DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

SD14 questions??

I took this section of a review done the the 14 from http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4277/camera-test-sigma-sd14-raw-talent-page2.html

"At higher ISOs, the difference between JPEG and RAW files becomes painfully obvious. At ISO 400-800, RAW files are vastly superior to the JPEGs produced in the camera, most evident in shadows and darker-colored areas, which block up and get very noisy in JPEGs. In fact, by ISO 800, JPEGs made in-camera had such unusual colors and extreme shadow noise in multiple patches on our GretagMacBeth ColorChecker DC test target that we had to give them a thumbs-down -- even though the average color accuracy across all 180 patches tested Extremely High (8.5 Delta E), and noise in the neutral gray patch was Moderate (2.4)."

Please correct me if Im wrong. If I shoot with the jpeg format and shoot at high iso's such as the 400's and the high 800's I will be very disapointed. But If I shoot in RAW with 400-800 iso , noise wont be a problem. Right? Im sort of a slow person actully im sort of dyslexic, i just need clairfication. If your wondering, I useually spell check it in word before I post a reply lol.
 
If you are looking to shot JPG....I would tell you to pick up a D40x or D60 Nikon....you can find them cheaper now....they are made to shot in JPG mode...The Sigma has a JPG setting however every time I use it...I end up trashing all my shots...It just does not compare to my D300 in JPG mode...however when I shot RAW format...I have not been able to find another camera that can produce the same images...and I believe it is due to the fact that in JPG mode the Foven sensor does not function properly...(please if someone has insight into this please chime in)....

If you shot RAW go Nikon, Canon, Fuji.....
IF you want the 3D look I would choose the Sigma...

If you do not know if you will really like it...pick-up an old SD9 or SD10 to play with...I know you can find these cameras...with a kit lens for around 200.00usd...

Tony C.

PS...I stopped using spell-check a while ago...so sorry if i misspell anything...LOL
 
If you are looking to shot JPG....I would tell you to pick up a D40x or D60 Nikon....you can find them cheaper now....they are made to shot in JPG mode...The Sigma has a JPG setting however every time I use it...I end up trashing all my shots...It just does not compare to my D300 in JPG mode...however when I shot RAW format...I have not been able to find another camera that can produce the same images...and I believe it is due to the fact that in JPG mode the Foven sensor does not function properly...(please if someone has insight into this please chime in)....

If you shot RAW go Nikon, Canon, Fuji.....
IF you want the 3D look I would choose the Sigma...

If you do not know if you will really like it...pick-up an old SD9 or SD10 to play with...I know you can find these cameras...with a kit lens for around 200.00usd...

Tony C.

PS...I stopped using spell-check a while ago...so sorry if i misspell anything...LOL

This is absolutely my opinion, too. Just take your time to shoot RAWs. Take even more time to polish them up on your computer.

If you are in a hurry ... SIGMA is no explicit recommendation to go for. It is a savourer's cam. :)

SD14 / 80-400mm EX OS (@351mm) / open aperture / ....1/40s.... freehanded

View attachment 667

See you with nice pictures

Klaus
 

Attachments

  • sample 2.JPG
    EXIF
    sample 2.JPG
    61.6 KB · Views: 22
klaus that is an amazing shot you have there! Very 3d indeed.

Tony that is a great price on eBay. But I think I’ll get it from Broadway photo.com. There I can get the lens and the camera at once.

As for shooting in raw. I do see it alot better than shooting in jpeg with this camera. Besides I can go fix my photos up which are in raw and just change them in to jpeg lol. I wouldn’t feel bad about it since now I understand that jpeg's are sort of like raw except that jpegs automatically fixes the images and raw is manually fixing the images. I don’t see that as cheating at all since most of my classmates are shooting directly into a jpeg format. Plus this puts extra work into the final photo, absoultly no guilt there. Two days ago I didn’t understand the difference from jpeg and raw, thanks to here on the sigmauserforum.com and a little bit of Wikipedia I got a slight grasp on what it is.

Thanks guys
 
Mini,

The link I sent you...call the company directly and have it packaged with the lens....the 18-200mm I was talking about is now 279.99....so you can get it $20.00 off....they are the same outfit that I bought mine from about a month ago...should have waited...$100.00 cheaper now...LOL....

Good luck...

Tony C.
 
Hello, Miniheli!

I just read re your purist stance. That's mine too and I don't think it has anything to do with nobility (no offence, Tony). I feel it's to do with preserving the moment of my life that I captured. In other words, my observations of all the nuances, colours etc that I want to convey to the viewer of my images.

And that is where I believe the Foveon sensor delivers an advantage to me, providing I play my part and utilise the camera's abilities correctly.

Sincere regards, Jim Roelofs

Discover the light on your journey
 
re. various info

minihell

A while ago since you posted, but I offer some advice anyway.

Changing of the image:
While I understand why your teacher want you to keep things unaltered, there are a few points to remember.
1. Most (if not ALL) cameraes changes the output compared to what the sensor captures. (Both Bayer and Foveon cameraes).
2. Camera settings may alter the picture. This is probably registred in the EXIF info.
3. Sigmas RAW program SPP "develops" the image, and by doing this it is altering the image further.
It does enhance the sharpness of the image a bit, and possibly more. This is not registred in the EXIF.
3. Changing parameters in the RAW program will also probably be registred in the EXIF.
4. Many EXIF readers do read the X3F format.
5. If you handle a JPEG to your teacher, written from SPP, I doubt any changes from the RAW editor is recorded.

Sigmas RAW editor has three modes:
1. X3F - this is the "unalterd" version, just picking up the parameters from the file.
2. AUto - SPP tries to guess what looks best.
3. Custom - when you adjust the sliders yourself.

Camera noise:
Generally, if you underexpose, and need to recover (increase the exposure) in SPP, it is easy to get noise, also at low ISO. It may differ from camera to camera, and it MAY differ with circumstances (humidity, static electrisity).
My advice is that if you have dark areas in your image that you can see will be underexposed, try to overexpose (at ISO100 and up) with 0.7 to 1.0 +EV. Then reduce the exposure in SPP.
But that contradicts the non-editing philosophy.
Generally, with the SD14 (and most other cameras) you should watch the histogram, and try to expose to the right. One important catch here; if you alter ANY of the in camera settings, the histogram is affected, and made "unusable".
Some people use the in-camera settings to improve the LCD image (which is not very good), because the LCD image is taken from the In-raw JPEG.
If you need more info on the SD14, you may want to ahve a look at my compendium:
http://www.foto.nordjylland.biz/SD14/SD-usertips.htm
And some info about the SD15:
http://foto.nordjylland.biz/SD15/SD-15-specs.htm

kind regards
Øyvind Strøm
 
Back
Top