Sigma DP-1 Camera reviewed (Verdict: Wait for the DP-2)

Michael Reichmann of Luminous Landscape has reviewed the long-waited-for Sigma DP-1, a pocket-sized camera with a full-sized DSLR sensor inside. It sounds like the picture and lens quality is almost everything Sigma promised, but their inexperience as a company in making cameras is evidenced by poorly thought-out interface design.

My approach to shooting with the DP1 has been to frame with the Voigtlander optical viewfinder (see below) and trust the autofocus, shooting when the beep is heard, indicating that autofocus has locked. I even do this when shooting distant objects because there is no way to be sure that the camera will stay at Infinity because of the lack of a lock in the focus wheel. What was Sigma doing during the 18 months since product announcement? This stuff isn't rocket science. Just buy a few competitor's products and see how they do it!

Even if you don't understand what Reichmann is talking about there, those last two sentences should be enough to steer all but the most dedicated away from the DP-1. Despite all its faults — no built-in optical viewfinder, no image stabilization, iffy low-light performance — the full-sized Fovean sensor at the heart of the camera does the job. If Sigma can get a revision out to market soon — even just a firmware update would be welcome, it seems — they might be able to take a swing the Canon G9 and other rangefinders.

A Compact Conundrum [Luminous-Landscape.com via Gadget Lab]

[#1 posted by murray , April 15, 2008 4:17 PM]

Since no other camera nerds have chimed in, I'll be the pedant who corrects you Joel. You said "...they might be able to take a swing [at] the Canon G9 and other rangefinders", but neither the G9 nor the DP-1 are rangefinders. Indeed there are only two digital rangefinders that I can think of - the Epson RD-1 and the Leica M8.

As a pixel-peeping photographer, I'm pretty excited about the availability of this camera, even though I can't afford it. All it's flaws notwithstanding, it is a dream come true for those of us who've pined for big-sensor quality in a compact.

[#2 posted by george57l , April 15, 2008 4:24 PM]

"Despite all it's faults..."

Tut, tut, tut and thrice more tut.

Let us just parse that, shall we?

"Depite all it is faults..."

No, that cannot be what you meant, Joel. It makes no sense.

Methinks you meant "Despite all its faults ..."

[#3 posted by Joel Johnson , April 15, 2008 4:37 PM]

Yes, George. We call those 'typos.'

[#4 posted by Joel Johnson , April 15, 2008 4:38 PM]

@murray: You know, I was questioning that when I wrote it. I actually thought I removed all references to "rangefinders" until I could actually figure out what I was talking about, but hurdurr.

[#5 posted by Anonymous , April 15, 2008 5:54 PM]

Please don't say "methinks".

[#6 posted by Jason , April 15, 2008 6:02 PM]

Significantly Inferior Glass Made for Amateurs

[#7 posted by eustace , April 15, 2008 6:36 PM]

Is "glass" cool photographer jargon for camera? Like "stick" is to surfers or "axe" to guitarists? Jason's anagrammatical post suggested this to me; and even if it isn't true, perhaps if I started using it that way...

[#8 posted by Joel Johnson , April 15, 2008 6:56 PM]

@eustance: "Glass" is a cool way to say lens. Or specifically, the glass in them. :)

[#9 posted by Anonymous , May 11, 2008 3:22 PM]

Joel's complaints are valid, but I love the images from my DP-1. My G-9 has a great user interface but suffers from pixel packing (like most other small cameras) and produces images that often take a lot of work to clean up. The complaint about a lack of focus wheel lock on the DP-1 seems pretty minor to me; maybe he shoots from motorcycles? ;-)
I think that those of us who buy the DP-1 do so with an understanding of its strength (images) and many weaknesses.