So another theory bites the dust. For months I've thought that if high-end compact cameras only packed bigger sensors, we would get better high-ISO performance and be able to use these devices for existing light photography in dim environments. But our first test case has not proven this theory to be true.
DP Review just analyzed the new Sigma DP1 compact that uses an image sensor that's nearly the size of a Nikon APS-C sensor, which is many times bigger than the standard 1 1/8" chip found in most compacts. You can see the size comparison on the first page of the DP review. Yet, in their wrap-up of the DP1's features, they write:
"While the DP1 can produce some brilliant results in daylight, it is almost completely useless in any low light situations. At higher sensitivities you'll find large amounts of chroma noise in your images, and you start losing detail. Turning on the flash won't help you much either, it is very low power and takes ages to recycle. Chances are you would not be able to focus anyway. The AF gives up completely once you dim the lights and there is no AF help light on the DP1."
Ouch!
So, this big Foveon sensor is no better in low light than my tote-around point and shoot. Of course, there could be other contributing factors to this, such as the Foveon technology itself, the supporting electronics, or some other thing that I just don't get. But the bottom line is, our first test case for putting a big sensor in a small camera fails to improve low light performance.
So, for now anyway, looks like I'll stick with my Canon G9. Maybe Sigma will go back to the drawing board and improve performance with the DP2.
Now Available! The Digital Photography Companion. The official guide for The Digital Story Virtual Camera Club.
- 25 handy and informative tables for quick reference.
- Metadata listings for every photo in the book
- Dedicated chapter on making printing easy.
- Photo management software guide.
- Many, many inside tips gleaned from years of experience.
- Comprehensive (214 pages), yet fits easily in camera bag.
Technorati Tags: digital photography, Technology, The Digital Story, Sigma DP1
As an early and enthusiastic DP1 user, I can't entirely agree with the way you've presented the DPReview findings. I think the review is accurate in it's facts, but the context isn't quite right.
The DP1 low light image quality suffers in comparison to the DSLRs because of the sensor. FOVEON technology just hasn't been pushed into the high ISO range as have the standard Beyer CMOS and CCD sensors from the bigger manufacturers. The Sigma DSLRs also suffer in comparison to other DSLRs in lower light.
However when you compare image quality to compacts, the superiority of the DP1 is instantly recognizable. My compacts all start showing noise in shadows at low ISO and it rapidly degrades with higher ISOs.
If you put the Nikon D300 sensor in the DP1, you'd have a better low light camera. And if you could push the lens to an f/2.8 or f/2.0 it would be outstanding.
As it stands, it's a great specialist camera, but won't replace anyone's DSLR as an all-purpose camera. And for casual photography a compact with zoom is also a better choice. For my travel photography, it's a gem.
Hi James, I think your comments are well-founded.
My point was more that a larger image sensor in a small camera doesn't automatically mean better low light performance. At this point, the DP1 bears that out.
But, as a camera to have on the go... oh yeah, I'd take one in a heartbeat.
I think that Sigma DP-1 should primarily be compared with other (almost) compact cameras, not with DSLR's.
The review at
www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma-dp1.shtml shows that the Sigma DP-1 does indeed provide cleaner images and better ISO 400 performance than the Canon G9 and the Ricoh GX100.
So I don't yet see evidence for "dusting" the theory of larger sensors having better high ISO performance.
Hi Stig,
Thanks so much for your comment. Yes, I did look at the images on Luminous Landscape, and the DP1 did a good job at ISO 400. But it wasn't that much stronger than the G9, except maybe in highlight detail, where it did perform very well.
Believe me, this isn't a G9 vs DP1 grudge match :) My point has been, and remains, given the huge difference in size between the sensors, the difference in capture quality seems much less. So I think there's a lot more to low light performance than just the size of the sensor. And these two cameras are the best test of that theory to this point.
Also Derrick, in you post you said the standard 1 1/8" sensor... It should be 1/1.8
(Also testing theory if putting in my website is causing problems for me)
Hmm, my my URL seems to be causing problems for posting...so let's see if attempt 3 goes up.
Anyway, I think it's great to have this technology evolving for compacts. I think it's the FOVEON sensor overall. It's new-ish tech and will get better with time. But I certainly hope we could bring somewhat bigger sensors to compacts.
My one 'fear' of big sensors is big megapixels. A big sensor with the same size pixels won't do much for quality if anything at all. The problem with a bigger sensor is the lens. WTH, right? First bigger sensors can take in more light (kinda the point there) but no more light can go through the same size lens. Thus the lens aperture would decrease (like the f/4 on the DP1) or it would get bigger (like the canon 50 f1.2L.. well not that big, but the point is there.) Not only is the lens wider but you also lose the crop factor. That's why quite a few nature photographers use at least one camera with an APS variant (APS, APS-C (30/40D), APS-H (1d Mk 3), etc.) sensor. Our lenses would need to be longer as well. Those superzooms many are fond off would be back-breakers. Then there's overall lens quality. There's more room for defects to show.
But yes I still want a bigger sensor! An APS one, not quite. As least not right now. What I would LOVE (and I think many would) is a 1/1.2 to 1/1.5 inch sensor that is 8 - 10MP. (There's not much need for 12MP in a compact.)And it would be even better is it was 3:2 aspect ratio. (Seriously, TVs and very few newer monitors are 4:3 these days and there's rarely a 4:3 print.) Something where I can make big enough prints (If really need them that big I should use a DSLR.) It helps keep noise down, and provided a nice enough crop factor (my guess would be 3 - 4x) and keeps things a bit more compact.
Okay, does anyone have a bucket of water? I think I'm dreaming!
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck
hi
xnpaw1jht32ir0ym
good luck