DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Sigma SD-9 or Canon Digital Rebel
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 18 of 18, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/01/2004 09:03:28 PM · #1
I am currently looking to upgrade to a DSLR and have been looking closely at both of these. The Sigma SD-9 comes with two lenses and would cost about 200 dollars more than the Rebel with one lense. Any suggestions about likes and dislikes about each would be appreciated. I have looked up both of these extensively also and know what the reviewers say are the pros and cons. Just looking for some help. Thanks
 04/01/2004 09:35:03 PM · #2
resale value will be higher for the rebel, and I think you will get more quality for minimally more money. You can probably get a used rebel for a bit less if you look around, with the onset of the MarkII I suspect there will be some used cameras around soon.
 04/02/2004 02:26:27 AM · #3
You can check the reviews at //www.dpreview.com . Also, a side by side comparison there might help you decide. There's also the SD-10 which apparently is an improvement over the SD-9.
 04/02/2004 02:27:30 AM · #4
rebel
 04/02/2004 06:01:05 AM · #5
Consider that the Sigma doesnt come with a chargeble battery and it only shoots RAW files....

I took one look at that camera and thought it was crap....
 04/02/2004 06:17:41 AM · #6
Comment based on conjecture as I have not shot the Sigma.

I love Canon equipment but I think the Sigma bodies do offer a value with their color responsiveness.

I wouldn't consider resale 'cause for my purposes I'd want to keep the original if I upgraded. Maybe I'd give it to my daughter when she gets older or something but for me the test is what I'm getting today. From what I've read I doubt I'd like the body but then again I've shot a couple of Digital Rebels (2 of my friends have 'em) and I really don't like that body either because of the lightweight, plasticy feeling; it feels like a toy camera in my hands. I am impressed with the response range of the Sigma (paticularly the SD-10). The multicolor photosites appears to yield very impressive color depth and a 3.1 mp image can produce an 8x10 or slightly larger with up-resing. I think the Sigma could easily be a choice to consider for some people although for my personal use I'll just keep investing in Canon equipment and hope that the next version of the 1Ds or 10D has similar multicolor photosite range.

For shooting stuff today and into the future I'd suggest the Canon based on the quality of the DIGIC processor and the quality of the glass that is a long-term investment.

Kevin
 04/02/2004 07:58:28 AM · #7
I'm considering the Sigma to be an outstanding digital camera, I really like the type of sensor they have in these camera but it's just not made for the everyday shooting and the little home set-up that most of us do. It's planned for a professional use. A serious professional use. It's one of the few digital camera out there that don't need sharpenning. I'd go with the rebel personnally.
 04/02/2004 09:37:38 AM · #8
Originally posted by nicklevy:
I'm considering the Sigma to be an outstanding digital camera, I really like the type of sensor they have in these camera but it's just not made for the everyday shooting and the little home set-up that most of us do. It's planned for a professional use. A serious professional use. It's one of the few digital camera out there that don't need sharpenning. I'd go with the rebel personnally.


Well I dont know of any serios professional photographer that uses Sigma DSLR´s ....
 04/02/2004 10:03:15 AM · #9
B&H had a used SD-9 kit a while back with that I picked up because I was very interested in the camera due to the Foveon sensor. Basically my experience with the two lenses that the camera came with was that they weren̢۪t worth bothering with. I did also buy a Sigma mount 50mm f/2.8 macro EX to use on the body also. The 50mm is an amazing lens and really made the system sing. The pictures out of the camera as SO SHARP and give as much detail as what I typically get from my rebel. I found the body of the camera to be quite boxy and not very comfortable in my hand. The body also felt very cheap to me. You are stuck always shooting RAW mode but the RAW converter is quite good so it isn̢۪t quite as annoying as it could be. I didn̢۪t really like the sports viewfinder but some people do. I found the high ISO performance to be fairly crummy, the Rebel definitely has the edge there. In the end I sold the camera and lenses as I didn̢۪t find enough benefit to keep them (keep in mind that I have a heavy investment in EF lenses and EOS accessories).

Greg
04/02/2004 10:42:25 AM · #10
The problem that I ran into with a Sigma 35mm SLR is that only Sigma makes lenses for it. With Canon you have such a huge selection of lenses from different manufacturers. But otherwise, I think Sigma is a great camera.
 04/02/2004 11:12:59 AM · #11
I'm in the same comparison process right now, and am leaning toward the Sigma, despite the drawbacks. It's revolutionary new sensor is TOTALLY different technology than the Rebel and is superior in sharpness and quality of image. I also think that in a few years, the Sigma technology will catch on and be in other cameras, unless there are patent issues that prevent this. Still, both are good cameras. I believe there was a fairly complete review of the Sigma in a recent Digital Photography magazine.

But I'm still comparing. I have a while as I don't have the money for either yet. Again, both are good cameras, and the comments above are very helpful.
 04/02/2004 11:14:46 AM · #12
Hi folks.

I'll be first to admit that the Sigmas aren't for everyone. Shooting RAW all the time is just not something most people like to do. But, since I started shooting RAW with the Canon S30, it was no big deal for me to keep shooting RAW with the Sigma. Besides, after I downloaded and tried out their Photo Pro RAW conversion software I was hooked. It's the best software for working with RAW files I have used. Its free for downloading from the Sigma site, I believe, and they have a few sample files you can work with and print.

The SD9 especially, is not great in low light. The SD10 is a lot better. These things were not important to me.

You see, I really didn't want a DSLR at all. I was pretty happy with a point and shoot and didn't wan't to go back to lugging around lots of gear (I have used SLR in the past w/film). But I liked the Foveon technology so I checked out the Sigma Forum at DPreview. Big mistake. From there I was directed to the Sigma Pbase gallery and was hooked.

Many people have dogged the build of the Sigma. I think the build is just fine. The outer casing is plastic, but it is a plastic over a metal substructure. The camera is a tank. It is a BIG camera. It fits larger hands well, and I find that it makes the camera easy to handhold. It is also very well laid out and easy to use. And it doesn't weigh a lot for a big camera.

And FWIW I use rechargeable CRV3 batteries. They last about 350 shots a charge. It's true that the SD9 is a two battery system (SD10 is only the CRV3) but the other batteries, the cr123's, last over 1500 shots each. As long as you have a spare set handy, your good.

Also, the SD9 is a real bargain right now since the SD10 was released.

Check out the following:
My PBase Site: //www.pbase.com/mcmurma
Sigma Talk Forum: //forums.dpreview.com//forums/forum.asp?forum=1027
Sigma Pbase Home: //www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root

Read through the forum and make a decision that fits you. If you don't already have an investment in Canon gear, are on a budget and don't mind using manual focus lenses, you can get an adapter and outfit yourself with some old screwmount gear rather cheaply.

Reagards,

Michael

Message edited by author 2004-04-02 11:18:56.
 04/02/2004 12:55:47 PM · #13
Originally posted by dsidwell:
It's revolutionary new sensor is TOTALLY different technology than the Rebel and is superior in sharpness and quality of image.

Just beware that the lack of an anti-aliasing filter on the Sigmas is a double-edged sword. Sure, the pictures come out "sharp" (which can be added later to other cameras in post), but with that "default" sharpness comes the distinct possibility of moire, which is often impossible to correct in post. See my earlier post today for a link that demonstrates the problem.
 04/02/2004 01:29:37 PM · #14
Originally posted by EddyG:
Just beware that the lack of an anti-aliasing filter on the Sigmas is a double-edged sword. Sure, the pictures come out "sharp" (which can be added later to other cameras in post), but with that "default" sharpness comes the distinct possibility of moire, which is often impossible to correct in post. See my earlier post today for a link that demonstrates the problem.


The moiré in the example is not the typical color moiré, but luminance moiré, which is arguably much easier to correct. Considering how unusual this is, the extra sharpness without the filter is probably a worthwhile trade-off.

I think the foveon technology is cool, but they have some catching up to do; I'd love to see a 6+Mp version of their chip (18+Mp in foveon-speak). The press releases about cameras using their sensors add necessary confusion about pixels. I wonder why other camera makers weren't interested in licensing the technology though. Maybe they foresaw faster growth potential in their own sensors (and they were right).
 04/16/2004 02:58:12 AM · #15
Another thing worth mentioning is that Sigma doesn't make a whole lot of lenses for their own bodies. Take a look at their system chart -- that was rather a surprise and disapointment.
 05/15/2004 07:40:11 PM · #16
Hi mcmurma

I was very impressed with the SD-9 until I became aware of the original chip's inability to capture greens accurately. Fresh limes looked like rotten limes.

As I love landscapes this seemed important. :D

Has a fix been devised for the problems with color accuracy?
 05/15/2004 08:34:31 PM · #17
My question would be what is more practical to get on a price-performance ratio, the SD-9 or -10? I was just doing research today...and looking through these galleries i do not necessarily see a $400 difference in the two...what are the pros and cons if someone would list?
 05/15/2004 11:20:56 PM · #18
This is a terrific discussion! I am looking to upgrade in the next few months and seriously considering the Sigma.
The primary supposed advantage of the foveon technology is that the color resolution is a true 3.1 megapixels vs. 1.5 megapixel for a 6 megapixel RGGB sensor.
In side by side comparisons, the Sigma images compare well to Canon 6 mp cameras such as Rebel, but don't fair so well against the 8-14 megapixel cameras.
I really like the sharpness of the Sigma images, but it seems they have some work yet to do in terms of color fidelity. Most cameras have twice the green pixel count as red or blue pixels.
There is a good reason for that: it more closely mimics the response of the human eye. The foveon sensor has the same number of pixels for each color.
The only other multi sensor camera I have seen is the Minolta RD175 or the Minolta RD3000. Both of those have 3 ccd sensors, but two those sensors are exclusively green with red and blue sharing a single sensor!
I think I'll wait a while and see if Sigma gets all the deficiencies worked out.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 06:24:19 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 06:24:19 PM EDT.