Sigma SD14: Quick Look at a Quirky Wonder
by Wesley Fink on June 3, 2008 4:20 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Final Thoughts
The Sigma SD14 is a huge refinement of everything that came before it. It is solidly built, well balanced, and easy to handle, with features that are much more contemporary and competitive than the SD10. These include a good viewfinder based on a real pentaprism with 98% accuracy in the view. The viewfinder is definitely one of the most significant improvements in the SD14.
The 5-point AF system is not state-of-the-art, but compared to the SD10 it is light years better. The AF module is new, so perhaps we can understand that it has trouble finding the right AF point, but it will certainly get better in the future. As a whole, the AF is much faster than the SD10 AF and much more flexible.
The electronics are something of a question mark. We initially had issues with very long start-up times with the SD14, but that turned out to be a CF card compatibility issue. With the change in CF cards start up was very fast - a second or less. However, the SD14, like its predecessors, is still plagued by agonizingly slow image processing. 2 to 3 seconds to image display followed by 6+ seconds to write a RAW image can only be described as slow. The JPEG support is also a nice option, but I think Sigma has achieved a first in that JPEG processing is actually slower than RAW. That is still a mystery.
Once the CF problem was sorted out the reliability of the SD14 was excellent in our continued testing. We are still sorting out the random lock-ups we first experienced with the SD14, but it now appears they were mostly related to a CF card design the SD14 definitely did not like. We have not experienced a single lockup since the CF card change. That certainly makes the SD14 an easier camera to live with than we first reported, but no matter how we recast these results there is no ignoring the slow image processing and write times of the Sigma SD14. We can only wonder what a Canon or Nikon or Olympus could do with the Foveon sensor, and whether the issue is the Foveon sensor overhead requirements or Sigma's issues with building processing boards. Until others release a Foveon camera, we can't answer that question.
With the limited image processing options and the extremely slow image processing of the Sigma SD14 you might conclude that there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to buy this camera. You would be wrong. When used properly, there is an almost three-dimensional appearance to Foveon images that nothing else can duplicate. It is very close to slide film with the kind of fluidity and color depth that is hard to describe but easy to love.
Sigma makes a big
deal of the SD14 being easy to operate, and we would agree that it is very easy to operate. However, that does not mean that the SD14
is easy to use. To use this camera properly requires more work than competing cameras - and a lot of
knowledge about photography. You have to be willing to shoot RAW most of the time
and spend the time in Sigma Photo Pro and Photoshop to get the most from your images.
Frankly, Sigma Photo Pro does a great job on Auto and you can safely batch process
images and save as TIFFs for Photoshop manipulation. For most images this is all the post-processing you may need, which can speed up the process for everyday shooting.
Photoshop CS3 is also reasonably good in the latest Camera RAW support in converting Sigma RAW. It's not quite as good, or as quite as flexible, as Photo Shop Pro, but it is not the disaster that past Photoshop RAW conversion was with Foveon images.
Our title said it all in this case. The Sigma SD14 is a quirky camera that is very slow in processing any images that it captures. Despite that, it is a significant upgrade and refinement to the earlier SD10 and SD9. It is certainly usable in the SD14 version as long as you keep its limitations in mind. If you choose the SD14 you learn to live with its quirks - for the gorgeous quality of the Foveon images. You have to be dedicated to live with an SD14 as there are much easier ways to achieve great results with competitive cameras. However, nothing from any competitor is quite as incredible as the best Foveon images, so there are definitely reasons to try to work with this camera.
The SD14 is probably best in the studio, in macro work, and possibly in weddings where the image quality might make your work stand out. It is even suitable for candids where speed and burst capability are not important. It would, however, be a terrible "candids" camera for sports or family action events or anywhere where slow image display times or slow image processing would be serious handicaps. In the right hands, the SD14 can be a remarkable photographic tool, but in the wrong hands it will just be a source of annoyance.
One thing definitely deserves mention in this review, however, and that is Sigma's extensive line of lenses for their SD series cameras. There are 39 Sigma lenses in their current catalog that are listed as available in the Sigma mount. Sigma-mount lenses are not easy to find, but the better ones we have worked with are very nice indeed. The 18-200mm f3.5-6.5 OS displayed very nice quality and a very competent OS implementation. We shot a number of images at 3 to 4 stops lower than the 1 over focal length rule that were very usable. It was also an absolute joy to mount a 15+ year old Sigma Macro on the SD14 and see it work exactly as it should. It was noisy compared to the best motor lenses form Sigma today, but the AF and exposure was exactly where it needed to be.
Last, after some experimentation and research it was clear the Foveon is better at highlights than at shadow detail. It seems to handle overexposure much better than underexposure. In the end, the best shots came by overexposing about 2/3 of a stop and letting Auto take care of it in RAW processing, or doing a little further exposure compensation on top of auto. This generally gave decent highlights without losing so much in shadow detail.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
View All Comments
cheetah2k - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
I've bought over 100 memory cards on ebay, and all at respectable prices (here in Australia we still pay about US$30 for 2GB!) and I've never had a problem. I just purchased a nice 8Gb Sandisk Ultra III CF for my Sony A350, 4Gb CF Ducati, and 8gb Sandisk MicroSD just recently, and again without any errors or faults.The only way to test these cards also, is to fill em up to the hilt with data. At 14MP, and 1 day of continuous shooting, I easily fill 8Gb.
The advice here should be dont buy $0.99 memory cards from sellers with less than 20 sales and 99% good comments or you will end up with BS backdoor memory cards full of sawdust instead of the usual silicone
cheetah2k - Tuesday, June 3, 2008 - link
In terms of this review, I think Anandtech has lost the plot againWhy compare a 14MP camera with 10 and 12MP??
You've reviewed the Sony A350, why isnt that in your review?
You're just wasting your own time carrying out reviews like this with out proper comparisons. I guess thats just because Anandtech is trying to be a jack of all trades, but not doing it very well
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, June 3, 2008 - link
Others would argue we should only compare the SD14 to 6 Megapixel cameras, or even less, since it is really a 4.7MP finished image. Most consider the SD14 roughly competitive in the 10 Megapixel space - with some tilting toward the 8 megapixel side and others to the 12 Megapixel end. Our choices were representative of prosumer cameras many would consider as having good IQ in that megapixel range, which was our goal.If you wish to compare the images to the Pentax K20D and the Sony A350 the crops and full images can be found at http://www.anandtech.com/digitalcameras/showdoc.as...">http://www.anandtech.com/digitalcameras/showdoc.as...
cheetah2k - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
I understand what others argue. However, when you're comparing cameras, you also need to compare cameras of equal MP, regardless of what their end result is. This then gives an unexperienced DSLR user the opportunity to compare and examine the results from, for example, how a sony 14MP camera produces vs SD14 14MP camera, etc. This way, for those wanting 14MP, they can establish good value for money and make a call on where they ultimately want to end up. Therefore, it would have been good to include the Sony A350 results that you got from a previous review.As noted above, in the case of Anandtech's past review of the Canon 450D (12.2MP) vs Sony A350 (14.2MP) vs Nikon 10.1MP cameras, I understand the varying MP review as that was all that was around at the time. From that review I actually purchased a Sony A350X set with the 2 lenses, as I established it was good value for money (and actually cheaper than the Canon 450D)
Some times a LIKE for LIKE comparrison is what we all need, especially for those of us who are non-pro photographers.
melgross - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
I've never heard of this being compared to a 12 MP camera. 8 to 9 seems to be the agreed upon equivalent. And even there, it depends upon the images, some look sharper, and some less so.pinto4402 - Tuesday, June 3, 2008 - link
Amen to the comment about the CF issue. I feel better about the startup time, but now I'm troubled by the memory card problems. When you depend on your gear for your living, any possible point of failure is scary.pinto4402 - Tuesday, June 3, 2008 - link
Holy cow. I considered purchasing a Sigma for portrait work because other portrait photographers rave about the IQ of the foveon sensor. I'm shocked, however, by the 9 second start-up time. This is not something anyone has discussed before. It is simply unacceptable for any modern camera to have such primitive electronics. I know that there are many "artistes" out there who feel smug about how they can create beautiful images with primitive gear. I am not one of them. I want my camera to function well and stay out of my way.This is a good, fair summary of the camera. While "ease of use" is a subjective and nebulous concept, I think it's appropriate that you pointed out that the camera took 9 seconds to boot up and has a slow write time. Aside from IQ comparisons, this is the kind of useful information I'm looking for in a camera review.
Maxington - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
If I was heavily into portraits I'd go with the Fuji DSLR's, with their specialized sensors, not the Sigma.I can't knock Sigma lenses, they have some gems, but their cameras so far are pretty lacklustre.
I'd like Foveon to stay around as competition though, maybe with development it will find its strong points.
pinto4402 - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
My only experience with Sigma lenses turned me off to "generic lenses" forever. I had my camera with a Sigma 17mm lense slung on my shoulders. As I was leaning down to pick something, the camera swung down and hit the ground. Not too hard, but hard enough. The lense and camera continued to operate fine, so I thought nothing of it. When I got home and developed my slides, I noticed that there were stray light streaks in all my images (not typical lense flare). When I examined the lense more carefully, I noticed that its plastic casing had cracked. The rubber focusing ring had obscured the crack.I'm still ticked off about this to this day 15 years later because I was on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Cambodia photographing Angkor Wat. All the hundreds of images I took with the Sigma had light streaks. Luckily, it was not a paying job, but the images had a lot of personal importance to me.
I've never had any such problems with the Canon L lenses, even though they've taken worse abuse. Their all metal build quality and wheather sealing (as well as fantastic optical quality) are the main reasons why I have been loyal to Canon even though Nikon, for now, has arguably superior cameras (D300, D3) to what I'm using (40D, 5D).
pinto4402 - Wednesday, June 4, 2008 - link
I agree that Fuji has found a place in the toolkits of many portrait photographers. The deal killer for me is that it has low resolution. I generally enlarge my prints to 24x36. An effective resolution of 6MP on the S5 Pro does not cut it. Come to think of it, the Sigma is probably not a good choice either because of its lower resolution. I've been a happy Canon 5D user, but I'm always looking for something different to add to my kitbag. That's why the foveon had some appeal.