Review on 📷 Sigma DP2 Quattro: Unleashing Creativity with a Compact Digital Camera by Chris Hodges

Used the camera for a few days in the Sigma test. As a previous user of Sigma Dp1 (Original) and Dp2M. It was interesting to see what has changed for the better and for the worse. Some first impressions compared to Dp2M.1. The camera is much more responsive and takes faster frame by frame.2. The screen is much better than the previous generation.3. The camera is longer and takes some getting used to. But feels very well made / feels more premium than the previous generation.4. JPEGS is VERY good, a huge improvement over DP2M.5. Battery life has doubled, approximately 120 shots.6. Image quality compared to Dp2M. The best way to describe it is another way. If you want the best image quality, you should always shoot at ISO 100, so this camera loves daylight and sunlight. For me indoor photography with limited lighting, forget it, get another rear camera. What bothered me about the previous Dp2m model was that it had that harsh, super-sharp HDR look in images that were a bit muted or not quite true to reality. With Dp2q it's the other way around, colors are nice with very good transitions and tones, auto white balance is much more accurate now, overall the picture looks very smooth, not sharp but still sharp without being sharp. HDR look now much better for pics with people in it.7. If you want the best image quality in a specific limited range (Iso 100, daylight/sunlight/outdoor, fixed (but one of the sharpest (45mm equivalent)) lenses) and are willing to take the time to set up and shoot to take (Nr fps here) this camera might be for you. looks better than the previous generation. Currently it takes a lot of time to process each image and make adjustments, maybe future updates can make it faster, but currently it is much slower than the previous version I used to process DP2M files. So the new camera is faster, but the new software is slower, and the result is still boring. 11. This camera isn't It's not for everyone, but within its limited range you can get great results, you just need time and often a lot of patience to get those results. I would rate it 5 stars for image quality (at ISO 100 of course). 3 stars for ease of use, 2 stars for software, 4 stars overall.