For me the deal breaker is the lack of viewfinder. However this might be designed for people who've not grown up with SLR or rangefinder cameras, but phones instead.
The ux is interesting it looks like the thumb wheel is the only real physical controls and only works on the selected item. For me thats probably ok, as I only really set the shutter speed during shooting.
I wonder what its actually like to use? I wonder how it compares to something like the AliceCamera (https://www.alice.camera/)?
However, if I was on the market for a camera, of that rough size and quality, I'd probably go for a second hand GFX100, which is around the same price as the BF. Its the only mirrorless camera that is easy to use (in shooting, the setup isn't great) and shows me what the picture looks like live. (I'm looking at you Canon RP)
Yeah, I think this is another situation where touchscreen-only phones/tables set a bad example for others to copy. I think a viewfinder is way better for outdoor shooting, but maybe people who take most shots indoors don't care?
It's great to see that at least one manufacturer is still willing to release a camera that isn't either a "generic modern" camera or an "film styling but with digital" camera.
I love the idea of a smaller body focused full frame camera, though I am skeptical of how useable this camera will be in colder climates. That metal is going to be freezing cold, and those buttons looks hard to operate with gloves on.
I admit I don't find it practical to hold. Part of today's shapes are to make it easier to grip, hold at an angle, etc. The metal body is neat and probably super durable, but I imagine that glass won't last long if it slips.
before you bag on this, try to ask some questions like:
- who is this product trying to reach?
- what does it do well?
- what do it's designers know that I don't?
If you see something that strikes you as weird, there's a reason for it. You're looking at a highly designed product, it's all intentional, try to be curious.
By that reasoning, you might say there's no such thing as bad art. In most cases, things are designed with the best of intentions and may or may not be successful for their audience.
But a standalone ILC is already a small addressable market so the choices do matter, especially for a company of Sigma's size.
Whether or not the choices are good ones depends on what factors matter to you. Even then, not all choices made are the best ones to achieve the ends of the designers and users, but in a product like this, they were made.
One way art can be bad is by refusing (or being unable to) make choices. Whether that's from lack of perception, skill, or interest. Of course you can subvert this by refusing to make choices, but that in itself is its own choice - it has intent.
I think the HN crowd often make an assumption that they have all the information necessary to judge something. It doesn't have an SD card slot! Is it possible that Sigma saw how their customers use these cameras and figured that they could significantly simplify the enclosure design and packaging by omitting an SD card facility? I don't know! But I think that this is interesting, and makes me think of the 20-somethings I see toting MLCs in the city, for whom I get the sense that a camera is a lifestyle component, not a professional one. Maybe they don't need to shoot >200GB a day? What's it like to have technology as a fashion statement? Being utility-minded engineer, what am I missing about people's relationships to objects?
Would you mind answering those questions? I love photography and when looking over a camera can get an idea around strengths/weaknesses. This seems like they wanted to cheap out on construction with fewer physical controls and still be able to advertise as a compact FF camera despite having a low MP sensor.
I think primarily it's targeting a user segment that's sort of distinct. The mainly younger folks who carry a camera very often or daily, for whom it's not just a hobby but also something that's fashionable. They do care about image quality, but also care about form factor and the looks of the thing, which is a distinct need vs. pro or typical prosumer users (DSLR dads, I lovingly call them).
Dropping the physical controls doesn't really save a ton of money. They went for a unibody chassis, which itself is a bit of an expensive way to make a production component (see their very nice staged dry-run toolpath simulation on a 5-axis CNC machine).
I do think they wanted something extremely compact for what it is (hence no viewfinder), without a bunch of stuff sticking off of it. Something that people who design EDC objects think about - will this snag on things?
I've spent a lifetime taking photos with all sort of cameras, and in my experience unless someone is paying for the photos I never use a camera that doesn't fit in my pocket, and over half the time that is an iPhone.
In UX there is a concept of 'don't make me think' - the camera corollary is 'don't make me carry'.
It's true that the best camera is the one you have with you.
I've definitely carried "real" cameras much less in the ~2 decades since I've gotten a smartphone than the 2 decades prior. I still use a "real" camera when I'm aiming for the best results, but it doesn't make up the majority of my photos anymore, mainly because it is an extra hassle to have something else to carry.
Are there any worthwhile pocketable cameras these days? Seems like those CoolPix and similar cameras that were ubiquitous 20 years ago are a rare sight these days, and if people own an actual separate camera it's going to be something beefy. Has anyone applied the advances in computational photography from smartphones to a standalone camera with a somewhat larger sensor and lens, but still smaller than the Sigma BF and competitors?
What is it the other half of the time? I've been thinking of picking up a GRIII for my trip to Japan this summer, but I'm open to other ideas.
I personally almost always find phone photos to be woefully inadequate for even light editing, mostly because they turn into a blurry mess as soon as you crop even a little bit or want to print/look on a large screen.
It violates the spirit of what you probably want, but there are some amazing free upscaling options these days.
I recently found a pic from behind-the-scenes of an old favorite movie of mine. It was exactly the kind of photo I wanted, but woefully small. With minimal effort and Real-ESRGAN (and perhaps a touch of artificial film grain), I blew it up to a very crisp B&W poster I framed. I'm still looking for errors in it.
I think I’m a target customer? I don’t think this is rev for me but I think in the future I could be sold. I own an a7c because I value compactness. I was just in New Zealand and a lot of times I was pretty happy to take photos on my phone. As my purpose was to just be able to take an image in my head and translate that to an actual photo. There are definitely some shots that I needed a bit more technical setup which was great with the a7c but I really didn’t need nearly so many of the bells and whistles. I also don’t really want to have to edit in RAW, ideally I get a good enough image that I can just transfer to my phone and post straight to Instagram with little work.
As someone who knows a bit about photography, not sure this is a good product. It seems to me to be more like gimmick/aesthetic appeal, especially given the price tag ($3000+ AUD?). Like Apple: "minimalist", opinionated, very expensive.
In terms of specs it doesn't look very impressive. Doubt it holds up compared to mainstream brands at that price point.
The lack of physical buttons probably makes it less appealing to professionals. Touch controls are just not the same for quick actions based on muscle memory.
I don't get the color modes. It advertises as "no fluff" but includes all these presets, which anyone halfway interested in editing will likely avoid in leiu of their own styles. In fact if you look at all the software features and modes, it's quite standard, not really minimal at all.
You're limited to Sigma lenses. Never used a Sigma lens so I can't comment on quality. But I don't know why you would want to limit yourself, again particularly given the price point.
Overall this looks like an aesthetic sell rather than a good photography product. It's for people who want to appear cool with a sleek-looking camera that gives you the popular image "looks" out of the box. And who are willing to accept an inflated price tag for it.
The camera is using Leica L-mount[1] so you have the full range of Leica as well as Panasonic and Sigma lenses available. For the sort of people who invest in Leica glass, $3k AUD will not seem unreasonable and the minimalist aesthetic is right in the Leica wheelhouse.
Ah ok my bad, didn't know about the L mount. I suppose if you are willing to pay that much... sure? I would still argue that it is not a good value for money product. Why would one take pride in purchasing an inferior camera for a premium?
I really wanted to like this (and buy it) due to the aesthetics, but spec-wise it's worse than the Linux s9. Notably missing an in body stabilization, which is important if you intend to use small lenses that don't have stabilization built in.
I think I'll pass this time. Merrill DP2 is still my favorite camera, maybe when (if) they release their next Foveon sensor camera in a few years it will be tempting. But judging by the design trajectory, it will be shaped like a tetrahedron or something.
I wonder if this can recapture the magic of old film cameras. With smartphones, the low effort it takes to capture a photo makes them less interesting. But DSLRs are also overly complicated for someone just wanting to capture something spontaneously.
That’s a gorgeous-looking camera. I am really happy to see Sigma still taking chances on their cameras. The FP is still one of my favorite cameras, it’s fun and really inspiring.
Has anyone seen the pixel layout on the sensor? I'm specifically curious if they went with an RGBW layout, or are stuck with the off the shelf image sensors.
There are actually a couple options out there - Alice, and SwitchLens! I've not used either of them, but both of them are apparently decent (but not world changing). I have thought about grabbing them, but I lack m4/3 lenses which would be perfect for this.
I have an Olympus E-M5 II with some nice m4/3 lenses, like the 12-40 F2.8. Once you add optics like that, the size difference between a dedicated camera and the Alice or SwitchLens is completely negligible.
wow, switchlens looks really cool. It would be amazing if there was a Canon EF-compatible mount and full frame sensor option as well. I suppose integrating other mounts and sensor sizes is straightforward once the platform is established.
This is obviously aimed at the Leica/Ricoh crowd, not high throughput photography (events, sports, documentary) or product. Also, 4300 raw files should be enough for quite a long holiday/many street photography sessions.
> This is obviously aimed at the Leica/Ricoh crowd
Maybe kinda? As a Leica owner myself, honestly I like my traditional controls and wouldn't trade my camera for the Sigma BF.
This feels more like the Tesla Roadster, which I guess some would say is meant to appeal to sports car fans, but I think honestly tries to create a new market. The old-school sports car guys who enjoy revving an engine and shifting gears aren't really the market for a Tesla Roader, it's a new generation of people who are enthusiastic about electric cars.
I think this is trying to do something similar - creating a new market for well-off Gen Zers whose parents didn't even expose them to traditional cameras growing up, just smartphones. People for whom those cryptic old control knobs hold no appeal. "Here's a powerful camera with a much better sensor and lens than your phone, but you don't need to be a camera nerd" is more what I imagine the pitch to be.
There are two kinds of Leica owners: photography nerds and people that buy the best of everything and want the best point-and-shoot you can get. Leica makes the M series for the former and the Q for the latter. This product competes with the Q and iPhone, not cameras for pros and wannabes.
These cameras are loved by street photographers, casual landscape photographers, documentary / environmental portrait photographers, and there's a significant Japanese lifestyle photography scene ... I often wonder if Sigma has this market in mind, which is not so visible if you're not in Japan or don't know where to look on Instagram (dig into the #sigmafp / #sigmafpl tag and look for washed out / blue-tinted photos of flowers/nature, for instance).
The major downside is no stabilization, which will severely limit the shooting envelope compared to these other cameras. I shot with a Sigma FP for awhile and the combination of poor autofocus, no stabilization, no viewfinder, and it still being heavy compared to, say, a Fujifilm camera, made for a very limiting experience. This will, however, be a user-experience upgrade for people who are happy with FP (which, honestly, I still miss sometimes).
"Worse glass" is a religious position if we're talking about Sigma glass. Especially considering how likely it is that any given name-brand lens is actually a Sigma design, or a Sigma design and build.
Doesn't really bother me. 256GB isnt the lap of luxury but it's not bad, is what I'd bring on most trips.
If you can backup from the camera to SSD, that's a much much much more tempting option anyways. Anyone shooting video is already used to having a Samsung T7 SSD strapped somewhere to their rig. SD is handy as heck & so good to have but vastly fantastically slower & not as reliable.
IMHO SD cards fail much more often than the USB-C connector would, what's the worry? If the camera mounts as a mass storage device it's one fewer thing to go wrong.
Firstly the main failure of connectors in cameras isn't the connector per se, it's generally the board that the connector is mounted on breaks off from the mainboard.
Secondly, and more importantly, the lifespan of your camera is now the lifespan of the internal storage. That seems very unappealing.
You are missing the point.
Sigma is offering a LEGO piece that one can use to assemble one's own configuration.
Viewfinder and everything else can be added.
They also offer two other sensor LEGOs: one that looks like a previous/heaper gen (fp) and other with high-res 60+ MP sensor ("fp L").
For me the deal breaker is the lack of viewfinder. However this might be designed for people who've not grown up with SLR or rangefinder cameras, but phones instead.
The ux is interesting it looks like the thumb wheel is the only real physical controls and only works on the selected item. For me thats probably ok, as I only really set the shutter speed during shooting.
I wonder what its actually like to use? I wonder how it compares to something like the AliceCamera (https://www.alice.camera/)?
However, if I was on the market for a camera, of that rough size and quality, I'd probably go for a second hand GFX100, which is around the same price as the BF. Its the only mirrorless camera that is easy to use (in shooting, the setup isn't great) and shows me what the picture looks like live. (I'm looking at you Canon RP)