SInce I had a little time this morning...I poked around a bit.
Quote: It really can (when the stars align) produce pretty stunning images.
Did you see the stunning images produced by the guy with the pinhole camera and the year long exposures?
I downloaded one of their sample pictures, the first thing that struck me was 14 mp and 2640x1760.
I'm looking at my K-x and 4288x2828 is 12 Mp. Sigma is still doing the funny math.
Really as someone who sells prints... I'm not sure 2640 is even manage able. I prefer to print at at least 120 dpi and I prefer 200 or over. At 200 dpi max size is 13 inches. I do unframed prints in bins that small... for people to look at while they are deciding to buy a more expensive print. But we don't really sell anything that size.
My K20D, has 2,000 more pixel width. That's capable of producing 4 times the image size as a print at the same resolution.
You have to ask, what does the sigma do different. Tess' image, we've never printed it or posted it. I just went to the smart folder with sunset and looked for something similar to the sigma, looking through the images I realized, our lenses are sharper and provide much crisper image detail, even when viewed at 100 percent crop. A 100% crop is what you see when you open the 2600 image on my monitor, because it fits on my screen. I have to say, I almost groaned when I opened it.
Sigma's sample image..
Our cast off image.
For a second there I was dreaming about buying one of these just because I've always thought the technology should produce great results... once again.. nothing special images, and really bad math.
But hey... I had an hour to burn, I'm retired.