Latest or all posts or last 15, 30, 90 or 180 days.
Welcome to
In-depth review coverage is by subscription.
Also by Lloyd: and
First-time visitor
Capacities up to 48TB and speeds up to 1527MB/s
🌈Shooting in Mountains thru ~Oct 20
There is no internet in the mountains where I am shooting. Most days I descend for internet service once per day, but not all. Please be patient when subscribing.

Sigma sd Quattro-H: DNG vs X3F Image Quality (Updated)

See my Sigma mirrorless wish list.

See also Sigma sd Quattro H File Size: DNG vs X3F.

Yesterday’s post discussed the DNG vs X3F file size issue. But setting aside the huge storage hit from using DNG, how does image quality work out for DNG vs X3F?

Sigma sd Quattro H: DNG vs X3F (Dolls, Daylight)

Sigma sd Quattro H: DNG vs X3F (Dolls, Long Exposure)

Image at sizes up to full 25.5 megapixel resolution, with RawDigger histogram and both ACR and SPP settings shown.

Curiously, there is one major behavioral difference seen in the longer exposure that is not seen in the shorter exposure, a behavior that adds to the negatives for DNG.

Sigma sd Quattro-H

The choice of DNG vs X3F is not all all clear-cut, involving file size issues, workflow issues, and now as shown in this comparison—very different results from ACR than from Sigma Photo Pro, with no way to get the two to look the same, at least not that I could find.

It’s a bitter pill to finally have DNG support but with all this baggage. I urge any Sigma sd Quattro shooter to consider the choice carefully, at least not assuming anything without making a similar assessment.

f6.3 @ 0.6 sec, ISO 100; 2017-02-03 10:40:23
sd Quattro H + lensNA @ 66mm equiv (50mm)

[low-res image for bot]

diglloyd Inc. | FTC Disclosure | PRIVACY POLICY | Trademarks | Terms of Use
Contact | About Lloyd Chambers | Consulting | Photo Tours
RSS Feeds | Twitter
Copyright © 2008-2017 diglloyd Inc, all rights reserved.