The first iteration of the Sigma fp was impressive — if a little quirky — with innovative features in a tiny, compact format. Unfortunately, its successor definitely isn’t so appealing, as this review explains.
Last summer, the Sigma fp — now $1,699 — became a much more viable option for filmmakers through the release of a firmware update that brought the option to externally record 12-bit uncompressed raw. This meant you could avoid the huge files produced by its 24.6-megapixel sensor, not to mention the complex workflow, and making the camera far more appealing.
With that in mind, the new Sigma fp L is somewhat confusing with its huge 61-megapixel that brings a raft of problems, and an updated autofocus system that doesn’t seem to offer much performance.
Gerald Undone runs through its various shortcomings but does have some suggestions of what Sigma can do to address his concerns, some of which might be feasible by further firmware updates. Philip Bloom doesn’t hold back in the comments on Gerald’s video, describing the camera as a “huge disappointment” and again struggling to understand what Sigma is trying to achieve.
What are your thoughts? Did Sigma license the sensor from the Sony a7R IV without a fully developed plan for what to do with it? Will you be buying this camera? Let us know in the comments below.
“Did Sigma license the sensor from the Sony a7R IV”
How you can “license” something from a camera?
What that's getting at is that Sony sells sensors for cameras, and it appears that Sigma purchased the same sensor as the one used in the a7r4 for use in the FP-L.
Panasonic and Nikon also seem to use a lot of Sony sensors too.
This camera needed a mechanical shutter even at the expense of a slightly larger body. Also had they cleared the top left from the two switches and made a hot-shoe interface that a smaller EVF could mount, they would have a much cleaner design and functional body.
First off, the FpL is not a successor to the FP, it’s an alternative version which will be sold alongside the original FP. It’s purpose is to provide a slightly more stills-oriented camera than the predominantly video-centric FP.
It’ll suit my needs perfectly and I’ll be buying one. I don’t see the point on ‘news’ articles slagging off cameras. Either they suit your needs or they don’t. If one doesn’t, then don’t buy it. Easy! There are loads of cameras on the market, just buy one that does suit you but that doesn’t mean your disparaging of someone else’s choice has any merit at all.
Lol. If fstoppers took every poster’s advice on what articles they shouldn’t write on this site, they’d have nothing left to write!