Devon

Hello filmmakers. I hate to do it again, but I’d love fresh new perspective for the new year. 
I’ve purchased a Sigma FP as another cam, and am rigging it out. I’m attracted to its small form factor. So mounting a V-Mount defeats the purpose of keeping it small. So I’ve decided to go with NP-F batteries to power the rig. 
I’ve had to have the camera repaired by sigma once already as somehow I fried the PCB board by failing to shut off my camera before disassembly. I’ve since upgraded to SmallRig’s latest NP-F plate, which has built-in overcurrent and short circuit protection (to prevent me from frying the board again since I tend to move fast sometimes.) 
Because of this, I’ve created a whole new fear of frying another board, with any camera in my future.
I feel better having the new SmallRig plate, but also have noticed some NP-F batteries advertise that they have a built in chip to also protect from over-current/short circuiting. 
I can’t get myself to purchase a true Sony NP-F as they’re so expensive and seemingly hard to find. So, I’m gonna give some Amazon brands a chance. I also have a gift card to Amazon from the holidays, so I’d prefer to use it. 
I’ve used Wasabi Power batteries for other cameras and have generally been happy. Check out this link though, as this person disassembled a lot of 3rd party NP-F batteries and found that they’re not even wired to deliver their claimed capacity. He also disassembled a Wasabi Power NP-F and found there was steel taped to the batteries. Seems sketchy, unless there’s a real use that I’m unaware of? Bummer. 
The only high capacity 990 I can find on Amazon is from Kastar. The reviews also are not great, claiming that the capacity isn’t as high as claimed. It also says it has a built-in circuit protection chip. Anyone like Kastar batteries despite being seemingly some of the cheapest on Amazon?
The Wasabi Power NP-F (linked above) has great reviews, has built in chip, but it looks like the forum poster (linked above/first link) left their findings as a review too. Bummer, as I like this brand. They have a good warranty too. Still considering it anyway. 
I know Watson batteries are generally good. But the price is still high. Still onsidering it though. 
Any other decent 3rd party Amazon brands ya’ll have had a good experience with?
Again, I don’t wanna fry my board. So a battery with a circuit protection chip is preferred. 
Thanks all!

I’m not sure what caused the issue. Except that I pulled the dummy battery out and back in with the camera still switched on a few times throughout the past few weeks I’ve had it. I’ve always done this with all of my cameras when breaking down my rig after a shoot. I’ve always just left the switch set to “on” with the camera. This is the only cause I can think of. 
Sigma UK told me that the camera expects voltages between 7V and 9V. So I wouldn’t worry about your dummy battery. I’d worry more about the plate you’re using and it’s voltage and amperage it’s outputting. 
 
I’ve also just ordered the powrig dummy battery. I asked powrig if the dummy battery had any advanced circuitry for regulating power. They assured me that it did. I’m not exactly sure if this is true or not 🤷‍♂️ But they assured me 😅
 
I’ve also purchased the newest NP-F battery plate from SmallRig. It has short circuit protection built into all outputs. It was expensive, but my hopes are that I’ll have it for many years using with various camera rigs. 
So my hope is that the combination of both of these accessories (powrig dummy battery and advanced SmallRig plate) avoids this issue of any PCB board frying again lol. 

I couldn't agree more. There are certainly a few things that Sigma need to define for a proper DI workflow. I understand releasing a camera early and providing firmware updates later as a plan to sell a camera. We might be a few years out from a proper DI workflow documentation from Sigma. 
That being said, the camera most definitely is a beast. I've been very impressed so far!
@Llaasseerr I simply followed their email address listed on their site: info@sigmaphoto.com
It took them a few days to reply, but I appreciate that they did.

I reached out to Sigma as well as this forum post. This is the reply I've received from them.

“In regard to the customer's reply, we currently recognize the difference in color parameters for DNG files recorded with Color Modes or with the Color Mode "OFF '' setting to be a specification of the camera and not a bug. To go a little further, the color mode parameters for any Color Mode that is not "OFF" will have the same color parameters when processed in DaVinci. This was done to render colors more natural to the human eye. The Color Mode "OFF" parameters were chosen to preserve the camera's original gamut. That is why the color processing and white balancing is slightly different between the two. If the user prefers to shoot with any of the Color Modes other than "OFF" selected for ease of filming, then we would recommend them to shoot all video with any of the Color Modes other than "OFF" for continuity in grading. 

Please inform the customer that their feedback is valuable to use and we will share it with our engineers for consideration in future product development.
Also, we would like to thank them for their feedback about the wording in the fp user`s manual. We apologize if the wording was misleading in any way and will consider if any revisions are necessary for more clarity.”

I've always had great interactions with Sigma. This is just more proof of that. As colorists though, don't we all prefer the "original gamut" over any creative interpretation?

I have. So far no replies unfortunately 😔
Here: https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=188556&p=983237#p983237

Hey all!
I’ve been following this thread since it started in 2019. I’ve finally got me my own Sigma FP! So far, I am loving the camera. I think I was lucky to wait so long to get me an FP, as now we are on firmware Ver.5.02 and the camera seems to run pretty smoothly! I’m very happy, and haven’t noticed any of the bugs mentioned back in 2019/initial release.
Apologies to resurrect this thread after a year. But I found something for those of you still shooting with the FP.
I have noticed a new “bug”. One that I think is easy to overlook for the fast paced video producer. (Again, apologies if this has already been found.)
We did a video shoot, and I noticed that the footage was a bit harder to white balance than our other (Blackmagic) cameras. So I did a test.
The results of the test are a little concerning (at least for the sake of color consistency.) See images in this post. I will also post a link to my Davinci Project file, and single DNG frames from my tests.
I set up a few objects in my apartment to capture different colors (apologies for not having a true color checker chart.) A green painting, white foam core board, a red roll of tape, and a yellow hat. I literally had nothing blue to film, but the painting has a little blue in it. I wasn’t testing for color ACCURACY, as much as I was testing for color CONSISTENCY. Everything is lit by a single Godox SL60. No house lights were on, and I blacked out all windows to make sure everything was lit by a single source for consistent color and exposure. The Sigma FP was mounted on a tripod, all camera settings & lens stayed exactly the same for each clip, EXCEPT I changed the in-camera color mode. All clips shot UHD DNG 12bit.
This is where our “bug” is: in-camera color modes. I have noticed that shooting clips (CinemaDNG/RAW, every resolution and frame rate) with ANY color mode activated EXCEPT color mode “OFF”, exhibits shifts in Davinci Resolve.
It has always been my experience that in-camera color modes DO NOT affect how RAW data debayers in post. It’s always been, “RAW is RAW.” “Sensor data is sensor data.”
SO, I shot a clip for each color mode. What I found is that color-mode: “OFF” produced footage as expected. It balanced and graded easily. BUT any clip shot with ANY other color-mode activated, exhibited color imbalance/shifts.
The images in this post are a representation of this issue. In DaVinci Resolve, I balanced the in-camera color mode “OFF” clip, to make the white foam core in the frame neutral. White balance adjustments were done in the RAW panel on the color page. I then applied that same grade to all other clips. I debayered every clip as P3-D60, linear. White balance stayed the SAME between each clip. In my node graphs, I then color space transformed from P3-D60, linear, to REC709, REC709. Tone mapping set to “None”. I did simple Lift gamma gain adjustments for contrast, added saturation, then soft clip to keep things from clipping (all on separate nodes.) Again, the very exact same RAW panel settings, and nodes were applied to each clip.
Still curious, I opened the DNG’s in Adobe Camera RAW. Adobe Camera RAW DID NOT exhibit the same balancing issues as Davinci Resolve did. Both DNG’s debayered identically in Adobe Camera RAW/Lightroom. This possibly means that the RAW sensor data between “OFF” clips and activated color mode clips, has consistency. I suspect there’s something in the DNG metadata throwing things off in Davinci Resolve. SO, I had the idea to convert camera original DNG’s using Adobe DNG Converter. Lo and behold, after conversion using Adobe DNG Converter, both clips were visually identical when imported and debayered in Davinci Resolve. In fact, the Adobe DNG Converted DNG's very closely resembled the color mode "OFF" original. I had this idea because I know some people use DNG Converter to get lossless (or lossy) compression to their DNG sequences. The issue with that/this workflow, is that Adobe DNG Converter removes some Cinema DNG metadata like frame rate, timecode, and I noticed that it reports “16 bit” color depth (among other things. [Just use SLIMRAW software for compression to avoid these metadata issues.] Adobe DNG Converter is ultimately meant for use by photographers.) Since Adobe DNG Converter strips metadata, it must be stripping the metadata that is causing Davinci Resolve to debayer clips differently.
EXIFTOOL shows a few differences between the DNG’s. I suspect the culprit is the “color matrix” difference between these clips. Although I’m not a software engineer, so which metadata it truly is requires someone smarter than me. Maybe some of the Magic Lantern developers could have some insight for us? I will leave out the EXIFTOOL reports since this post is already very lengthy.
I’ve tested a lot of cameras, and have never experienced this issue with any other RAW footage I’ve shot and graded.
Dear Sigma, if you find this post; thank you for making full frame RAW available to those of us without a big budget. You changed the game because of that. Props to you all! I hope you find this post, and patch this metadata issue (probably?) for CinemaDNG clips.

DNG's and Davinci Resolve project files here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/lf9jmvqz5eyajfz/Sigma-FP-Ver.5.02-DNG-Debayer.zip/file

Hey all!
I’ve been following this thread since it started in 2019. I’ve finally got me my own Sigma FP! So far, I am loving the camera. I think I was lucky to wait so long to get me an FP, as now we are on firmware Ver.5.02 and the camera seems to run pretty smoothly! I’m very happy, and haven’t noticed any of the bugs mentioned back in 2019/initial release.
Apologies to resurrect this thread after a year. But I found something for those of you still shooting with the FP.
I have noticed a new “bug”. One that I think is easy to overlook for the fast paced video producer. (Again, apologies if this has already been found.)
We did a video shoot, and I noticed that the footage was a bit harder to white balance than our other (Blackmagic) cameras. So I did a test.
The results of the test are a little concerning (at least for the sake of color consistency.) See images in this post. I will also post a link to my Davinci Project file, and single DNG frames from my tests.
I set up a few objects in my apartment to capture different colors (apologies for not having a true color checker chart.) A green painting, white foam core board, a red roll of tape, and a yellow hat. I literally had nothing blue to film, but the painting has a little blue in it. I wasn’t testing for color ACCURACY, as much as I was testing for color CONSISTENCY. Everything is lit by a single Godox SL60. No house lights were on, and I blacked out all windows to make sure everything was lit by a single source for consistent color and exposure. The Sigma FP was mounted on a tripod, all camera settings & lens stayed exactly the same for each clip, EXCEPT I changed the in-camera color mode. All clips shot UHD DNG 12bit.
This is where our “bug” is: in-camera color modes. I have noticed that shooting clips (CinemaDNG/RAW, every resolution and frame rate) with ANY color mode activated EXCEPT color mode “OFF”, exhibits shifts in Davinci Resolve.
It has always been my experience that in-camera color modes DO NOT affect how RAW data debayers in post. It’s always been, “RAW is RAW.” “Sensor data is sensor data.”
SO, I shot a clip for each color mode. What I found is that color-mode: “OFF” produced footage as expected. It balanced and graded easily. BUT any clip shot with ANY other color-mode activated, exhibited color imbalance/shifts.
The images in this post are a representation of this issue. In DaVinci Resolve, I balanced the in-camera color mode “OFF” clip, to make the white foam core in the frame neutral. White balance adjustments were done in the RAW panel on the color page. I then applied that same grade to all other clips. I debayered every clip as P3-D60, linear. White balance stayed the SAME between each clip. In my node graphs, I then color space transformed from P3-D60, linear, to REC709, REC709. Tone mapping set to “None”. I did simple Lift gamma gain adjustments for contrast, added saturation, then soft clip to keep things from clipping (all on separate nodes.) Again, the very exact same RAW panel settings, and nodes were applied to each clip.
Still curious, I opened the DNG’s in Adobe Camera RAW. Adobe Camera RAW DID NOT exhibit the same balancing issues as Davinci Resolve did. Both DNG’s debayered identically in Adobe Camera RAW/Lightroom. This possibly means that the RAW sensor data between “OFF” clips and activated color mode clips, has consistency. I suspect there’s something in the DNG metadata throwing things off in Davinci Resolve. SO, I had the idea to convert camera original DNG’s using Adobe DNG Converter. Lo and behold, after conversion using Adobe DNG Converter, both clips were visually identical when imported and debayered in Davinci Resolve. In fact, the Adobe DNG Converted DNG's very closely resembled the color mode "OFF" original. I had this idea because I know some people use DNG Converter to get lossless (or lossy) compression to their DNG sequences. The issue with that/this workflow, is that Adobe DNG Converter removes some Cinema DNG metadata like frame rate, timecode, and I noticed that it reports “16 bit” color depth (among other things. [Just use SLIMRAW software for compression to avoid these metadata issues.] Adobe DNG Converter is ultimately meant for use by photographers.) Since Adobe DNG Converter strips metadata, it must be stripping the metadata that is causing Davinci Resolve to debayer clips differently.
EXIFTOOL shows a few differences between the DNG’s. I suspect the culprit is the “color matrix” difference between these clips. Although I’m not a software engineer, so which metadata it truly is requires someone smarter than me. Maybe some of the Magic Lantern developers could have some insight for us? I will leave out the EXIFTOOL reports since this post is already very lengthy.
I’ve tested a lot of cameras, and have never experienced this issue with any other RAW footage I’ve shot and graded.
Dear Sigma, if you find this post; thank you for making full frame RAW available to those of us without a big budget. You changed the game because of that. Props to you all! I hope you find this post, and patch this metadata issue (probably?) for CinemaDNG clips.

DNG's and Davinci Resolve project files here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/lf9jmvqz5eyajfz/Sigma-FP-Ver.5.02-DNG-Debayer.zip/file

Why not put it on a tripod and shoot a test clip and then take a RAW still image and then compare?

I don't know. A few EOSHD members have had issues with their FP that I have not had. So it is random and variable.
It's a very new camera with not many users globally. So if you are worried about hardware issues I would buy from a recognised dealer.
Some official Sigma dealers my have an ex-demo body, or customer return.
I regularly buy nearly new gear from main dealers.

Do not do it. We have the shadow flickering bug that affects only some cameras - so in case this needs to be fixed in hardware, you will be out of luck.
Besides, have you fully read the statement by Sigma? Any repair of a grey market camera does not only need to be paid out of your own pocket, but you'll also be charged $250 extra. That means that the money you saved will evaporate as soon as you need the camera to be serviced.

@Devon, I am not Andrew, but a gray market camera simply boils down to a camera without warranty, so you're getting a discount for the risk of likely having to pay repairs or replacements out of your own pocket if your copy should be defective.
Postscript - Sigma very clearly states that their warranty does not include gray market cameras:
https://www.sigmaphoto.com/article/important-information-regarding-gray-market-sigma-products/
"As of January 1, 2017, any product that is not imported by Sigma Corporation of America or purchased from an unauthorized Sigma USA Dealer will not be serviced under warranty regardless of the service required. The Sigma Corporation of America Service department will service these products for a minimum $250 charge in addition to the required parts and labor charges at the owner's expense."

Private messaged ya Devon

It's a really great camera right now, feature packed. Yes, LOG would be nice and I am 99% sure it's coming, but I wouldn't be hesitant to use it in the V1.0 state it is in.

Complete BS (Ken wants you to use his affiliate links, and not buy it from somewhere else for potentially cheaper), the firmware will update on any camera, no problem. The only difference is with some brands, some languages and frame rates are not available (the fp is NTSC/PAL switchable, so no problem there)

Yes, I have. Although I can get even better prices if I buy slightly used from ebay.

I bought my FP used, albeit from someone in my country.
I have already updated it once. The update is a free download from Sigma's site. Same with older Sigma cameras, I used to own second hand purchased DP Merrill.
I guess my major worry would be support if something went wrong with the camera. Grey imports don't come with local tech h support (generally).
I have found in the past, if you buy second hand, at least the local distributor will give you some help, or offer a repair at a cost. But they really don't want to support people who grey import.

Hi Devon, i missed this sorry.
Unbound RGB is a floating point version of the colours where they have no upper and lower limits (well infinity or max(float) really). If a colour is described in a finite set of numbers 0...255 then it is bound between those values but you also need the concept of being able to say, what Red is 255? That's where a colourspace comes in, each colourspace defines a different 'Redness'. So P3 has a more saturated Red than 709. There are many mathematical operations that need bounds otherwise the math fails - Divide for example, whereas addition can work on unbound. There's a more in-depth explanation here with pictures too!
https://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/unbounded-srgb-divide-blend-mode.html
Hope that helps?
cheers
Paul

First just to say how much i appreciate you taking the time to answer these esoteric questions!
So i have a DNG which is a macbeth shot with a reference P3 display behind showing full saturation RG and B. So in these scene i hope i have pushed the sensor beyond 709 as a test.
Resolve is set to Davinci YRGB and not colour managed so i am now able to change the Camera RAW settings.
I set the color space to Black Magic Design and Gamma is Black Magic Design Film.
To start with my timeline is set to P3 and i am using the CIE scopes and the first image i enclosed shows what i see. Firstly i can see the response of the camera going beyond a primary triangle. So this is good. As you say the spectral response is not a well defined gamut and i think this display shows that. 
But my choice of timeline is P3. And it looks like that is working with the colours as they're hovering around 709 but this could be luck.
Changing time line to 709 gives a reduced gamut and like wise setting timeline to BMD Film gives an exploded gamut view.
So BMD Film is not clipping any colours.
The 4th is when i set everything to 709 so those original colours beyond Green and Red appear to be clamp or gamut mapped into 709.
So i *think* i am seeing a native gamut beyond 709 in the DNG. But applying the normal DNG route seems to clamp the colours. But i could just be reading these diagrams wrong.
Also with a BMDFilm in Camera RAW what should the timeline be set to and should i be converting BMD Film manually into a space?
I hope this makes sense, i've a feeling i might have lost the plot on the way...
cheers
Paul
 
 

The thicker ones could be achromats, the thinner could be simple one glass diopters ?

Sorry for digging up an old thread, but I just wanted to say @Gregormannschaft 's above video is beautiful! The DR is HUGE! Did you shoot in s-gamut too? My favorite shot is the screenshot below. Is this shot on a 35mm lens or a 24mm?

I had this lens and was quite happy with the performance,actually rather surprised it was sharp at f2. I used it with a mitakon lens turbo focal reducer on the a6000.I returned it not because of performance issues but because I wanted a different focal length at the time. Also the build quality and focus ring were quite good for the price.These are some random test photos I remember getting with the lens at f2 or 1.4 considering the focal reducer.


I would also like to add if there was a negative about the lens I would say it would be character. I often felt even though the image was quite sharp it lacked that pop of my vintage nikon lenses.Then again that could be a good thing if you want a more neutral image in the first place.I would definitely get the lens again.

I'm having trouble finding an answer online on how exactly to use Vision Color's Film Emulation luts.
I'm filming with a Sony A7s. I most often film in S-log-2.
My question is; Do I apply a _CIN lut first, then an _FPE lut after corrections? Or do you apply _CIN, then _FC, then _FPE to properly emulate a DI workflow?
Do you still use a _CIN lut if the footage was encoded in S-log-2?
Thanks everybody!