Skip the Sigma BF and Buy the Sigma FP or FP L
Sigma BF vs. Sigma FP
So you heard about Sigma’s new camera? There has been a lot of buzz around the Sigma BF since its launch and you’ve probably seen the 1,000+ “reviews” from people who borrowed the camera from Sigma for 2 weeks.
I was originally intrigued by the camera, and was considering buying it, but after learning more about it, I’ve changed my mind. The more I learned, the more I thought to myself, “Why wouldn’t someone just buy the Sigma FP or the FP L. As a Sigma FP owner, I can’t think of hardly any compelling reasons, especially for stills photographers (which is the target market of the BF). You really have to love that aluminum body to justify buying one of these over an FP.
In this article, I want to speak to photographers who are tempted by the BF and discuss why I think the FP is a better option all around.
The Sigma FP is Better than the Sigma BF
Design – A Fashion Statement
If you’ve been smitten by the Sigma BF’s aluminum body and that is the main reason you want to buy it, go for it. But let’s not forget that the Sigma FP was a revolution in design for its time. Nothing quite like the FP had ever been released, and the camera was a beautiful statement of minimalism.
Buying a BF isn’t the only way to make a fashion statement. Besides, I suspect that once the allure of the silver body wears off, many photographers will be wishing for something a bit more subtle to carry around… They’ll be wishing they had bought a matte black Sigma FP L.
If minimalist design is what you’re after… Buy the Sigma FP
Menu System – It was Already Good
The Sigma FP already introduced a really clean and efficient menu system. There was no need to trim it down even more.
If you’re looking for a camera with a great menu (as if its really that big of a deal), buy the FP or the FP L.
Functionality – How Minimal is Too Minimal?
Do you really want to spend your time using touch capacitive buttons to dig around in the menus of the Sigma BF? Are digital menus appealing to you?
Reviewers have already been subtly complaining about the lack of custom buttons on the BF. The lack of physical buttons means you have to dive into digital menus to adjust basic settings like aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focus modes, and white balance.
Personally, I feel like it takes away from the beautiful experience of photographing the real world when I have to spend time making adjustments in the digital world. Sigma made an aesthetically pleasing camera by taking away buttons, but the user experience will suffer for it.
The Sigma FP has a few more buttons than the Sigma BF, and maybe that makes it slightly less beautiful, but the functionality those buttons provide will make your daily photo walks more beautiful because you won’t be spending all your time looking at a menu.
The Sigma FP was minimalism done right. The Sigma BF is minimalism to a fault.
Auto Focus Improved – But Who Cares?
Many reviewers have been reporting that the video autofocus in the Sigma BF is better than that of the FP, although still not at the level of competitors. This is good, I guess, but this camera isn’t designed or even marketed towards videographers. Videographers are going to be much more interested in the FP for the features it offers, like internal RAW recording and SSD support through USB-C
The auto focus for stills (single point) was totally fine on the FP and even better on the FP L. Realistically no one is going to be using this camera for continuously auto focusing fast moving subjects, so I don’t see this improvement as a significant update.
The Screen – Better on the FP?
The screen on the back of the Sigma FP was the best I’ve ever used. It was bright and very detailed, often remaining visible even in bright sunlight.
I’ve heard many reports that the Sigma BF screen is dimmer and less visible in harsh conditions. If true, this would be a massive negative. When you only have a back screen and it doesn’t articulate, that screen needs to be top quality.
The Sigma FP has a top-quality back screen. The Sigma BF’s screen may not be as high quality.
Sensor – Just as Good
The sensors for both the Sigma FP and the Sigma BF have 24 megapixels. Performance and dynamic range are likely very similar. No real upgrade in this category.
Shutter – Still Electronic, Still Susceptible to Banding
Like the Sigma FP, the BF is electronic shutter only. You can experience banding issues in certain artificial lighting conditions.
I experienced this with my FP when filming an outdoor event. The Sigma BF doesn’t solve the issue.
EVF and Accessories – At Least They Were an Option
I admit, I didn’t really like the modular EVF or many of the attachable accessories for the Sigma FP, but at least they were available. I knew I could take the EVF if the lighting conditions were going to be tough. I knew I could add a grip if I wanted the camera to be more ergonomic.
The Sigma BF doesn’t offer any of those options.
Video Quality – A Wash, Some Pros and Some Cons
The Sigma BF offers 6k video and the option to film in L-Log, which I admit, I wish the FP had.
The Sigma FP on the other hand offers internal RAW Recording and some other high-end production codecs.
Keep in mind, the FP and FP L also offer video recording directly to an SSD and an HDMI port for a number of video accessories.
Price
The Sigma BF is more expensive but offers less.
The Sigma BF is $2,000 MSRP. You can buy a used Sigma FP for half the price.
SD Cards vs. Internal Storage vs. SSD
I don’t fault the Sigma BF for opting for internal storage. It’s nice not to have to worry about carrying around memory cards. On the flip side, its nice sometimes to pop your SD memory card out of your camera and use it in whatever device you choose, or to swap cards for different photo shoots.
Both have their advantages. One advantage the Sigma BF doesn’t have however is the ability to record to an external SSD.
What Sigma Should Have Done Instead
Instead of making the Sigma BF, Sigma should have refined the FP and FP L. They should have updated the auto-focus, added a simple IBIS (stabilization) system, given users a tilt screen, and continued building modular accessories to increase usability.
Another thing Sigma should have focused on is small lenses to match their small bodies. One of the great weaknesses of the L-Mount system is their lack of small lenses. Their smallest quality lens is the Sigma 45mm f/2.8, but beyond that it’s slim pickens. If the Sigma BF had launched with a matching set of small pancake prime lenses, it would have been very compelling, but currently there aren’t any lenses that match the BF’s small and sleek body.
Resolution – At Least the FP Line has Options
Sigma made the FP L for stills photographers who wanted a high-resolution camera. They offer the FP with 24mp and the FP L with 61mp.
Interestingly, the Sigma BF, although targeted at photographers, uses the 24mp sensor.
If you need high resolution, the Sigma FP L is your best option (around $1300 used).
Conclusion
I see very few reasons to buy the Sigma BF over the Sigma FP or FP L. The most compelling reason for most will be the aluminum design, but I suspect many photographers will come to resent the poor ergonomics and the cold metal body.
Don’t worry, the Sigma FP will still be there for you when you’re ready to make the trade.
I still have hope that Sigma may improve the FP and FP L. I was disappointed that the BF announcement wasn’t a Sigma FP mark ii announcement. A truly improved FP mark ii would have been loved by many. I don’t think Sigma will see the same response around the BF. After the hype dies, I see only a hyper niche audience for the camera.
I really do believe the Sigma FP and FP L are the better buy for 80% of people, especially if you’ve never photographed with one before.
Additional Reading:
The Olympus E-m1 mark ii Review in 2024 and 2025
Fujifilm X-H2 - Best Hybrid Camera? - Long Term Review in 2025
Review: Sony A7s (the original) - A Great Deal in 2024?
