36 + Mp SL?

[vladik]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Last week I’ve decided to get a LS body and a Leica adapter to use my M lenses (28,  35,  50,  and 75 plus R 4/80-200) on it. I even visited local Leica shop and try the LS with a 2/35 cron. The camera is in this configuration not too big compared to my M (240) and I was able to shoot few pictures that I processed in Lr back at home. As I do not want to have LS and M my plan was to sell M and there is where BUT comes in. But: Both cameras have 24 Mp sensor (LS a ‘better’ one) but only 24 Mp. As my main photography subject is nature and landscape I would wish for mere megapixels thus ‘upgrade’ to LS does not make much sense at this time (BTW I am quite happy with my M). Now, it is my wish and hope that Leica will in not too distant future introduce SL with higher Mp sensor as this platform lend itself to it. Comments welcome.

[earleygallery]

What's an LS ?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wildlightphoto]

What's an LS ?

 

 

Dyslexic SL

[cpclee]

How large do you print? 24mp is sufficient for printing 40inchesx20inches with none to minimal interpolation so do you really need more pixels?

[vladik]

How large do you print? 24mp is sufficient for printing 40inchesx20inches with none to minimal interpolation so do you really need more pixels?

 

 

I would like to have 84 x 118 cm (It is close to 33 x 46 inch) exhibition prints printed out by professional printing company. After some research my impression is that large Mp files would be required such as from Nikon, Canon or Sony cameras (35 mm format). The other issue in my post is that Leica to stay competitive and position SL to be a professional’s choice will have to have a higher Mp sensor. Sentiment expressed by professional photographers on several forums.

[ramarren]

Maybe, some day in the future.

This Mpixel debate has gone round and round in several other threads. 

[fcomarin69]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to have 84 x 118 cm (It is close to 33 x 46 inch) exhibition prints printed out by professional printing company. After some research my impression is that large Mp files would be required such as from Nikon, Canon or Sony cameras (35 mm format). The other issue in my post is that Leica to stay competitive and position SL to be a professional’s choice will have to have a higher Mp sensor. Sentiment expressed by professional photographers on several forums.

 

 

Please, Not another pixel discussion and the feeling of of professional photographers from CNS. 

[IkarusJohn]

Vlad, 

 

i think you're right. The SL isn't enough for you. You need a Canon 5dsr. Then again, that is actually only a marginal increase in resolution. The PhaseOne XF with 100MP digital back must be the only choice for you. 

 

Now, leave the rest of us mortals fooling around with a mere 24MP in peace. No good image has ever been done, or is even possible with less than 50MP. 

 

Really. 

[jaapv]

Landscape Photographer of the Year 2015 Andy Farrer:

 

 

I currently use a Canon 5Diii and a Canon 7D, with a variety of Canon and Zeiss Lenses. My current favourite lens is my 21mm Zeiss f2.8 lens. Zeiss prime lenses are always on my wish-list as I love the quality of them.

 

Good, prizewinning landscape photographs are not made by megapixels, they are made by photographers. Thinking that an unending quest for the next technological advance will magically bring your photography to the next, ultimate level is chasing a chimera.

[thighslapper]

85cmx120cm exhibition prints need to be viewed from a reasonable distance to appreciate the whole image ...... and it is doubtful whether 24 or 50 megapixels would look much different.

 

I haven't seen many people at photographic exhibitions looking at prints with a magnifying glass.

 

You will lose the ability to crop images significantly ...... but if you are really into serious landscape photography you would use the appropriate lens or position to avoid that anyway. 

 

More pixels may be better ...... but that doesn't mean it is necessary.

 

Leica have specifically said they pegged the SL resolution at 24 as the best compromise for the processor in the camera and file size allowing high frame rates and speedy usage ....... and they have the S which fulfils the next step up in resolution. 

 

Unless Leica have a replacement extra zippy maestro processor in the pipeline I think 37.5 mpx in the S is as high as you will get from them in the forseeable future..... and it will not appear in the SL.

 

The only question is what is going on with the M .........

 

Looking at the current Leica line-up the only thing it has going for it is compact size and a rangefinder viewfinder ...... Leica may choose to keep it simple and bump up the megapixel count instead to keep it 'unique' compared to their other cameras.

[jaapv]

Which shouldn't be a problem - Germany's top nature photographer Norbert Rosing uses Leica gear to great effect, he does not appear to be  limited by 37.5 MP (which is only marginally more than 24, 7500x5000 vs 6000x4000, btw)

[Guest JonathanP]

I don't think there's a need for everyone to take such a dismissive attitude to Vlad. There are genuine reasons to look for higher megapixel sensors, just as much as other folks might like maximum FPS or high ISO performance. There's been a lot of jumping on people who question Leica's current offerings and it doesn't reflect well on the LUF community IMHO.

 

I'm currently evaluating what gear I want to use over the next few years. My interest is in high resolution, high dynamic range landscape images (I don't particularly like using grad filters). Now, I know that I have to make some compromises because the latest Phase One 100Mpx back (or a S system and lenses) is not within my budget. For me it comes down to the trade off of latest Sony sensor vs the Leica mechanical precision & lenses. I do find I prefer using an EVF, so really the choice for me is between A7Rii/SL/wait for a bit longer.

 

You just have to make a balanced decision on what gear attributes you find most suites your needs and give up on finding the holy grail.

 

Jonathan

[jaapv]

I don't think there's a need for everyone to take such a dismissive attitude to Vlad. There are genuine reasons to look for higher megapixel sensors, just as much as other folks might like maximum FPS or high ISO performance. There's been a lot of jumping on people who question Leica's current offerings and it doesn't reflect well on the LUF community IMHO.

 

I'm currently evaluating what gear I want to use over the next few years. My interest is in high resolution, high dynamic range landscape images (I don't particularly like using grad filters). Now, I know that I have to make some compromises because the latest Phase One 100Mpx back (or a S system and lenses) is not within my budget. For me it comes down to the trade off of latest Sony sensor vs the Leica mechanical precision & lenses. I do find I prefer using an EVF, so really the choice for me is between A7Rii/SL/wait for a bit longer.

 

You just have to make a balanced decision on what gear attributes you find most suites your needs and give up on finding the holy grail.

 

Jonathan

I think that is just what we are saying. No jumping here - everybody has a right to his own  decisions

[Jon Warwick]

Nothing wrong with lower megapixel cameras for some situations, and nothing wrong with higher megapixels for others.

 

What often gets missed in the discussion is

(i) what's the subject matter (landscapes are very demanding on resolution, whereas any megapixel camera can seemingly produce a close-up of a face where "the eye lashes are oh so sharp");

(ii) what print size is needed;

(iii) what is your threshold for what you consider a technically high image quality (if you're aiming for that).

 

If all I'd ever used was a 35mm film, then I'd probably think an M240 takes incredibly detailed images - why bother for more?  Alternatively, if one had a background in 10x8" film, one might think nearly all digital cameras today are sacrificing ultimate image quality for convenience.

 

I agree that great images are produced by the photographer.  But there is certainly nothing wrong in combining that with higher image quality .....   for me, personally, the "distinctive look" of prints by Richard Avedon or Greg Crewdson, etc, etc, has been arguably enhanced by their very high level of technical image quality for such large print sizes.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Jon Warwick

[LocalHero1953]

Given that the SL was only launched last October, the earliest you can expect a replacement with a higher MP sensor is October 2018.

[Jeff S]

I'm looking into a supplemental system for the M for some specific landscape applications.  MP is far down the list of criteria.  The M system can even serve as a fine landscape camera, but primarily falls short for my needs in terms of lenses (I sold my R lenses long ago), including lack of T/S lenses, and undesirable EVF.

 

My decision priorities....viewing system (and focusing), lens line, camera ergonomics/controls, price/value.  IQ is sufficient across a broad range of systems for all but the most extreme needs.....pretty much as it's always been, given the capabilities of the photographer....and the printer.  Format size used to be a critical aspect, but that is changing.

 

YMMV.

 

Jeff

[jaapv]

Interesting you should say that.I was just talking to a Calumet salesman and he told me that the demand for medium format has taken a nosedive, both in sales and rental. He felt that the market was shifting to mid-range pixel count smallish cameras. Sony was selling well with both A7 models (they don't do Leica over here).

[ramarren]

Sigh. I'm thoroughly exhausted by all the megapixel mania of the past ten years. 

 

 

I find this a satisfying photograph. It won awards in two exhibitions, printed to 20x24". I made four 11x14" prints yesterday, three spoken for. I made it with the Olympus E-1, a 5 Mpixel camera that I've owned for eight years and that is thirteen years old. Sure, 50Mpixel would have captured more detail, and I could make a 40x50" print more easily with that number of pixels. 

 

The Leica SL captures approximately 2x the linear resolution of this image; that's a great improvement. Moreover, the SL has about 3x the buffer space and is 50x faster to store images once captured. To jump another 2x linear resolution would require a 100 Mpixel camera, and for it to be twice as fast to store a capture will take internal I/O and cards capable of operating at 4x the current speed of the SL. I'll wait for that.

 

I bet I can do a lot of photography between now and when that 100+ Mpixel version of the Leica SL is available. Why spoil that time always wishing for something else?   

[ynp]

Last week I’ve decided to get a LS body and a Leica adapter to use my M lenses (28,  35,  50,  and 75 plus R 4/80-200) on it. I even visited local Leica shop and try the LS with a 2/35 cron. The camera is in this configuration not too big compared to my M (240) and I was able to shoot few pictures that I processed in Lr back at home. As I do not want to have LS and M my plan was to sell M and there is where BUT comes in. But: Both cameras have 24 Mp sensor (LS a ‘better’ one) but only 24 Mp. As my main photography subject is nature and landscape I would wish for mere megapixels thus ‘upgrade’ to LS does not make much sense at this time (BTW I am quite happy with my M). Now, it is my wish and hope that Leica will in not too distant future introduce SL with higher Mp sensor as this platform lend itself to it. Comments welcome.

Vlad,

 

If you need more resolution for whatever reason, you may want to try stitching and your M and lenses are adequate.

 

Yevgeny

Edited March 14, 2016 by ynp

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[steppenw0lf]

If the resolution of the SL is not good enough for your printer company, then you could use a trick.

Sounds maybe silly, but you could try to use panorama sw and HDR work flow to get "richer" images.

I use it in star fotos (astronomy, not people) to get more details. (from several fotos)

I could imagine it works also in landscape photography.

 

Actually I find that I have more than enough details with classy lenses like the Leica wideangles, more details even than with other (bigger) sensors with less brilliant lenses, or maybe more mirror movement.

 

Stephan