New Firmware 3.0

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not sure why these concerns are so important to some folks.

 

That says it all..... if it's not important to Godfrey, it's just not important. Shows through in many of his posts that aren't just technically oriented. And when pointed out, he runs.... or puts you on his ignore list, on which I'm happy to be a member.

 

Jeff

Edited June 4, 2017 by Jeff S

[ramarren]

I have no illusions that my opinion carries any weight here. Nor do I care. 

 

I voice my opinions because I thought that's part of what being on a forum was about. I feel that way too much time is spent nattering on whether this thing is better than that thing, rather than "I'm trying to do this. Is anyone else doing it, and, if so, what's the best way you' ve found to acheive it?" I fine the 'this is better than that' blather very tiresome and prone to starting brand wars, which are similarly tiresome. Whether someone's Nikon is 'better' than my Leica I simply couldn't care less about. 

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I also don't care whether the EXIF data shows that my camera used the electronic shutter or not. I hardly ever look at the EXIF data.

 

I'm not sure why these concerns are so important to some folks.

 

I do review EXIF info from time to time, especially when a camera is new or I am new to the camera.  But my little post about the lack of a place in the EXIF to record use of an electronic shutter was in defense of a poster whose question drew a somewhat harsh and unjustified putdown from a moderator.  

 

scott

[MRJohn]

Question: does anybody has some experience whether the FW3 AF-S low-light performance has been (significantly) improved with the 90-280? I recently shot a concert in challenging light conditions (mostly ISO 6400) and the lens was barely usable due to lack of focus which the lens had constantly moving (also tried M mode with focus on joystick press), probably not enough contrast to technically work with. When I got focus, image results were quite good. Haven't had a chance yet to test FW3 under these conditions myself. 

[ramarren]

Question: does anybody has some experience whether the FW3 AF-S low-light performance has been (significantly) improved with the 90-280? I recently shot a concert in challenging light conditions (mostly ISO 6400) and the lens was barely usable due to lack of focus which the lens had constantly moving (also tried M mode with focus on joystick press), probably not enough contrast to technically work with. When I got focus, image results were quite good. Haven't had a chance yet to test FW3 under these conditions myself.

 

No opportunity to test low-light AF specifically yet, but given that all AF operations seem much speedier and more precise, an improvement has likely been made.

[bilbrown]

Just loaded the new firmware on the SL and 24-90 and 90-280. So far so good on low light AF. I will try the other features and report back.

Edited June 5, 2017 by bilbrown

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Question: does anybody has some experience whether the FW3 AF-S low-light performance has been (significantly) improved with the 90-280? I recently shot a concert in challenging light conditions (mostly ISO 6400) and the lens was barely usable due to lack of focus which the lens had constantly moving (also tried M mode with focus on joystick press), probably not enough contrast to technically work with. When I got focus, image results were quite good. Haven't had a chance yet to test FW3 under these conditions myself.

I've been travelling without the SL, so have not yet updated the FW. My own experience in using the SL and native lenses for classical concerts and, even worse, rehearsals in dimly lit halls, is rather better than yours. I set the max ISO to 12500, but although I recall some problems with AFs, I don't remember them as severely limiting. I have another music recital coming up, and an orchestral rehearsal, for which I'll use the new FW. I'll report back if I notice any changes.

[MRJohn]

I've been travelling without the SL, so have not yet updated the FW. My own experience in using the SL and native lenses for classical concerts and, even worse, rehearsals in dimly lit halls, is rather better than yours. I set the max ISO to 12500, but although I recall some problems with AFs, I don't remember them as severely limiting. I have another music recital coming up, and an orchestral rehearsal, for which I'll use the new FW. I'll report back if I notice any changes.

 

I show you an example, the shot below was taken with the 0.95 Noctilux wide open at 1/50 sec at ISO 1600. Focus was on the bass player. In this light it was very difficult to use the 90-280.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited June 5, 2017 by MRJohn

[LocalHero1953]

I show you an example, the shot below was taken with the 0.95 Noctilux wide open at 1/50 sec at ISO 1600. Focus was on the bass player. In this light it was very difficult to use the 90-280.

I'm not arguing with your experience, but I have certainly not had much problem focusing the 90-280 at ISO 1600.

[MRJohn]

I'm not arguing with your experience, but I have certainly not had much problem focusing the 90-280 at ISO 1600.

 

I do not perceive it as arguing, - with the 90-280, it would not be ISO 1600 in this case, rather 6400-12000 depending on focal length. - Thanks anyway

[ramarren]

I do not perceive it as arguing, - with the 90-280, it would not be ISO 1600 in this case, rather 6400-12000 depending on focal length. - Thanks anyway

 

 

I can't tell what you're expecting the SL90-280 to be able to do. Showing a Noctilux photo taken at f/0.95 doesn't give me much information as to your expectations or how the SL90-280 is failing. Have you got any photos with the zoom in the light you're looking to work in? 

 

I can't simulate a nightclub scene as you have shown with musicians, all the vast contrast ranges, specular highlights, etc, to test against. I did dim down my office to the equivalent of ISO 1600 @ f/4 @ 0.5 seconds exposure, very flat lighting, and quickly targeted various things around the room with the SL90-280 set to 160mm focal length at 8 to 11 foot distances and f/4. AF locked on instantly with minimal hunting and came out focused exactly on target (with remarkably little camera motion blur too, thank you image stabilization!). The scene you showed is much with the Noctilux is more complex both due to depth requirements, complexity of objects and contrast, near and far distant objects, etc. A focusing system can only do so much. 

Edited June 5, 2017 by ramarren

[MRJohn]

I can't tell what you're expecting the SL90-280 to be able to do. Showing a Noctilux photo taken at f/0.95 doesn't give me much information as to your expectations or how the SL90-280 is failing. Have you got any photos with the zoom in the light you're looking to work in? 

 

I can't simulate a nightclub scene as you have shown with musicians, all the vast contrast ranges, specular highlights, etc, to test against. I did dim down my office to the equivalent of ISO 1600 @ f/4 @ 0.5 seconds exposure, very flat lighting, and quickly targeted various things around the room with the SL90-280 set to 160mm focal length at 8 to 11 foot distances and f/4. AF locked on instantly with minimal hunting and came out focused exactly on target (with remarkably little camera motion blur too, thank you image stabilization!). The scene you showed is much with the Noctilux is more complex both due to depth requirements, complexity of objects and contrast, near and far distant objects, etc. A focusing system can only do so much. 

 

I do, same venue, one of the few which did focus nicely at 222mm f4 1/200 sec and ISO 6400. But it was motoring in and out a lot before I could take the shot. - Anyway, just a question whether they improved it. I have not said "it failed" but certainly reached its limits (and perhaps and hopefully it is improved now), but next time I might try an R tele lens instead, it might just be easier to focus completely manually under these conditions with the great EVF.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Ingo]

 but next time I might try an R tele lens instead, it might just be easier to focus completely manually under these conditions with the great EVF.

 

You can use manual focus with the 90-280 as well if you prefer it. There is no need to change the lens.

 

I use the 'back-button-focus'-technique to separate focus and shutter release. 

[Leicaiste]

..., but next time I might try an R tele lens instead, it might just be easier to focus completely manually under these conditions with the great EVF.

I recommend the Apo-Summicron-R 180/2 Summicron and the APO-Telyt-R 280/2,8.

 

[emoji6]

[ramarren]

I do, same venue, one of the few which did focus nicely at 222mm f4 1/200 sec and ISO 6400. But it was motoring in and out a lot before I could take the shot. - Anyway, just a question whether they improved it. I have not said "it failed" but certainly reached its limits (and perhaps and hopefully it is improved now), but next time I might try an R tele lens instead, it might just be easier to focus completely manually under these conditions with the great EVF.

 

 

That's a much more subdued range of elements and focusing targets than the prior photo. Since the AF succeeded, it's hard to say what might be different from the cases where it 'failed' or hunted. Regardless, I suspect you'll find that AF operation in this scene circumstance is improved with the v3 firmware update and lens firmware update. I've been torture testing it in a dim room and I have to get the room awfully dim now to force it to hunt.

 

Presuming equal lens quality, there should not be any difference between focusing the SL90-280 and any R lens in a dim room manually. The only reason to change to an R lens is to get one that's actually faster. The Elmarit-R 180/2.8 I sold in order to afford the SL90-280 was a little less than one stop faster, but similar size/weight ... and the SL90-280 is easier to focus manually IMO, as well as a better performer. Other lenses are likely better performers than that but will be much pricier. (And the SL90-280 will automatically enable peaking when you turn the focusing ring if you so desire and set up the option... That's occasionally handy for quick focusing.)

 

Another one of the things I'm liking about firmware v3 is that I can choose to have a one button magnification assist on the joystick for manual focusing with the SL90-280. I sometimes prefer that configuration to the 'one touch AF' on the joystick. 

[douglas fry]

Wow, shooting DNG + Jpg to a second SD card is VERY slow, so slow I thought there was something wrong with my camera (on Sandisk and Lexar cards), camera briefly locked up etc - bad news on a shoot till I suddenly thought I would just try shooting DNG only, like before

 

Shooting DNG ONLY and backup to second SD card is very quick, much faster than before..

[ramarren]

Wow, shooting DNG + Jpg to a second SD card is VERY slow, so slow I thought there was something wrong with my camera (on Sandisk and Lexar cards), camera briefly locked up etc - bad news on a shoot till I suddenly thought I would just try shooting DNG only, like before

 

Shooting DNG ONLY and backup to second SD card is very quick, much faster than before..

That's interesting. I hadn't noticed any speed difference. I'll check when I get home.

[j_lir]

can anyone let me know how well improved the SL focuses on AF-C now? that was a major drawback for me on this system for the number of times I've had loaners thats what deterred me from ditching my Nikon sir system in favor of the SL. in my experience the SL's kit zooms are absolutely incredible, so much so that I'd think they're by far the best 35mm zoom lenses out there by a long shot, they handle shooting into the light as well as the 28/2 ASPH M which is by far my favorite for that sort of thing.

 

anyway - I'm super excited at the prospect of the new firmware fixing the issues with this SL camera system that held me back from getting on board with it.

 

so please - let me know how much better it focuses for movement, I need to be able to rely on this camera for a fast moving subject in a number of lighting situations but most importantly for sports with plenty of light, and concerts on stages with ample light as well.

 

cheers,

 

jesse

[sillbeers15]

can anyone let me know how well improved the SL focuses on AF-C now? that was a major drawback for me on this system for the number of times I've had loaners thats what deterred me from ditching my Nikon sir system in favor of the SL. in my experience the SL's kit zooms are absolutely incredible, so much so that I'd think they're by far the best 35mm zoom lenses out there by a long shot, they handle shooting into the light as well as the 28/2 ASPH M which is by far my favorite for that sort of thing.

 

anyway - I'm super excited at the prospect of the new firmware fixing the issues with this SL camera system that held me back from getting on board with it.

 

so please - let me know how much better it focuses for movement, I need to be able to rely on this camera for a fast moving subject in a number of lighting situations but most importantly for sports with plenty of light, and concerts on stages with ample light as well.

 

cheers,

 

jesse

For a start, all of us have had different experiences from SL 601 earlier before FE3.0 was available, predominantly due to different usages and subjects we chase after. I'm no pro and not a die hard bird photographer, but I thought that using the test of capturing birds in flight would be a good enough test to determine the responsiveness of the auto focus tracking ability of the SL. Let us also set our expectations right as no camera gives us perfectly sharp pics at 200% hit rate. If so, there would be no 'back button focus' technique developed by DSLR users to aid and control AF more precisely.

 

My earlier disappointment with the SL 601 + 90-280mm VE was on the camera's inability to find focus when the camera was pending and shutter button was triggered (with camera set on AFc & Dynamic tracking mode) on bird-in-flight as subject of focus against a the sky (a low contrast background). The autofocus would move in the opposite direction until the subject was lost and camera could not even lock focus. Despite dual motor to drive quick focusing from the 90-280mm lens but the camera's AF just could not deliver. On the contrary, locking focus and getting good hit rate on capturing moving subjects such as road vehicles moving towards and from side to side was not a problem on the SL on earlier firmware.

 

After FW3.0 down loaded into both camera & lens, I carried out the same BIrd-in-flight test at the same location at the same lighting conditions and same subject size birds (tend to be smaller bird or birds that hardly fill much of the frame). My last test results showed me very encouraging results. Upon pressing the shutter release button while pending/moving the camera to locate the subject within the frame, the camera would first focus in opposite direction but very quickly get the focus right and snap the shots after locking focus of which I set the camera on 'continuous high' and have tested all focusing points (single point, field, zone focusing). What I have not done was to screen in magnified details of the shots on the computer screen as my visual checks on the camera eve and LCD looks focused well.

In conclusion, I will still be using back button focusing technique on SL but now that the AF works well on tracking moving subjects gave me better confidence of the camera as my overall go to camera. Granted there are better AF performance cameras available out there but that is not my concern.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[j_lir]

For a start, all of us have had different experiences from SL 601 earlier before FE3.0 was available, predominantly due to different usages and subjects we chase after. I'm no pro and not a die hard bird photographer, but I thought that using the test of capturing birds in flight would be a good enough test to determine the responsiveness of the auto focus tracking ability of the SL. Let us also set our expectations right as no camera gives us perfectly sharp pics at 200% hit rate. If so, there would be no 'back button focus' technique developed by DSLR users to aid and control AF more precisely.

 

My earlier disappointment with the SL 601 + 90-280mm VE was on the camera's inability to find focus when the camera was pending and shutter button was triggered (with camera set on AFc & Dynamic tracking mode) on bird-in-flight as subject of focus against a the sky (a low contrast background). The autofocus would move in the opposite direction until the subject was lost and camera could not even lock focus. Despite dual motor to drive quick focusing from the 90-280mm lens but the camera's AF just could not deliver. On the contrary, locking focus and getting good hit rate on capturing moving subjects such as road vehicles moving towards and from side to side was not a problem on the SL on earlier firmware.

 

After FW3.0 down loaded into both camera & lens, I carried out the same BIrd-in-flight test at the same location at the same lighting conditions and same subject size birds (tend to be smaller bird or birds that hardly fill much of the frame). My last test results showed me very encouraging results. Upon pressing the shutter release button while pending/moving the camera to locate the subject within the frame, the camera would first focus in opposite direction but very quickly get the focus right and snap the shots after locking focus of which I set the camera on 'continuous high' and have tested all focusing points (single point, field, zone focusing). What I have not done was to screen in magnified details of the shots on the computer screen as my visual checks on the camera eve and LCD looks focused well.

In conclusion, I will still be using back button focusing technique on SL but now that the AF works well on tracking moving subjects gave me better confidence of the camera as my overall go to camera. Granted there are better AF performance cameras available out there but that is not my concern.

 

 

ok cool - thanks for this, sounds promising indeed, I've heard if you turn face detection on as well (for people) it should increase the AF's ability to track a moving subject, as long as they're facing you I suppose? I'll be doing another project with the SL coming up here so I'll figure this out for my self - just wanted to see if I could get any info before to know if I need to bring my Nikon system on that job as well. I guess I will as safe is a better place to be.

 

cheers,

 

jesse