Pass by 24 megapixel pleas

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think I've read anyone who owns the camera say a bad thing about the SL. I certainly am not. It's a very capable camera, that is not what this thread is about and my little input is just some info as to why some might pass on 24MP.

 

There are more reasons for higher pixel count than just print size - although that is one of the most obvious.

 

More pixels (done well obviously) means better graduation, so more rich and realistic colour and tonality. It means better IQ with less to no moire and artefacts as pointed out already by Doug.

 

More pixels pushes a lot of the things that most complain about with digital further back into the image and that has a bearing on small images too. Super sampling is an immediate way to make a better image at smaller sizes.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Paul J

[fastcar888]

I don't think I've read anyone who owns the camera say a bad thing about the SL. I certainly am not. It's a very capable camera, that is not what this thread is about and my little input is just some info as to why some might pass on 24MP.

 

There are more reasons for higher pixel count than just print size - although that is one of the most obvious.

 

More pixels (done well obviously) means better graduation, so more rich and realistic colour and tonality. It means better IQ with less to no moire and artefacts as pointed out already by Doug.

 

More pixels pushes a lot of the things that most complain about with digital further back into the image and that has a bearing on small images too. Super sampling is an immediate way to make a better image at smaller sizes.

 

 

I agree with Paul. Everything should be evaluated within the context of the camera, lens, and software. DP review allows for side-by-side comparsions. The end results of Nikon 850 appears to be as good as any camera in this class. It approaching 2018. 

 

Regardless of one's financial position, I sincerely hope Leica SL's future iterations and lenses are lighter in weight, smaller in bulk and can be part of stand alone system without previous lenses from the M in order to optimally utilize the Leica system. Other than the Q, I fear Leica may be losing its way. The old timers with numerous Leica lenses are falling off the map. I want a Leica SL with Nikon 850 detail, with smaller and lighter auto-lenses.  For the record, I have been a Leica owner for decades who sold my M6 and 6 lenses when digital came in and wound up with the Q. I would have purchased the SL in a heartbeat if it was not a beast with the zoom. Hopefully, from my perspective, things will change. A world without a financially viable SL Leica would be a shame.

[antigallican]

As a commercial photographer I am occasionally asked for high resolution files. 90% of the time the SL is fine. Sometimes it isn't. Maybe my clients could get away with 24MP files. But it's my job to supply what my clients WANT rather than try to educate them. I could shoot medium format but often require the use of TS lenses.

 

So I keep an A7R2 in the bag for the 10% of jobs I need it. I would dearly love to replace it with a high resolution SL. Then I'd have a more consistent workflow and file preparation. I'd only have one battery type to charge and one less camera to carry (currently I carry two SL's and the Sony).

 

I honestly think the only reason the SL isn't available in a higher resolution is that the sensor manufacturer doesn't offer it. The original SL was designed as a fast professional body rather than a D850 competitor. I don't buy the "ideal resolution" argument. We had that at 6, 12 and 16 MP already. Plus the lenses are clearly capable of much higher resolutions. Leica simply can't get hold of a high res sensor except from Sony.

 

Gordon

Wishful thinking in red Gordon.

 

ps if someone really wants hi-res I have a 5x4

Edited November 2, 2017 by antigallican

[jaapv]

 Leica simply can't get hold of a high res sensor except from Sony.

 

Gordon

This is simply not true. Leica has access to the  Panasonic connection for sensor production, as evidenced in the Q and (most likely) the SL. 

Panasonic has a 20 MP 4/3 sensor, which is equivalent to an 80 MP FF sensor.

[lx1713]

This thread is becoming awash with myths. Ms aren't calibrated for particular focal lengths or individual lenses. 

I agree that focus calibration is independent of the focal length or the individual lenses. What you are saying to me is that it's impossible for Leica technicians to miscalibrate two bodies with different set of lenses sent in separately.

 

 

Note that Jaap actually says below. Why is there a need to do that if my situation was a myth   Mind you, I'm not disagreeing with yourself nor Jaap except for the word "myth". Both statements contain elements of truth but just not relevant.

 

If you have problems like this send the whole kit to a trusted third-party technician (DAG and Wil van Manen come to mind) and receive a perfectly adjusted set in return within a short time.

 

What made the matter worse was that these were brand new bodies but bought 6 months apart because one body was in Germany. I wish mistakes were myth-takes but I'm glad you have never suffered such.

[lx1713]

STOPPER: repeating my much earlier post, no publication has ever rejected my submissions

complaining of lack of resolution or sharpness. I am speaking of Tri-x images, also native M9

images.

 

Counter?

 

Counter: No publication rejects the exceptional even if delivered in first generation digital files in 2 mp. Some images just don't fall into the easy category of rejection. Every editor worth his salt will never reject an eye-balls magnet.

[lx1713]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No, image resolution - 6096mm x 3048mm CMYK 500dpi 2:1 is the actual specification. Yes, that is big.

 

Bear in mind most billboards are made up of negative space and copy too so the actual image often takes up a smaller area. A good agency designs for this in mind.

 

Yes, 50MP makes a big difference as opposed to 24MP. You see it straight away. The extra detail is there and that is what shows. I personally consider 50-60MP a minimum these days for large scale work. Low resolution shows.

 

The differences of these two sizes can be seen and compared mostly at 1m. Even an M9 and an S will look reasonably comparable (in critical ways) up to that point. But 24v50 - by 2m the 24Mp has relatively fallen apart and you see a lot more artifcats where as the 50MP keeps going. 100MP gives even more. We're getting a 150MP sensor in 2018.

 

There was a sudden leap in printing technology (and monitor resolution for that matter) but it's going to stabilise for a while until things catch up.

 

 

Thanks. Are you dealing with the colour sep house or the client? If it's the colour separation people, I'm a little surprised at this development.

 

Did you have to uprez and deliver CMYK on your side? Or do you let the CMYK people do their tricks? That's a massive four colour file I'm looking at 236"@300dpi? How much ram do you have on board?

 

I agree that 50mp does have a big difference and is necessary at large print sizes. Can't beat it at those sizes.

 

Because of the general viewing distances, I have to say that's a very exceptional  requirement. Is this a norm for your customers? 

[pop]

I had a couple of M8s that had rangefinder focusing issues. Calibrating it for 50mm & 75mm made it inaccurate for my 90mm and so one body was ok with 90 but the other for 50 and 75. I never explored the issue but maybe there's something to the resolution contention affecting rangefinder accuracy. The M8 was 10mp. Loved it to bits even though it was quirky. So now it's an SL to replace the M8.

Yes, that's perfectly possible. However, it's not the focal length of a lens which influences the accuracy of the rangefinder but the individual copy of the lens. So I think you had one particular 90mm lens that focused properly on one camera but not the other one.

 

I used to own a 90mm Elmarit-M which I sent to Leica Switzerland for coding. They returned the coded lens with the remark that they had adjusted it for infinity. As I failed to understand what they were trying to tell me, I made them explain it to me. It turned out that they could adjust this particular lens to coincide with the rangefinder at one distance only. They had run out of parts that were needed to fix that. As I rarely used that particular lens at infinity, I was unhappy with the new adjustment and sold the lens.

 

The explanation is not all that difficult. The rangefinder works by sensing the position of the optical system within the lens barrel. However, the coupling is correct for one focal length only. Lenses with other focal lengths use some kind of gear to translate the movement of the optical system within the barrel to the range suitable for the range finder. It appears that the gear in my Elmarit-M did not accurately match its focal length. That's one more variable that very few people seem to be aware of.

[jaapv]

You are not the only one. Will often has a whole kit in. Leica also requests both the body and the lenses, for the simple reason that it is hard for the owner to determine which is at fault.

Will will, like it should be, adjust camera and bodies to a common standard. It cannot be otherwise.

[pico]

Interesting. I just removed the head from my M-mount 135mm Hektor to look at the RF coupling. I couldn't see much but I did find the lens serial number penciled into the focusing tube.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

This is simply not true. Leica has access to the  Panasonic connection for sensor production, as evidenced in the Q and (most likely) the SL. 

Panasonic has a 20 MP 4/3 sensor, which is equivalent to an 80 MP FF sensor.

 

And Panasonic is making a lot of 35mm hi res sensors? Is Panasonic making this 80MP sensor you speak of? I'm not wrong and you just back me up. The sensor available from Panasonic (if it is a Panasonic sensor) is 24MP. There's NO high resolution option available apart from the Sony and Nikon (probably fabbed by Sony). So the SL doesn't have a MP higher than 24MP. If the SL sensor manufacturer offers a higher MP sensor the we will almost certainly see a higher resolution SL.

 

If Panasonic were capable of making an 80MP sensor with decent noise/DR performance on an economic scale it'd be on the market already.

 

Gordon

[jaapv]

And Panasonic is making a lot of 35mm hi res sensors? Is Panasonic making this 80MP sensor you speak of? I'm not wrong and you just back me up. The sensor available from Panasonic (if it is a Panasonic sensor) is 24MP. There's NO high resolution option available apart from the Sony and Nikon (probably fabbed by Sony). So the SL doesn't have a MP higher than 24MP. If the SL sensor manufacturer offers a higher MP sensor the we will almost certainly see a higher resolution SL.

 

If Panasonic were capable of making an 80MP sensor with decent noise/DR performance on an economic scale it'd be on the market already.

 

Gordon

Well, they weren't offering  (not making, they come from a Panasonic-related firm) 24MP FF sensors before Leica needed them either - and they are not exactly on the market as they are a Leica exclusive.

If you can cut a high-quality 20 MP 4/3rds sensor from a wafer, it is no big deal to cut 80 MP FF sensors from that same wafer.

I suspect that the bottleneck is elsewhere - in the processing pipeline. The M10 is on the limit of heat management already, 80 MP images having to be created, it is doubtful whether an adequate processor is available anyway.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

 

If you can cut a high-quality 20 MP 4/3rds sensor from a wafer, it is no big deal to cut 80 MP FF sensors from that same wafer.

 

 

I don't think it's that simple. Hence the distinct lack of 80MP 35mm sensors from ANY manufacturer.

 

Gordon

[almoore]

What you are saying to me is that it's impossible for Leica technicians to miscalibrate two bodies with different set of lenses sent in separately...Note that Jaap actually says below. Why is there a need to do that if my situation was a myth   Mind you, I'm not disagreeing with yourself nor Jaap except for the word "myth". Both statements contain elements of truth but just not relevant.

 

No, I'm not saying that it's impossible for Leica technicians to miscalibrate bodies or lenses, just that bodies can be accurately calibrated without access to the lenses they're being used with. Regarding Jaap's post, there's often a need for a technician to examine both bodies and lenses to determine which is at fault. 

[jaapv]

Yes, that's perfectly possible. However, it's not the focal length of a lens which influences the accuracy of the rangefinder but the individual copy of the lens. So I think you had one particular 90mm lens that focused properly on one camera but not the other one.

 

I used to own a 90mm Elmarit-M which I sent to Leica Switzerland for coding. They returned the coded lens with the remark that they had adjusted it for infinity. As I failed to understand what they were trying to tell me, I made them explain it to me. It turned out that they could adjust this particular lens to coincide with the rangefinder at one distance only. They had run out of parts that were needed to fix that. As I rarely used that particular lens at infinity, I was unhappy with the new adjustment and sold the lens.

 

The explanation is not all that difficult. The rangefinder works by sensing the position of the optical system within the lens barrel. However, the coupling is correct for one focal length only. Lenses with other focal lengths use some kind of gear to translate the movement of the optical system within the barrel to the range suitable for the range finder. It appears that the gear in my Elmarit-M did not accurately match its focal length. That's one more variable that very few people seem to be aware of.

Philipp, I would not call that "gear", as it calles up an image of whirring cog wheels   It uses a precisely cut helicoid. That is the sloped piece of brass you can see at the back of the lens, combined with the threads that control the movement of the optical cell.

And yes, that may be off, especially the position of the helicoid, or the shimming of the optical cell

[pop]

Philipp, I would not call that "gear", as it calles up an image of whirring cog wheels   It uses a precisely cut helicoid. ....

You're certainly right. In the case of my Elmarit-M, it appears that the slope of the helicoid was off.

[Steve McGarrett]

What Elmarit was? The 11807 one?

[pop]

What Elmarit was? The 11807 one?

I don't recall the model number; it's the black one with the sliding hood; 11807 sounds about right. Otherwise a lovely lens.

[Paul J]

Thanks. Are you dealing with the colour sep house or the client? If it's the colour separation people, I'm a little surprised at this development.

 

Did you have to uprez and deliver CMYK on your side? Or do you let the CMYK people do their tricks? That's a massive four colour file I'm looking at 236"@300dpi? How much ram do you have on board?

 

I agree that 50mp does have a big difference and is necessary at large print sizes. Can't beat it at those sizes.

 

Because of the general viewing distances, I have to say that's a very exceptional  requirement. Is this a norm for your customers? 

 

 

I still do all retouching in house. It gets delivered to the client, but many jobs there's lots of back and forth between repro. Some jobs there are press days down at the press. There are always surprises in different papers and processes, especially book projects. Standardised processes like Billboards aren't too bad.

 

There are no standards. I work in CMYK and RGB. Some want RGB, some want CMYK. Sometime it's standard profiles, other times clients have their own custom CMYK Profiles. Some jobs get delivered with little, others with GMG Proofs or Epsons.

 

Yes, lots of RAM and LOTS of hard drives. 30GB single files aren't uncommon.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

Paul, the camera you need is the Panasonic G9. It has an 80 MP Hi-Res mode, which does resolution stacking, taking four images in fast sequence and shifting the sensor by a few microns between each shot, stacking the result for a true 80 MP file.

 

Actually, I hope the GX9 will have this feature as well, as it will be my next camera.