Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
chris_tribble

Leica CL DNG file size

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interested to note that the DNGS available to download from here: http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/leica_cl_review show up as over 43MB files.  This compares with the M10 files which show as around 22MB.  I also note that the CL files are 6000x4000 and the M10 files are 5976x3922.

 

Given the APS-C camera's smaller sensor, naively I thought that it would produce a smaller file than the M10 despite having the same nominal resolution.  Is anyone able to explain?  Having looked at the image quality of the RAW I've taken the plunge and managed to buy the last CL body that Manchester Leica Centre had in stock.  I look forward to playing with it over the next few weeks and will post back to the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like they are the same size as SL files...... which are in a narrow range of 43.5-44.5 Mb.

 

TL2 files vary widely .... 35-60 Mb

 

I assume they are uncompressed ...... or part compressed.....  in different ways ....... although why there is so much variation for what are all 24Mpx sensors eludes me as well ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M10 used a lossless compression scheme.  SL densely packs 14 bits per raw pixel in order to increase read and write speed on their files, taking the position that storage gets cheaper every day.  I can check for you (not right away) but it's logical that the other  L cameras would take a similar approach, sharing Maestro hardware and firmware.

Edited by scott kirkpatrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott - I'd appreciate.  One of the things I actually really like about the lossless compression on the M10 files is how compact they are and how relatively light they are on processing demand.  

 

However - still intrigued that the SL (fullframe) outputs files of the same size as the CL.  It must be all those zeros and ones in a 24MP file!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scott - I'd appreciate.  One of the things I actually really like about the lossless compression on the M10 files is how compact they are and how relatively light they are on processing demand.  

 

However - still intrigued that the SL (fullframe) outputs files of the same size as the CL.  It must be all those zeros and ones in a 24MP file!

Right, it's still 14 bits from each pixel, until you get even larger pixels like in Phase One products, that save 16 bits.  You can pack 'em tight, saving 2 bits every pixel, and requiring maybe two extra instructions per pixel to unpack them, you can encode them down to something like 8 bits per pixel (as the M10 does, using a standard code, which is spelled out in the DNG files), but them it takes more work to get back to the raw data and you are more likely to see embedded jpegs when you check your files.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If the SL is 24 MP and the CL is 24 MP, why wouldn't the files sizes be comparable?   I'm not a physicist, but if the difference is the size and/or density of the pixels, does that mean larger pixels = larger files?  If not, than the files should be similar in size.

 

EDIT:  I think Scott just answered, just before i posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, it's still 14 bits from each pixel, until you get even larger pixels like in Phase One products, that save 16 bits.  You can pack 'em tight, saving 2 bits every pixel, and requiring maybe two extra instructions per pixel to unpack them, you can encode them down to something like 8 bits per pixel (as the M10 does, using a standard code, which is spelled out in the DNG files), but them it takes more work to get back to the raw data and you are more likely to see embedded jpegs when you check your files.

Scott - really helpful. The world is full of surprises. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sandy McGuffog took a quick look through some CL DNG files and also sees them as like M10 and SL files,  with one slight cleanup.  The CL files apparently don't contain the lines of XMP metadata intended to be populated by Adobe Photoshop or LightRoom software.  His comment is posted at chromasoft.blogspot.com .

Edited by scott kirkpatrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Rob7P
      Hi,
      Maybe the future of the CL and TL2 will be the same sensor of the Sony alpha 7C: compact camera, full frame and 24 MP? 
      There are also rumors of an SL2-S with this specs so it can be the end of the CL and TL lineup?
      Currently I have a T and I'm worried if upgrade to a TL2 for Black Friday or wait.. I will be happy to uprade for the extra megapixels of the TL2 but there are some cons for the fact that with the same sensor the pixels are smaller?
      Happy if anyone can help with my decision 

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By Torpille
      I would like to share my experience with the Leica CL after one year of use.
      The first idea was to find a replacement for my Canon 6D after 6 years of loyal service.
      Why change to a Leica CL, you ask? 
      - To gain in size and weight and really take my camera everywhere.
      - to benefit from EVF technology
      - to make full use of the lenses of my Leica T, which I love but is not the most efficient camera available.
      - to use my M lenses much more easily than with the T.
      - to finally have a single ecosystem
      The observation is simple: the CL is an excellent daily camera especially with the Zoom 18-56 mm, when the light is there ...
      - The EVF is of good quality.
      - The image quality is very good, as is the ISO management.
      - The weight and size are very nice.
      - The Thumb support greatly improves ergonomics and allows to limit the movement of the focus slider.
      - Only the autonomy is a real weak point and 2-3 batteries are essential.
      - Wifi is very slow and for my part almost unusable, I don't have enough patience !
      Concerning the TL lenses, I am more reserved :
      The Elmarit-18mm was part of the kit, I will discard it because I'm not too comfortable with this focal length, but the image quality is good and I recommend it to anyone who likes to shoot with 28mm.
      The Zoom 11-23 is very good, the color rendering is excellent, but for specific and occasional use. I only use it very rarely. 
      For my use, the zoom 18-56mm  at my preference on the CL, the quality is good, and the weight perfect. It is really the ideal partner of this camera because it is very versatile.
      I don't need the 55-135mm zoom and haven't tried it. (Same for the Elmarit TL 60mm)
      The fact remains that, at this stage, a luminous lens is missing, a real all-purpose optic, usable indoors and for street photography :
      I used the TL-35mm for a few months, but I didn't keep it. The lens is heavy and the 50mm is not my favorite focal length. But clearly the image quality is superb.
      The Summicron TL- 23mm, which I had with the T, I didn't have a very good experience with it and I sold it.
      But here it is, 35mm is still my favorite focal length and one year after selling the TL-23mm, I ended up buying one to give it/me another chance.
      What motivated me besides the very low price at which it is possible to find it in new condition, is the fact that it is possible to use it with the SL, of course with a reduced resolution but what a result!
      So much so that I don't think I'll go for the Sigma 45mm for the SL.
      Whether with the CL or the SL, we are very close to the Summicron-M 35mm.
      This brings us to the use of the CL with the M lenses :
      The use is simple and efficient, the quality of the images is up to the M.
      An advantage is also that an M 50mm becomes a 75mm, ideal focal length for portraits.

      On the other hand, I much prefer the ergonomics provided by the SL for the use of the M optics (the EVF and the joystick really make the difference).

      To sum up, I will continue to use with pleasure the Leica CL with the 18-56mm zoom and the 23mm to have a light and luminous equipment
      if needed and hope to have a software improvement of the WIFI.
       

       
    • By HGDJONES
      Looking to do more sports/action photography with my CL.  Not Sports Illustrated covers - just kids soccer and theater production work.  Worried that SIGMA 100-400 would be too heavy.  I know CL is not a sports camera but 10fps with decent focus tracking should be good enough.  Need at least 200mm to feel close enough in most cases.
    • By bgb
      I purchased a Q end of last year, liked it so much that I sold my Nikon DSLR, Lumix FZ-2500 and Fuji XE-T3. I then purchased the CL with the 18-56mm lens a few months later. Now with adapters to use my Rokinon wide-angles, and 7 Artisan lenses I find myself using the Leica CL way more than the Q.  There's no doubt that the IQ of photos from the Q, a full-frame camera, are better than the Leica CL, t's a fantastic camera and lens with macro capability.. But I'm thinking of selling it add more lenses for the CL (or at least pay it off 😎).   Anyone else face this situation?    BTW, with all that's going on in the world at this time, I'm fully aware that this is no big deal, but it keeps my mind off the other cataclysmic issues  we're experiencing.  All opinions welcome, any recommendation for lenses?...thanks.  I am currently waiting for arrival of the TTArtisan 35mm F1.4 lens to ship.  Be Well everyone.
    • By twcxz
      Hi everyone, 
      I'm currently working on a project to once and for all fix the analogue Leica CL's broken take up spool problem, by 3D printing them. 
      I've ran a roll through mine with version 2 of the spool and it works pretty good, but i'm working on version 3 which should be better still - I got the dimensions slightly wrong on this one - it's too short.
      How many of you CL owners would be interested in buying such an item? They'd cost around £20 and be sold through eBay all said and done, and I'd make a video showing how to take apart the CL and install them, as well as reassembly - International shipping would happen too through the eBay GSP as I'm UK based.
      The attached photo is version 2 and not by any means the final version as this is still in very early development, but the quality of the ones that go on sale will be much higher. This one was printed by a friend of mine, but I'm soon going to acquire my own printer and make them much better.
      I know also that this doesn't look anything like the original, but when I copied the original part dimension for dimension, curve by curve, it didn't work and suffered the same problems as the original.. immediately. Thus I simplified it and made it more "3D Printer friendly."
      Thanks
      Tom
       
       
       
       

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
×
×
  • Create New...