Panasonic S1 & S1R available next week

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That should work better but you’ll have to like your eggs sunny side up. 😁

[Advertisement]

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

[Mixalis]

Can anyone please confirm the size of RAW image files produced by the S1R? I'm assuming lossless compression, so should be a lot smaller than the uncompressed 86MP DNGs from the Q2 with its similar sensor.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Mixalis
Factual error

[thighslapper]

40 minutes ago, Mixalis said:

Can anyone please confirm the size of RAW image files produced by the S1R? I'm assuming lossless compression, so should be a lot smaller than the uncompressed 86MP DNGs from the Q2 with its similar sensor.

Panasonic RW2 files are 69.7-69.9Mb

OOC JPG range from about 14-24 Mb

Surprisingly DNG conversions from the RW2 files range from 35-60Mb

[Mixalis]

Thanks for the quick response, TS. It's as I thought, the S1R is employing compression. I hadn't considered the DNG conversion which adds another interesting sideshow. I am writing an article on the huge size of Q2 files — over 100MP if you take into account DNG+Fine — and trying to understand why Leica (or, perhaps I should say Panasonic) opted for no compression at the cost of such large files. My contention is that it was a heat problem because of the increased processor activity involved with compressing the files. This adds to other loads on the processor, including distortion correction. What I don't understand is why compression was not incorporated in the SL with its bigger body and, therefore, more opportunity to dissipate heat.  I understand from Panasonic that they also had heat problems with the S1R but the bigger body helps, certainly in comparison with the compact Q2. If any forum members have views on this I am all ears (or eyes).

[thighslapper]

1 hour ago, Mixalis said:

Thanks for the quick response, TS. It's as I thought, the S1R is employing compression. I hadn't considered the DNG conversion which adds another interesting sideshow. I am writing an article on the huge size of Q2 files — over 100MP if you take into account DNG+Fine — and trying to understand why Leica (or, perhaps I should say Panasonic) opted for no compression at the cost of such large files. My contention is that it was a heat problem because of the increased processor activity involved with compressing the files. This adds to other loads on the processor, including distortion correction. What I don't understand is why compression was not incorporated in the SL with its bigger body and, therefore, more opportunity to dissipate heat.  I understand from Panasonic that they also had heat problems with the S1R but the bigger body helps, certainly in comparison with the compact Q2. If any forum members have views on this I am all ears (or eyes).

I'd have to agree ..... I have always thought Leicas avoidance of compression is to reduce the processing burden on the camera. In the SL I think it was a speed issue rather than a heat one. 

Adobe RW2 to DNG is a pretty slow process even on a fairly fast iMac..... so file conversion and/or compression clearly has significant overheads. 

As for heat and the SR1 ..... the battery compartment (ie. grip) does get quite warm with intensive use ...... and there are warnings in the video section of auto cut-off if sensor temperature gets too high. 

Edited March 22, 2019 by thighslapper

[LocalHero1953]

11 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

I'd have to agree ..... I have always thought Leicas avoidance of compression is to reduce the processing burden on the camera. In the SL I think it was a speed issue rather than a heat one. 

Adobe RW2 to DNG is a pretty slow process even on a fairly fast iMac..... so file conversion and/or compression clearly has significant overheads. 

This image processing and storage overhead has long been a concern of mine as resolution has moved from the 'necessary' to the 'unnecessary' category of upgrades*. This is confirming it.

Will it be a factor in your decision to keep or return the S1R?

 

*Edit: I realise you have wanted it for landscapes, which I don't, so 'necessary' and 'unnecessary' are subjective judgements.

Edited March 22, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[Mixalis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks to both of you. Good to have confirmation. This has also been mentioned by Sean Reid in his review of the Q2.  However fastbthe processors and however cheap the bulk storage, we always seem to be running to catch up. 

[jonoslack]

52 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

I'd have to agree ..... I have always thought Leicas avoidance of compression is to reduce the processing burden on the camera. In the SL I think it was a speed issue rather than a heat one. 

 

Hi There 

It might be because of heat - on the other hand it might be because so many people whinged about the files being compressed a few years ago ..      .... ... .. they decided not to bother!

[Mixalis]

1 hour ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There 

It might be because of heat - on the other hand it might be because so many people whinged about the files being compressed a few years ago ..      .... ... .. they decided not to bother!

Could be right, Jonathan. But why is it not possible to turn off compression on the M10. Consistency is all.....

[thighslapper]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

This image processing and storage overhead has long been a concern of mine as resolution has moved from the 'necessary' to the 'unnecessary' category of upgrades*. This is confirming it.

Will it be a factor in your decision to keep or return the S1R?

So far there are no major irritations, it's easy to use, and image quality is super so I will be keeping it. 

I think I will convert all the RW2 files to DNG and delete the originals ..... size is less and you lose nothing. They will end up only 25% bigger than current SL files. With Adobe batch converting it's no more of a nuisance than having to renumber Leica images because Leica cannot count beyond 999.... or bother to continue numbering unchanged after firmware upgrades. 

[Mixalis]

10 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

So far there are no major irritations, it's easy to use, and image quality is super so I will be keeping it. 

I think I will convert all the RW2 files to DNG and delete the originals ..... size is less and you lose nothing. They will end up only 25% bigger than current SL files. With Adobe batch converting it's no more of a nuisance than having to renumber Leica images because Leica cannot count beyond 999.... or bother to continue numbering unchanged after firmware upgrades. 

What lenses are you using? How does the S1R manage M lenses?

[DigitalHeMan]

On 3/16/2019 at 4:01 PM, thighslapper said:

Hello folks .......

another quick update from a few hours testing ..... and I'm afraid it may not be particularly good news ...... 

I think you will find that M lenses under 90mm are going to give significantly worse peripheral performance than on the SL ... and the wider you, the worse it gets. Even the WATE is not completely immune.

I tried the following this morning, Voigt 10mm, Voigt 12mm (old version), WATE, MATE, 21/3.4, Zeiss 35/1.4, Apo 50/2, Noct 50/0.95, 75/2, 90/4, wide open (f2 for the Nocti) 

The Voigt 10mm and 90/4 are perfect and all the rest have varying degrees of often fairly obvious peripheral smearing..... even the Apo 50/2 seems to be affected. On the worst it starts within the outer 1/3 of the frame.

 

 

Hi TS, do you have any examples of shots taken with the S1 and M lenses? Was your additional testing anymore conclusive?

[jonoslack]

On 3/16/2019 at 3:01 PM, thighslapper said:

Hello folks .......

another quick update from a few hours testing ..... and I'm afraid it may not be particularly good news ...... 

I think you will find that M lenses under 90mm are going to give significantly worse peripheral performance than on the SL ... and the wider you, the worse it gets. Even the WATE is not completely immune.

I tried the following this morning, Voigt 10mm, Voigt 12mm (old version), WATE, MATE, 21/3.4, Zeiss 35/1.4, Apo 50/2, Noct 50/0.95, 75/2, 90/4, wide open (f2 for the Nocti) 

The Voigt 10mm and 90/4 are perfect and all the rest have varying degrees of often fairly obvious peripheral smearing..... even the Apo 50/2 seems to be affected. On the worst it starts within the outer 1/3 of the frame.

 

I'm not even slightly surprised - and if you do the checking nearer to infinity it will probably be worse. 

I think it's a simple issue with coverglass thickness, and why should Panasonic suffer the problems/inconvenience of a thinner coverglass so that Leica can sell more lenses . . . ?

[MarkP]

29 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

I'm not even slightly surprised - and if you do the checking nearer to infinity it will probably be worse. 

I think it's a simple issue with coverglass thickness, and why should Panasonic suffer the problems/inconvenience of a thinner coverglass so that Leica can sell more lenses . . . ?

Indeed.  
Where possible, I do want cross-system compatibility.  I have never been unhappy using any of my M lenses on the SL.
I guess I'll just have to start saving for when the SL2 is released.

[darylgo]

Re: M lenses corners, specifically the 21/3.4, I am not seeing smearing, rather lower resolution.  The difficulty is determining sensor resolution from lens resolution from dof.  Furthermore, what will hi res mode do for landscape shooters, will down ressing compete with SL/24mp despite unoptimized corners.

Part of me hopes the S1R is great, the other part wants it to fail so the SL continues to be my companion.  The Nikon Z7 failed to improve on the SL IQ and it was sent packing, the Nikon lenses contributing to it's horrible corner performance.  I have the 24-105 package arriving next month, my first test is performance of this zoom.  Is it Nikon/Canon or Leica corners?  I suspect it's the former based on price.  

[jrp]

On 3/17/2019 at 7:04 PM, ron777 said:

Always on, GPS, tends to be a power hog.  Perhaps that is the reason for its omission.

Well, it turns out that I was wrong; the camera does have GPS, or rather if you pair it by low power Bluetooth to your phone, you'll get a GPS stamp in your photos.  Probably eats more battery than on-board GPS, but who knows.  As it is, the S1R eats more battery than the SL, but things may improve a bit after a couple of recharges, if other Lithium batteries are anything to go by.

[ron777]

31 minutes ago, jrp said:

Well, it turns out that I was wrong; the camera does have GPS, or rather if you pair it by low power Bluetooth to your phone, you'll get a GPS stamp in your photos.  Probably eats more battery than on-board GPS, but who knows.  As it is, the S1R eats more battery than the SL, but things may improve a bit after a couple of recharges, if other Lithium batteries are anything to go by.

I would guess that the IBIS, not present in the SL, uses considerable power.

[jrp]

Yeah, but IBIS is only engaged when you have the shutter button half-pressed,

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ron777]

3 hours ago, jrp said:

Yeah, but IBIS is only engaged when you have the shutter button half-pressed,

True, but energy consumption is additive or cumulative.  I'm not sure that it's possible to make a comparative battery consumption analysis without being privy to the energy consumption requirements of a given camera's components.  With that information at hand, a side-by-side comparison might be possible.  But to say that one camera eats more battery power than another without that information is, from a causative perspective, meaningless. On the other hand, it is germane as it pertains to duration of use, i.e., functional duration.

However, if a given camera does what I desire, and its battery life is hobbled by some energy consuming component, I'll simply carry more batteries.

[caissa]

About LENR: It can be turned off on S1R, great. But has anybody used a “black photo” with the lens cap on and computed his own noise reduction with this photo ?   Is this the way to go (to get noise reduction, but only once, not in every single shot) ? Or is another procedure better ?     Did anybody try it ?  What is the best way to get this “sensor noise photo” ?