Jump to content
thighslapper

S1R & S1 + Leica Lens Image Thread

Recommended Posts

Regarding the use of the electronic shutter with moving subjects (and ignoring the additional complication of artificial light for in-house shooting); I am converging towards that most situations work fine. But of course, cases can be found where artefacts occur - quick bird/animal motions and quickly moving insect wings may pose problems. Perhaps we could get some image examples showing ES artefacts? A bee's wings are shown below, from an earlier thread. And since I haven't received the S1R yet, my experience is limited to 3.5 yr of use of the SL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor einer Stunde schrieb thighslapper:

Using a tripod and remote release images with the mechanical shutter up to 100mm or so are sharp. Above 100mm or so they are progressively degraded. 

This happens with IBIS on or off. 

 

I had the impression that the mechanical shutter is well damped while playing around with the S1r for 20 minutes at a dealer.

However, I think about the bug that the IBIS system moves the sensor randomly even with IBIS switched off, if a non L mount lens is used. It is only software.. And only using the electronic shutter and IBIS switched off has no IBIS movement anymore.  Mitght this be apossible explanation from your experience with the camera?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, gbpost said:

I had the impression that the mechanical shutter is well damped while playing around with the S1r for 20 minutes at a dealer.

However, I think about the bug that the IBIS system moves the sensor randomly even with IBIS switched off, if a non L mount lens is used. It is only software.. And only using the electronic shutter and IBIS switched off has no IBIS movement anymore.  Mitght this be apossible explanation from your experience with the camera?

Possible, difficult to prove and unlikely.

I think the obvious, known problem of shutter shock is much more likely. 

Whether it is down to moving the whole camera due to vibrations or just the sensor in its IBIS mount is another matter.

If it was the former you would expect IBIS to help the situation ..... but in my testing this morning it doesn't seem to do much, if anything. 

That leaves the latter .... I doubt that a linear increase in resolution of 33% would be enough to cause the issue alone. 

As you say the shutter is very quiet and gives the impression it is well damped. 

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is the sort of difference you are looking at....... 80-200 R at f8, 200mm, tripod 1/8 sec iso 100 (unprocessed RAW), 100% crops

Mechanical Shutter:

Electronic Shutter:

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just to confuse things I've repeated all the above with the R 280/2.8 with and without 1.4 and 2x teleconverters. (ie 785mm)

Surprisingly images are sharp throughout most of the shutter range I tried (1/40 to 1/250) when on a tripod. No difference with IBIS on or off, even if set to the incorrect focal length (on a tripod). Changing to the electronic shutter makes a slight but noticeable increase in sharpness at the 1/40 sec end. It is nothing like as noticeable as in the images above. The only proviso is that this was at relatively close distance indoors, as outdoors today is again very windy. 

Handheld is another story ...... but if you can handhold this combination without wobbling wildly then you must be built like The Rock. 

The only significant difference is the 280 has a tripod mount close to the centre of gravity, and although it wobbles easily even on a rock solid tripod, possibly the frequency of oscillation set up by any shutter movement is much lower due to the inertia in the arrangement. Unlike the previous speculation, that does tend to suggest camera rather than sensor movement. 

I suspect the magnitude of issues will turn out to be lens dependent and how they are used ......

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ventured outside ...... there is a bit more difference with distant objects .... but still nowhere near as much as the 80-200...

This is a mesh cowl on a chimney pot about 60m away 100% crop making the image width about 10cm ...... f8, 1/30sec, iso 100, 280/2.8 with both teleconverters making 785mm. Bear in mind this lens is 36 years old ....

Mechanical Shutter:

Electronic shutter:

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From a logical perspective, shutter shock is the most likely explanation for the IQ differences noted with and without E shutter.  But it would appear that none of the employed lenses embodied IOS, or IOS that is functional on the S1 or S1R bodies.  And since it has been established in the past that OIS is more effective than IBIS for long lenses, is its not possible that Panasonic's own eventual and likely stabilized telephotos might serve to mitigate the problem?  The fact that the Leica lenses are "compatible" with the S series does not mean that they, as already proven by the lack of OIS functionality, are meant to operate as replicas of lenses designed specifically for the S series.

Although it might not be long enough, I wonder if anyone has yet to put Panasonic's stabilized S 70-200mm to this test?

 

Edited by ron777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, ron777 said:

From a logical perspective, shutter shock is the most likely explanation for the IQ differences noted with and without E shutter.  But it would appear that none of the employed lenses embodied IOS, or IOS that is functional on the S1 or S1R bodies.  And since it has been established in the past that OIS is more effective than IBIS for long lenses, is its not possible that Panasonic's own eventual and likely stabilized telephotos might serve to mitigate the problem?  The fact that the Leica lenses are "compatible" with the S series does not mean that they, as already proven by the lack of OIS functionality, are meant to operate as replicas of lenses designed specifically for the S series.

Although it might not be long enough, I wonder if anyone has yet to put Panasonic's stabilized S 70-200mm to this test?

 

I think the issue is more complex than just shutter vibration or the lack of OIS on the lens. As long as the focal length of the adapted lens is below 100mm, the images were sharp even at low shutter speeds. This is with or without IBIS. Obviously with the 3 Panasonic lenses, there is no issue. I have tested all three lenses at low shutter speeds (1/40sec and below) and all the images were tack sharp. So native lenses do not exhibit this problem. I did not test the Leica 90-280mm so I can't be 100% sure with this lens but I would not be surprised if it works perfectly on the S1/R. Below sample image was taken with the Panasonic 70-200 f4 at 200mm using a shutter speed of 1/40sec.

What is puzzling me is why this phenomenon is occurring on Lumix S1R and not on Sony's a9 and a7RIII cameras? What is the secret sauce used by Sony? 😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the small glitch, I am want to add that I have no regrets getting the Lumix S1R. Hopefully, Panasonic will issue a firmware upgrade in the near future to resolve this glitch.

Technically, the S1/R is a fantastic camera. A little big and heavy for my hands but still manageable. I much prefer the grip on this camera than the one on the SL. What I really like about this camera is the excellent EVF and IBIS. And the camera is so customisable that once it is set up properly, it is a breeze to use. And personally for me, it is perfect for my M and R lenses.  Especially those on the heavy side 😄 Manual focusing on this camera is so easy and precise. I also look forward to using the Sigma MC-21, which I believe will be much better than the Novoflex adapter for Canon lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have tried every combination with the SL 90-280 at 280mm whilst on a tripod and a shutter speed of 1/4 second ....... IBIS on, IBIS off, Lens OIS on, Lens OIS off, Mechanical shutter, Electronic Shutter, Electronic Front Curtain Shutter ..........

There is a very slight ..... (possibly even imaginary) ..... increase in sharpness when using the electronic shutter ..... but otherwise every image to me looks as sharp as I would expect. 

This again is with the lens mounted on the tripod, not the camera. 

Handheld, with IBIS on I can get sharp images at 1/10 sec at 280mm .... and again mechanical or electronic shutter seems to make no difference. 

This might be reassuring for Leica L mount lens users ...... but if anything makes explaining what is going on even more difficult ....:rolleyes:

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have to agree,  that from every aspect,I really like the S1R.  But shutter shock is likely only part of the story.  

The shutter shock issue that Sony had encountered with A7r, although I'd never personally experienced it, had been described as having been widespread, and not specifically related to focal length, although logic would suggest that it would have been more prominent with longer lenses. I still have the camera somewhere in my storage room where it has sat, unused for years.  

As for the a7rIII and a9 not having similar issues, I assume that you are referring to adapted lenses?  I'd recently sold my a9, but still have an a7rIII, and while my imaging does not require long lenses, a few of my adapted M's do not play nicely with the camera.  The images that they produce, while acceptable, are not up to par when compared with the results obtained from the same M mounted on the SL.  I have yet to hang an M off of my S1R.  

So for me, the take away is that adapted lenses, regardless of whether they require an adapter or not, may not represent the epitome of perfection on a non native camera.

Edited by ron777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, thighslapper said:

Just to confuse things I've repeated all the above with the R 280/2.8 with and without 1.4 and 2x teleconverters. (ie 785mm)

Surprisingly images are sharp throughout most of the shutter range I tried (1/40 to 1/250) when on a tripod. No difference with IBIS on or off, even if set to the incorrect focal length (on a tripod). Changing to the electronic shutter makes a slight but noticeable increase in sharpness at the 1/40 sec end. It is nothing like as noticeable as in the images above. The only proviso is that this was at relatively close distance indoors, as outdoors today is again very windy. 

Handheld is another story ...... but if you can handhold this combination without wobbling wildly then you must be built like The Rock. 

The only significant difference is the 280 has a tripod mount close to the centre of gravity, and although it wobbles easily even on a rock solid tripod, possibly the frequency of oscillation set up by any shutter movement is much lower due to the inertia in the arrangement. Unlike the previous speculation, that does tend to suggest camera rather than sensor movement. 

I suspect the magnitude of issues will turn out to be lens dependent and how they are used ......

OK, that's confusing.  

Perhaps our heavy duty tripods are not as solid as we think.  Tiny oscillations, not be visible to the naked eye, may be in play, and mounting the lens, rather than the camera, to the tripod may have served as a mitigating factor by providing a better distribution of weight, or by reducing the torque factor.

Whatever the explanation, IMO, the camera is a keeper and has already relegated my SL to a shelf for possible future use as an M lens holder.

Edited by ron777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, grahamhoey said:

Tried the High Res option on the S1R today for the first time, second 2 pictures are 100% crop

Lack of dust on shelves is truly amazing.  I usually don't publish shots like this as even low res digital is embarrassingly revealing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I wonder if anyone has compared the IQ of the new Panasonic S Pro 50mm to that of the Leica 24-90mm Vario-Elmar at the 50mm setting?

Edited by ron777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, ron777 said:

I wonder if anyone has compared the IQ of the new Panasonic S Pro 50mm to that of the Leica 24-90mm Vario-Elmar at the 50mm setting?

I would be interested to see this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, adamquesada said:

I would be interested to see this.

Perhaps a posting as a separate topic would gather more attention.  Based upon existing posts, there must be someone who has the required combination of lenses and S cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What's happening here?  Very little activity.  Perhaps everyone except me is out shooting with their new cameras. 

I have been extremely pleased with the overall performance of the S1R with L-mount lenses made by Leica, and now I am starting to test a variety of M lenses adapted to the camera.  This afternoon I went out with the Super-Elmar-M 18mm, and the images were soft.  I have used this lens very little on either the M10 or SL, and so I can't really say if the softness relates to the camera, or if this lens is soft on other bodies.  Perhaps I will get a chance to experiment with the M10 and SL with this lens sometime within the next few days.  Here is an example:

S1R + Leica Super-Elmar-M 18

Edited by relms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just received my S1R last week and was able to use it with my 16-35SL, 50/1.4SL and 90/2SL on a short trip last week. Can set the camera to shoot in high-res mode and also provide a "standard" res at the same time. The following pics are from Mount Petit Jean State Park in Arkansas.

16-35 SL:

16mm 1600 ISO f/6.3

 

another 16-35SL:

35mm 100 ISO  f/10

 

from 90/2 SL (with polarizer):

100 ISO  f/5.6

and another with the 90/2:

320 ISO f/8

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...