rumors SL2 with 36MP sensor only

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Funny things that in film days, everybody agrees that you need black and white film for B&W and colour film for colour obviously.

Even if it was easily possible to convert colour scans into black and white. 

But in digital, somehow people start to think that it was unnecessary to use a proper bayerless monochrome sensor.

Even if the advantages are huge : twice perceived resolution and at least twice better sensitivity. 

 

I know the argument : with colour you can tweak the colour channel mix. I really find that screwing the best coloured filter in the first place is way better 

I really missed my first M Monochrom. Without a doubt the best digital M so far. 

[nicci78]

In the age of the generalisation of bad LED lightings with very low CRI.

You should start shooting black and white exclusively again. 

Indoors and at night on the street, colours are so bad nowadays. What a shame. 

Even awesome Hong Kong have replaced many of its beautiful neon lights for ugly LED signs. 😞

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, verwackelt said:

For a new Monochrom they have to improve the greyscale and gamma. Compared to analogue b&w the old monochrome was very muddy and flat.
PhaseOnes monochrome has the same downsides by the way…

No big deal as flat out of camera files can be common with higher dynamic range.  Simple curve or other adjustments in PP; the files are extremely malleable. Ultimate screen and print rendering choices are endless. 

Jeff

[BernardC]

6 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Anyway Lumix S1 uses Sony 24MP sensor. S1R may be the only non Sony sensor used by a Panasonic camera.

Has anyone ever done a teardown to prove this? I see lots of internet authorities claiming that "camera X uses sensor Y", but there doesn't ever seem to be any data to back it up.

In the end it probably doesn't matter. Sensor performance became sufficient a decade ago (when the 5DII came out). Everything after that has been minor improvements that end-users won't notice in most cases. The classic (and oft-repeated) case is when a "tester" says that they under-exposed by 5 stops, brought it up in [Lightroom, C1, something else], and saw hints of "banding," or "noise!" It defies comprehension how anyone would find this test to be relevant to photography in any way.

[BernardC]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

No big deal as flat out of camera files can be common with higher dynamic range.  Simple curve or other adjustments in PP; the files are extremely malleable. Ultimate screen and print rendering choices are endless.

That, of course, is what the Zone System was all about: matching your scene contrast with the contrast that you want in your print. It's easier to do with a digital RAW file, but the overall concept hasn't changed.

[colonel]

some fun

A "35mm" frame is 36x24mm in size. Looking at the resolution spec for some films and lenses. Some films are rated at nearly 200 lines/mm, but some much less. There is a tradeoff between sensitivity and grain size. Then add noise and lowered spacial resolution of more sensitive films. Lenses also cover a range. Let's say roughly 50 lines/mm would be "good", and 100 lines/mm astonishingly superb. Of course that's only at the optimum f-stop and camera mounted and held very still.

Let's see what 75 lines/mm comes out to as a starting point. A "line" is actually one complete light-dark cycle, so you have to allow for at least 2 pixels per line width. So the 75 lines/mm becomes 150 pixels/mm, which means a full 35mm frame would have 5400 x 3600 pixels = 19.4 Mpix.

So a 41mp M10-Monochrom would be good enough

** warning: this post is highly speculative and should not be used for business decision making or emergency services. If in doubt, please use google, bing or other random selection tool. No refunds. No responsibility will be taken by management for any implications or usage of this information **

 

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Stunden schrieb BernardC:

Has anyone ever done a teardown to prove this? I see lots of internet authorities claiming that "camera X uses sensor Y", but there doesn't ever seem to be any data to back it up.

In the end it probably doesn't matter. Sensor performance became sufficient a decade ago (when the 5DII came out). Everything after that has been minor improvements that end-users won't notice in most cases. The classic (and oft-repeated) case is when a "tester" says that they under-exposed by 5 stops, brought it up in [Lightroom, C1, something else], and saw hints of "banding," or "noise!" It defies comprehension how anyone would find this test to be relevant to photography in any way.

I haven't done a teardown of the CL but the colors are sooo Sony 😂 or are easily matched to the α7R III when the same lens is used: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-qDx8fd/ Plus, malleability of the files and ISO 3200 performance, for noise and color, is impressive for APS-C. My first thought when I got the CL was that it must have a Sony sensor.

I take the liberty to steal colonel's disclaimer.

** warning: this post is highly speculative and should not be used for business decision making or emergency services. If in doubt, please use google, bing or other random selection tool. No refunds. No responsibility will be taken by management for any implications or usage of this information **

Edited August 30, 2019 by Chaemono

[hexx]

On 8/28/2019 at 1:02 PM, nicci78 said:

Isn’t that great if every L-Mount alliance manufacturer are providing different sensors ? More choice within the same mount. 

Having a S1R in Leica flavour would be quite lame. And the constant comparison would not make it easy for Leica to sell its brand new body  7 months later. Even harder if 50% more expensive.  

Having a 36MP state of the art sensor would be more attractive and different enough marketing wise. 

We will also get the chance to have future Sigma Foveon sensor too. 

It’s that Foveon that really interests me. Still have and use DP2M and DP3M (proper Foveon X3) alongside my M240

[Jon Warwick]

4 minutes ago, hexx said:

It’s that Foveon that really interests me. Still have and use DP2M and DP3M (proper Foveon X3) alongside my M240

I had the Dp2M too, and the colour depth and acuity are highly impressive compared to Bayer sensors. 

[verwackelt]

Am 30.8.2019 um 14:57 schrieb Jeff S:

No big deal as flat out of camera files can be common with higher dynamic range.  Simple curve or other adjustments in PP; the files are extremely malleable. Ultimate screen and print rendering choices are endless. 

You are right with a bit amount in pp you can get beautiful b&w pictures from the raws.
But shouldn´t a 7000€ camera not be able to give some nice JPGs too?
I know a lot of people that do not like sitting in front of computer and just wants a nice JPG from a well exposed shot.
I find the Leica monochrome JPGs not pleasing. Some looked really bad. Leica should take some afford to optimize the sensorinterpretation in software.
Fuji did a good job with the Acros simulation. Leica should be able to do the same or better.
I think it is a typical problem when engineers do the profiling and colormanagement without photographers consulting them.

[Jeff S]

9 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

But shouldn´t a 7000€ camera not be able to give some nice JPGs too?

Some think so, but the flip side is based on the premise that anyone spending that much will surely want to shoot RAW and apply their own vision.  JPEGs are cooked files... just someone else’s cooking. Different strokes...

Jeff

Edited August 31, 2019 by Jeff S

[verwackelt]

But for that price you should have both options…

[pico]

26 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

I find the Leica monochrome JPGs not pleasing. Some looked really bad. Leica should take some afford to optimize the sensorinterpretation in software.

What adjustments would you suggest?

[Jeff S]

19 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

But for that price you should have both options…

Maybe ‘you’ should.  I’m delighted as is.  If Leica had that philosophy for other built in  camera options, it would be bloated with bells and whistles and other automated choices.  Just the ‘essentials’, as they’ve marketed.  Not like other companies where less is less, not more.

But the JPEG issue has been debated here before.  No need to repeat it all, st least not by me.  Anyway, I was initially addressing your comment about ‘muddy’ out of camera files, and that’s not a JPEG issue; dynamic range has consequences.

Jeff

[verwackelt]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb pico:

What adjustments would you suggest?

I find the greyscale very flat and muddy. general the JPGs out of camera but the RAWs opened in C1 at default settings shows the same
Skys and clouds looks often dull and too dark in JPG too. I think that great sensor could deliver much better results if proper firmware would be implemented.

 

vor 4 Minuten schrieb Jeff S:

Just the ‘essentials’,

Essential would be a good shot out of the box 😉

[nicci78]

Really just try it with colour filters. Even jpg will look awesome.

 

[Jeff S]

14 minutes ago, verwackelt said:

Essential would be a good shot out of the box 😉

Never happened by itself, film or digital, particularly if a displayed print is the ultimate objective.  The most important tools remain between the ears.

Jeff

Edited August 31, 2019 by Jeff S

[verwackelt]

Sorry but other brands export files that looks quite good and can be used for "normal" shots that wont be printed but stored for show friends or family.
For Printing you will of course do pp.
If i have bought the monochrome i would felt like getting a kit instead of a ready made product.

[Jeff S]

Easy, then, buy another brand.  Many good choices these days.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[lct]

23 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Never happened by itself, film or digital, particularly if a displayed print is the ultimate objective.  The most important tools remain between the ears.

True but some cameras give more pleasant results than others as regards OoF jpegs. You know those cameras giving you the feeling that you don't really need to waste your time in PP. When i use them with Leica lenses my Canon 5D1 and Sony A7s mod give me this feeling from time to time but my M8.2, M240 and digital CL cannot compete from this viewpoint. I don't care personally but i understand that some jpeg users can be disappointed. Perhaps they should read this forum more carefully... 

Edited August 31, 2019 by lct