"Vader" Certainly Isn't Any Prettier

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The S1R sensor is the budget version of high res FF sensors. The CL beats it for DR and malleable files. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

7 hours ago, BernardC said:

..............

Other than landscape shooters, and a few high-end fashion shooters, "professionals" don't want or need high megapixel counts. Most photography is consumed on screens these days. Professionals also rarely crop (although their photos are trimmed to fit a layout), and they rarely need to recover shadows that are 5 stops down.

................

Actually, many working photographers want/need higher resolutions. It’s just that they need to make compromises, sometimes and will sacrifice resolution over build quality or speed or handling or support. But if it’s offered they’ll take it.

Broadly speaking, working photographers cater to two markets. Domestic and corporate. For the domestic market you’re right. They don’t need the resolution often due to the way it’s consumed. That doesn’t mean they don’t want it even if the have it because they think their clients will be impressed. Phones have 12-16MP. More is an easy way to differentiate to a client. For the domestic market better glass is going to usually, be a bigger advantage than more pixels.

The corporate market often requires higher resolutions and except for some sports shooters (and even those guys are getting more reach by cropping now days), the more resolution the better. Architecture, corporate portraiture, annual reports, fine art, reproduction, fashion, beauty and product photography, plus a bunch more, all demand high resolutions. Walk through a shopping centre and you’ll be drowning in high resolution imagery in almost every store Also the clients tend to be MUCH more demanding. Many are used to medium format film and expect the same in digital. There is certainly bracket creep as small format cameras like 35mm format improve (the real change being the newer lenses) but if you charge thousands per day then you don’t turn up with anything but what will impress the shit out of your clients.

You’re spot on about the recovery though. We use lights and lots of them to make sure we have less to do in post, not more. If I need to recover 5 stops then I’ve screwed up. Badly. I can think of exactly one shot I’ve wanted to recover 5 stops in 25 years. And that was for personal use. Luckily I was hooting on an X1D at the time.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

15 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

The S1R sensor is the budget version of high res FF sensors. The CL beats it for DR and malleable files. 

Sorry but no. If you compare the S1R to either the A7R3 or D850 you’ll see they are quite close in capability. It’s not a budget sensor.

Gordon

[sillbeers15]

13 hours ago, ron777 said:

S

Sir, I believe that you have overlooked a large sector of fine art photographers, for whom detail, and thus high MP sensors, are beneficial.  You make the assumption that "most photography is viewed on screens," and by this I assume that you are referring to computer monitors, cellphones and tablets, and if that were the case, the entire camera industry would be forced to kneel to the army of existing cellphones, and so-called cellphone photographers.  Apparently, you have not made any recent visits to the photographic art galleries located around the world.  So, yes, many fine art, architectural, landscape and product photographers feature their work on the Internet via their websites, but that is primarily for demonstrative purposes and is likely not their chosen medium.

In response to Chaemono's test, I applaud your efforts but question its practicality. I have been shooting with the S1R for the past 6 months, under all manner of available lighting conditions—none as extreme as in your test—and have never encountered the color banding that you've depicted. (All PP performed in C1 Ver 12).

Granted your requirements require high MPx. There are the medium format cameras that are equipped with bigger footprint and MPx sensors that the FF struggle to meet . Don they suit your requirements more head on?

[nicci78]

Still not the same price. Even with relatively cheap X1D and GFX cameras  

FF has always been the sweet spot : lighter & faster lens, smaller body, cheaper, faster to use... just to name few advantages. 

Having high res FF avoid many of us to take the costly upgrade path to MF. 

 

High resolution also provide us a way to use our favourite aspect ratio with lots of pixel to spare. With 47MP sensor, you can still produce panoramic 3:1 images with 23MP. Or square 1:1 with 31MP. Of course APS-C crop or using TL lenses with SL2/S1R will be a no brainer, with 20MP

Edited September 15, 2019 by nicci78

[Mr.Q]

Against other brands, you're right. FF is cheaper and lighter than MF.

Against Leica though? The X1D system is the around the same price and smaller/lighter. GFX is a bit bigger but with much cheaper lenses. The GFX100 even has PDAF and IBIS.

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica only compete against himself 😜 SL system is way cheaper than S one. 

Hopefully for Leica, X1D II is still a half baked system. Still no dedicated ASICS. 

General purpose CPU can do so much, but can not replace dedicated SOC. Just look at how faster GFX system are. Even though Fuji MF are still slower than other FF system. 

 

However X2D may become available one day with proper SOC and 100MP 33x44 sensor. If priced the same as SL2. Leica would be in trouble. But hopefully again, Hasselblad will price it at 12K€

[Tailwagger]

10 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

You’re spot on about the recovery though. We use lights and lots of them to make sure we have less to do in post, not more. If I need to recover 5 stops then I’ve screwed up.

After all the discussions here, I've downloaded a number of S1R raw files from 800-3200 ISO and  they seem awfully noisy to me. To the point, where as a someone who typically shoots natural light at the edges of the day, I'm expecting that most of the acuity advantage it might have over 24MPx sensors is largely moot.  We all shoot under different circumstances and for differing reasons. A lot of folks here seem to love the S1R, which I respect, but I begin to wonder just how they are using it and how well it would fare in my hands.  Personally, there are few things in this world I hate more than a noisy image reminding me in post that it was taken by a sensor, not film.

[sillbeers15]

2 hours ago, nicci78 said:

However X2D may become available one day with proper SOC and 100MP 33x44 sensor. If priced the same as SL2. Leica would be in trouble. But hopefully again, Hasselblad will price it at 12K€

I agree and disagree. Yes lower priced MF will impose some competition to FF users but generally one cannot replace MF with FF in versatility. 

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, sillbeers15 said:

I agree and disagree. Yes lower priced MF will impose some competition to FF users but generally one cannot replace MF with FF in versatility. 

I agree and disagree as well. I do think that FF gives one optimal control over DoF, shallow and deep, while generally offering the best compromise around size, weight and cost. Oh, and there is that 2x3 vs 3x4 thing. But... 

While it's fairly easy for me to dismiss the Fujis,  the 'Blad is another matter.  Having worked with this sensor previously in the 645Z, I'm still on the fence. 100MPx, is utterly uninteresting to me, but had they introduced the ii with a new gen 50Mpx sensor, I suspect I'd be ordering one now to shoot along side my Ms. I still might in spite of my lust for a 75MM Summicron-L, given the overall system cost is lower, as is the weight and presumably the noise floor. From an AF perspective, neither system is state of the art, but fortunately in my case, I'm not overly concerned with such things. Those that are, are probably better served elsewhere anyway.

Likely I will stay in the fold as in the long run, the L-A is a better bet. But I cant say that I'm not concerned about some of the performance aspects of the SL2 if indeed we're getting what amounts to a rebodied S1R.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Tailwagger

[lct]

2 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

After all the discussions here, I've downloaded a number of S1R raw files from 800-3200 ISO and  they seem awfully noisy to me. [...]

Too noisy as per the DPR comparison tool as well (pic). The SL2 will do much better hopefully.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Tailwagger]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

Too noisy as per the DPR comparison tool as well (pic). The SL2 will do much better hopefully.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

This is a great illustration of being careful what you wish for.  Whatever added detail might be there at ISO 100 is rapidly lost once one starts pushing things. Unless Leica can do a better job with it, this really is a non-starter for me.  Hmmm... perhaps the bundle deal on an SL1 isnt such a bad idea after all.

[BernardC]

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

There is certainly bracket creep as small format cameras like 35mm format improve (the real change being the newer lenses) but if you charge thousands per day then you don’t turn up with anything but what will impress the shit out of your clients.

Exactly, and that's why all this talk of high-res and professionals is irrelevant to the new SL. If you want to play in that market, you need medium format. You won't impress anybody by showing up with a camera that looks like something you buy at the mall. It's not snobbery either, it's a genuine requirement for files that will be heavily retouched, composited, etc., and that could potentially be printed very large.

[Chaemono]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Tailwagger:

A lot of folks here seem to love the S1R, which I respect, but I begin to wonder just how they are using it and how well it would fare in my hands. 

One user who does landscapes stated that he uses bracketing in high contrast scenes. Resolution is more important for his type of work. Shadow detail recovery is not an issue for him. S1R meets his needs. Also, if properly exposed, ISO 3200 noise of the S1R is absolutely fine and can easily be dealt with by setting NR to +30 in LR and downsampling if one wants to. This is not the issue. Below are two ISO 3200 files, one with the S1, one with the S1R. 

S1R ISO 3200 RW2 download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g138745038-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=0_N3hLdKe_0_I7GutGDxnFq-HXbrv4i5eWOuQuTYhr0=

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

S1 ISO 3200 RW2 download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g19399703-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=zdm5CneMfbG-6R99zscHjlYtnN_On_Jm9gRjrwQMOjs=

 

The issue is that in high contrast scenes one cannot follow the rule 'expose for Highlights, develop for the Shadows' with the S1R because tons of color banding will appear. Trivia question, can one get a 'picture' from the files represented by the JPEGs below?

S1R exposed for Highlights

 

S1 exposed for Highlights

[Chaemono]

And below is what the S1 picture looks like after one does the following tonal adjustments in LR: Exposure +2.70, Highlights -50, Shadows +100, Whites -53. One doesn't want to see what the S1R result looks like with the same adjustments. I'm not going to post it here, but the S1Rresult is included in this gallery: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-zZCDLz/i-whqb2nm

S1 picture from previous post

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[scott kirkpatrick]

Just want to correct some statements about "big" (6 micron) and "little" pixels (4.x micron) that are wrong but passed unchallenged.  The number of electrons that a pixel can hold without bleeding, and thus its dynamic range, isn't only a function of the surface area.  The CL and SL have very similar dynamic ranges, so it might be better to think of the smaller pixels as deeper so that they hold almost the same amount of charge.  This is the result of newer chips with new cell designs coming along 2-3 years later.  Look at the comparison of the two S1 models and the older SL:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Screen Shot 2019-09-15 at 5.05.49 PM by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr (from photonstophotos.com)

There are some other things to be learned from these measurements -- there is a glitch in the response of all three cameras at low ISO, which is why the Auto ISO settings for the SL use 200 as a minimum setting.  I haven't noticed anything strange happening at ISO 600 in my S1R (a drop in shadow noise, perhaps), but I'll check.

Edited September 15, 2019 by scott kirkpatrick

[Donzo98]

15 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

And below is what the S1 picture looks like after one does the following tonal adjustments in LR: Exposure +2.70, Highlights -50, Shadows +100, Whites -53. One doesn't want to see what the S1R result looks like with the same adjustments. I'm not going to post it here, but the S1Rresult is included in this gallery: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-zZCDLz/i-whqb2nm

S1 picture from previous post

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

There is a huge diff between those 2... but how often is that kind of correction needed??

[BernardC]

53 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Exactly, and that's why all this talk of high-res and professionals is irrelevant to the new SL.

To be clear, this comment isn't limited to the SL or to other L-Mount options. The Nikon D850/D810/D800 have been out for years, and they haven't set the commercial world on fire either. There is no reason to believe that a 47MPx (or whatever) SL would do any better in that market.

There is a great appeal to having a camera that can "do it all," But if your main concern is high-resolution photography, you should go straight to medium format.

[Donzo98]

2 minutes ago, BernardC said:

To be clear, this comment isn't limited to the SL or to other L-Mount options. The Nikon D850/D810/D800 have been out for years, and they haven't set the commercial world on fire either. There is no reason to believe that a 47MPx (or whatever) SL would do any better in that market.

There is a great appeal to having a camera that can "do it all," But if your main concern is high-resolution photography, you should go straight to medium format.

Makes sense...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jon Warwick]

4 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

A lot of folks here seem to love the S1R, which I respect, but I begin to wonder just how they are using it and how well it would fare in my hands. 

I use it in a way that maximises some of its attributes. I use it often:

(1) On a tripod

(2) .... in high res mode

(3) .... with an SL Summicron as the lens

(4) and blending images in post when exposure extremes occur, eg, when inside a dark building but looking at a window, I would expose for both shadows and highlights separately, and blend in post.

That way, you’ll get image quality in high resolution mode that is about as high as one can achieve in full frame (whether or not it’s 187mp, it’s as high a resolution as I’ve seen off 35mm FF, far far far ahead of what I achieved off my M240 + 50 APO; no banding; no moire; no false colour etc).

I use 5x4, and find doing the above to be very easy in comparison. So I guess it partly depends on one’s background to the “process”.

Trying to use new high resolution cameras in a casual way invariably gives me, well, casual looking shots and casual looking image quality.

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by Jon Warwick