"Vader" Certainly Isn't Any Prettier

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 41 Minuten schrieb peterv:

Lots of preoccupation with noise, but maybe I am missing something.

Lots of preoccupation with color banding of the S1R when attempting to recover some viewable detail in the Shadows which neither the S1 nor the CL show.

vor 41 Minuten schrieb peterv:

Chaemono, are you saying that if you severely underexpose an already dark area (which is already about three stops under medium gray) and then lift it from obscure oblivion in Lightroom by pumping the shadows up to 100 and then bring your exposure slider up to 1.35, you see noise and banding? How strange! 

You are misunderstanding. The Highlights determine the severe underexposure of the Shadows. That's why a cheapo high res FF sensor that can't recover Shadow detail in post without showing tons of color banding is not welcome. See here:

vor 41 Minuten schrieb peterv:

Maybe I misunderstand, and maybe it would be more helpful if you could just post some screenshots at 100 percent to prove your point. Perhaps that would be easier to see then downloading raw files from some link somewhere.

You're funny. I'll tell you what, because you're insisting on screenshots, I'll start a dedicated thread in the L-mount section of this forum and flood it with RAW files. It'll be called "Exposing for Highlights with the S1R and the S1 - inspired by Peter." 😂

Edited September 15, 2019 by Chaemono

[Robert E]

1 hour ago, ron777 said:

Attempting to recover detail from the dimmest of shadows or darkest regions of a poorly exposed photo should be reserved for forensic photographers.

I don't understand your apparent obsession with noise and shadows.  As has been stated, cameras are tools, we should choose the correct tool for the task at hand. If an APS-C or m/43 sensor gets you where you wish to go, then stick with what works for you.  Just as you wouldn't try to squeeze juice from a rock, why do you persist in demeaning the S1R ... we get it, you're a Leica man through and through, end of story.  For some of, or perhaps many of us, the S1R performs flawlessly, and banding—a more frequent issue with PDAF sensors—has not been observed, nor has noise been a bothersome issue.  Time to move on.

Yes, I too agree. Own the S1R and just love it, sold my SL to get it. Just love using my M lenses with IBIS. Have both the Leica Certified 50mm and the 70-200mm; awesome results from both lenses. I'm a Leica guy through and through, with the MP240, Q and M10P as well. The Panasonic S series is breathing new life into the L mount arena. 

[peterv]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

You are misunderstanding

No sir, I don’t.

It’s not that I don’t believe you, you don’t have to preach to the choir, it’s just that I don’t understand why you have to keep on hammering this for pages and pages. And I don’t get why you wouldn’t just post some screenshots, prove your point and be done with it.

I for one, am not going to be bothered downloading raw files from some unknown source just to see what I already know I’m going to see. It’s not hard to imagine what it looks like, I’ve been through a lot of digital cameras the past 23 years.

Like I said, you don’t have to preach to the choir, I am right in the middle of testing and getting to know my new S007 and the first thing I do before I get into an unknown lighting situation is put the expose compensation on -1.5 as I hate what we used to call in the analog film days glass film. And film back then had a nice roll-off in the shoulder, much better than digital. So I hate overexposed whites and highlights in digital even more than apparent noise. That’s why I let the shadows fall where they may because it’s, you know, photography and not computer generated imaging.

Maybe I give it a little help in Lightroom, but I don’t expect too much of it in dramatically under exposed files because that would be unreasonable. There is no sensor commercially available that can take 20 stops all at once so we photographers have to make do, like we always have, although we get it easier all the time with higher and higher exposure latitudes.

I’m glad you find it humorous, all in good jest. I haven’t looked at the YouTube video, I’m kind of allergic to those, cheers, Peter

 

[Chaemono]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb peterv:

I don’t get why you wouldn’t just post some screenshots, prove your point and be done with it.

Because people like to be entertained.

vor 9 Minuten schrieb peterv:

It’s not that I don’t believe you, you don’t have to preach to the choir, it’s just that I don’t understand why you have to keep on hammering this for pages and pages.

Ok, it was all a misunderstanding then. Instead of doing "Exposing for Highlights with the S1R and the S1" I'll do "Exposing for Highlights with the S1R and the SL2" when the latter is out. And I won't mention your name. 😁

[peterv]

Fine by me 🙂

you know, the late Michael Reichman did on awful lot of good work spreading oline information about digital photography. He was a fervent proponent of exposing to the right and for some time a few years ago, I ETTR-ed a little too enthusiastically. I regret that now but we live and learn. 

[hmathias]

10 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. 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.

Higher noise, unfortunately, is a byproduct of higher sensor resolution. Given the same imager dimensions, the smaller the size (higher density) of photosites in a high-res sensor means that less photons impact each site. This reduces the quantum efficiency of the light-to-image signal transfer.

Higher resolution sensors — baring new technological breakthroughs — have more noise, are less light sensitive and usually exhibit harsher gray scale reproduction.

 

Sorry, but that is physics. 

Harry

[Tailwagger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, hmathias said:

Sorry, but that is physics. 

No news for me in that. The question is, other than the typical dumb ass more is better consumer attitude, what is driving the industry to assert that the count of sites is so much more important than count of stops? Canon is rumored to be going to 80MPx soon, Sony's A7iv 61MPx is apparently quite disappointing in terms of its noise handling.  Seriously, how many people produce work for bill boards?  Ok, one or two on these pages apparently, but after that? Hell, whats the percentage of owners who currently own 40MPx+ cameras that print beyond A1 even once.  10%? 🤣Doubtful.  

We've had 50MPx cell phones for several years now.  I think we'd all agree that the results from such devices aren't very satisfying.  Clearly judging the value/usefulness of a sensor goes well beyond simply tallying the count of rows and columns. Previously on these pages, there was speculation that indeed Leica was going its own way. Sadly that no longer seems to be the case. As a result I finally downloaded a few S1R samples to see if I was satisfied with what I saw.  I understand there's physics involved, but frankly, and I say this as an engineer, I could care less. What I care about are the capabilities and the results. From noise levels found in the raw images, it seems to explain why some folks have criticized the S1R's CDAF low light capabilities. 

A move into the L-System to sit along side my Ms is $15-$30K+ decision, something I don't take lightly. As always, it is the optics that drive the desire. The bodies, so far, not so much. I hope to be more enthusiastic once a few SL2 samples are available for inspection, but we'll see. I'm sure it will be an excellent option for many, but, given the how, when and where of my shooting, I need to be convinced that there's more on offer than the ability to heavily crop or print 2M wide before I invest in the system.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, peterv said:

you know, the late Michael Reichman did on awful lot of good work spreading oline information about digital photography. He was a fervent proponent of exposing to the right and for some time a few years ago, I ETTR-ed a little too enthusiastically. I regret that now but we live and learn. 

Back in the day, Michael (Reichmann) had a stronger point, given digital technology at the time.  A contrarian, more recent commentary, was presented at TOP by Ctein...

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/10/expose-to-the-right-is-a-bunch-of-bull.html

Jeff

[ron777]

40 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

No news for me in that. The question is, other than the typical dumb ass more is better consumer attitude, what is driving the industry to assert that the count of sites is so much more important than count of stops? Canon is rumored to be going to 80MPx soon, Sony's A7iv 61MPx is apparently quite disappointing in terms of its noise handling.  Seriously, how many people produce work for bill boards?  Ok, one or two on these pages apparently, but after that? Hell, whats the percentage of owners who currently own 40MPx+ cameras that print beyond A1 even once.  10%? 🤣Doubtful.  

We've had 50MPx cell phones for several years now.  I think we'd all agree that the results from such devices aren't very satisfying.  Clearly judging the value/usefulness of a sensor goes well beyond simply tallying the count of rows and columns. Previously on these pages, there was speculation that indeed Leica was going its own way. Sadly that no longer seems to be the case. As a result I finally downloaded a few S1R samples to see if I was satisfied with what I saw.  I understand there's physics involved, but frankly, and I say this as an engineer, I could care less. What I care about are the capabilities and the results. From noise levels found in the raw images, it seems to explain why some folks have criticized the S1R's CDAF low light capabilities. 

A move into the L-System to sit along side my Ms is $15-$30K+ decision, something I don't take lightly. As always, it is the optics that drive the desire. The bodies, so far, not so much. I hope to be more enthusiastic once a few SL2 samples are available for inspection, but we'll see. I'm sure it will be an excellent option for many, but, given the how, when and where of my shooting, I need to be convinced that there's more on offer than the ability to heavily crop or print 2M wide before I invest in the system.

Where can I buy a 50mp cellphone, I want one? 16mp appears to be top of the line today.

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, ron777 said:

Where can I buy a 50mp cellphone, I want one? 16mp appears to be top of the line today.

64 capable, headed to 108...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/12/20801750/samsung-108-megapixel-smartphone-camera-sensor-xiaomi-100-million-pixels-6k-video-recording

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

29 minutes ago, ron777 said:

Where can I buy a 50mp cellphone, I want one? 16mp appears to be top of the line today.

Google is your friend. 

Nokia introduced a 41Mpx in 2012.  After MS acquired their cell phone division, they introduced a 50 Mpx.  Sony announced a 48MPx chip last July, and as Jeff just pointed out, Samsung has just introduced a 64 with the 108 on the horizon.  The fun part is imagining all those pixels crammed into an FF sensor. What 2-3 Gigapixels?  Probably shoot a frame every few seconds, given how long it would take to read it all out.  Talk about LENR... whoa.

Forgot to add that Leica is in the mix as well, but only 40Mpx. https://consumer.huawei.com/en/phones/p20-pro/

Edited September 16, 2019 by Tailwagger

[105012]

It's also worth being aware of diffraction limitations as you move to higher resolution sensors.

Some systems use deconvolution to stretch things a bit further, but for a miniature format sensor (24mmx36mm) you can only resolve about 30MP at f/8, so it would be wise to use f/5.6 or wider for a 47MP sensor (and have the lens and stability etc).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction-limited_system

[ron777]

3 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

Google is your friend. 

Nokia introduced a 41Mpx in 2012.  After MS acquired their cell phone division, they introduced a 50 Mpx.  Sony announced a 48MPx chip last July, and as Jeff just pointed out, Samsung has just introduced a 64 with the 108 on the horizon.  The fun part is imagining all those pixels crammed into an FF sensor. What 2-3 Gigapixels?  Probably shoot a frame every few seconds, given how long it would take to read it all out.  Talk about LENR... whoa.

Forgot to add that Leica is in the mix as well, but only 40Mpx. https://consumer.huawei.com/en/phones/p20-pro/

Just did a search and the Sony is the largest currently available with 19mp. I don’t see any 50mp cellphones, but if you do please supply a link.

Edited September 16, 2019 by ron777

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, ron777 said:

Just did a search and the Sony is the largest currently available with 19mp. I don’t see any 50mp cellphones, but if you do please supply a link.

The 41mp Nokia is already 6 years old.  And you already have links to upcoming 64 and 108mp capable phone cameras.

https://www.androidauthority.com/huawei-p20-pro-vs-lumia-1020-857050/

Jeff

[nicci78]

In all fairness, Samsung 64MP sensor will only output 16MP. It is just like getting rid of bayer matrix. Hence better clarity. Add the ISOCELL tech avoiding any colour cross contamination between photocells. You can get pretty clean image.

Same with the old Nokia, they use all these pixels as a way to digital zoom and to clean high ISO image will pixel binning. 

So real high resolution output is still a full frame and medium format monopoly.

 

[nicci78]

2 hours ago, 105012 said:

It's also worth being aware of diffraction limitations as you move to higher resolution sensors.

Some systems use deconvolution to stretch things a bit further, but for a miniature format sensor (24mmx36mm) you can only resolve about 30MP at f/8, so it would be wise to use f/5.6 or wider for a 47MP sensor (and have the lens and stability etc).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction-limited_system

It has never been true. Diffraction is quite difficult to predict. Huge modern lenses combat these default with diffraction limited glass. Adding weight and size to the whole optics. 

With Q2, diffraction starts to kick in at f/11 only. But it is perfectly corrected at this stage. But diffraction really takes its toll at f/16 where we experience a significant loss. But it is relative, its image is still very sharp at this stage. 

Leica SL lenses also start get really affected by diffraction at f/16. But it is still sharp enough.

So enjoy your modern lenses with very high pixel counts at any aperture. They are made for each other.

 

Edited September 16, 2019 by nicci78

[Jeff S]

25 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

In all fairness, Samsung 64MP sensor will only output 16MP. It is just like getting rid of bayer matrix. Hence better clarity. Add the ISOCELL tech avoiding any colour cross contamination between photocells. You can get pretty clean image.

Same with the old Nokia, they use all these pixels as a way to digital zoom and to clean high ISO image will pixel binning. 

So real high resolution output is still a full frame and medium format monopoly.

 

Indeed, no substitute for sensor real estate...

https://www.androidauthority.com/100mp-cameras-1016587/

But even MF digital cameras aren’t immune to marketing... see 16 bit color ads.

Jeff

[frame-it]

21 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

But even MF digital cameras aren’t immune to marketing... see 16 bit color ads.

Jeff

Leica does some interesting marketing too..."professional" camera, "sports/skiing pics", "weather sealing"....among other things

[Guest BlackBarn]

11 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Lots of preoccupation with color banding of the S1R when attempting to recover some viewable detail in the Shadows which neither the S1 nor the CL show.

You are misunderstanding. The Highlights determine the severe underexposure of the Shadows. That's why a cheapo high res FF sensor that can't recover Shadow detail in post without showing tons of color banding is not welcome. See here:

You're funny. I'll tell you what, because you're insisting on screenshots, I'll start a dedicated thread in the L-mount section of this forum and flood it with RAW files. It'll be called "Exposing for Highlights with the S1R and the S1 - inspired by Peter." 😂

Thanks Chaemon for posting the video....,

Found it useful and interesting......

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jeff S]

54 minutes ago, frame-it said:

Leica does some interesting marketing too..."professional" camera, "sports/skiing pics", "weather sealing"....among other things

Standard market-speak, not the spinning of pure technical specs, e.g., bit depth or megapixels, as described here.

Jeff