Jump to content
Chaemono

Leica SL2 dynamic range

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ISO 100 pushed by 3.8 stops and Shadows +51 looks amazing.  Some other minor tweaks and Sharpening +40, NR +50. Check out the less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/1.4 @1/1600 sec.

Same as above, processed

ISO 100 f/1.4 @1/1600 sec.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a lot more challenging now to push the files due to the risk of shadows banding.  Severely underexposed and Exposure pushed by 3.85 stops, Shadows +50, Sharpening +40, NR +60.  I think, I only want to shoot this camera at base ISO.  It looks ISO-invariant there.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/2 @1/500 sec.

Same as above, processed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chaemono said:

This is a lot more challenging now to push the files due to the risk of shadows banding.  Severely underexposed and Exposure pushed by 3.85 stops, Shadows +50, Sharpening +40, NR +60.  I think, I only want to shoot this camera at base ISO.  It looks ISO-invariant there.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/2 @1/500 sec.

Same as above, processed

Interesting! Eventually - one would think - that Leica's handling of high(er) ISO beats ISO-variance. At which ISO? In 10+ days time we will know... 

Edited by helged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is totally harmless.  Just for sharpness (NR +30, Sharpening +60 in LR).  Slightly overexposed but highlight detail can easily be brought back.  Not a challenge for any camera these days. 

Less compressed JPEG here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/1.4 @1/400 sec.

Same as above, processed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, helged said:

Interesting! Eventually - one would think - that Leica's handling of high(er) ISO beats ISO-variance. At which ISO? In 10+ days time we will know... 

... beats ISO-invariance... (pardon)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chaemono said:

ISO 100 pushed by 3.8 stops and Shadows +51 looks amazing.  Some other minor tweaks and Sharpening +40, NR +50. Check out the less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/1.4 @1/1600 sec.

Same as above, processed

ISO 100 f/1.4 @1/1600 sec.

To be honest, I'm not sure I understand what is to be gained by taking an image at ISO 100 and pushing shadows to get the exposure you want, when you could just expose the shot properly in the first place?  I tend to use base ISO when I can (why give up that level of dynamic range and image quality unless you have to), and to then use aperture to maintain a usable shutter speed (if this is an issue).  Otherwise, aperture is a means of controlling depth of field.

With each camera, I have limits to high ISO - it's not actually something I put a lot of priority on - with the Monochrom, I have opted to set aperture and shutter, leaving ISO to do its own thing - rarely does it go that high, but even at very high ISO (10,000 very rarely), the images have a filmic quality I like.

Pushing files in post to find banding in post I don't get ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 22 Minuten schrieb IkarusJohn:

To be honest, I'm not sure I understand what is to be gained by taking an image at ISO 100 and pushing shadows to get the exposure you want, when you could just expose the shot properly in the first place?

If a camera is ISO invariant, it’s better to shoot at base ISO and later push the results because cameras are generally capable of recording their widest dynamic range at base ISO.  See the paragraph on ISO Invariance from the DPR review of the original SL here: https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/leica-sl-typ601-in-depth-camera-review/3.  I fully subscribe to this view,...

vor 32 Minuten schrieb IkarusJohn:

Pushing files in post to find banding in post I don't get ...

...you obviously don’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

If a camera is ISO invariant, it’s better to shoot at base ISO and later push the results because cameras are generally capable of recording their widest dynamic range at base ISO.  See the paragraph on ISO Invariance from the DPR review of the original SL here: https://m.dpreview.com/reviews/leica-sl-typ601-in-depth-camera-review/3.  I fully subscribe to this view,...

...you obviously don’t.

Yes, I am aware of the benefits of shooting at base ISO - the SL has its famous dip in dynamic range, which I tend to avoid.  I don't read DP Review.  I'm not sure about your last comment.  I'm sure it is not your intention to be rude.

If you take the first of your images above, it was at ISO100, f/1.4 and 1/1600 second.  Now, the same shot at the same ISO and aperture, but at 1/200 second would have given you 3 stops more exposure, and I suspect a better image.  I guess my point, which you perhaps don't accept from your image posting, is that for a given image properly exposed, there is considerable headroom in aperture, shutter speed and usable ISO with modern sensors  - easily enough to properly expose without over-extending the malleability of files in post processing.

I suppose it's like having a camera with 100MP and taking every image with a 28mm lens on the basis you can crop to your heart's desire - underexpose every image to remain within base ISO, using a shutter speed that avoids motion blur (camera or subject) and then do everything in post.

Now, you may respond to say "obviously I don't get it", inferring that I am stupid, I suspect; or just being amusing.  But, coming from film, my starting point is correct exposure.  I suspect that what you gain taking every image at base ISO you lose in pushing the limits of post processing.  Speaking personally, your pushed images don't really show much to my eye (not that it matters).  Your analysis doesn't seem to establish anything of photographic interest.  I don't mean that to be rude.

Cheers
John 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 8 Minuten schrieb IkarusJohn:

I'm sure it is not your intention to be rude.

No, the reference was to 'subscribe' not to 'don't get.'  The last sentence completed mine preceding it, not yours. 😁

vor 11 Minuten schrieb IkarusJohn:

I suspect that what you gain taking every image at base ISO you lose in pushing the limits of post processing. 

It depends.  I'm quoting from the DPR review of the original SL liked above: "A camera with low downstream read noise, which usually translates to high dynamic range, will show little to no benefit to using hardware amplification vs digitally correcting brightness later."

vor 15 Minuten schrieb IkarusJohn:

Your analysis doesn't seem to establish anything of photographic interest.  I don't mean that to be rude.

It's not an analysis, yet, because we don't have an SL2 in our hands.  It's food for thought.  You picked up on it, good.  It's inspired by the conclusion of the DPR review on the original SL where they concluded that:

"The Raw dynamic range of the Leica SL shows some significant limitations. It falls well behind class-leaders like the Nikon D750, D810, or Sony a7R II (scroll back up to widget). However, from purely a random noise level, the SL shows more dynamic range than a comparable Canon full-frame camera. However, the reality is that banding creeps in pretty early in shadows at low ISO settings, which will limit the real-world 'push ability' of shadows.

What this ultimately means is that you'll be limited in your ability to decrease exposure to expose so as to not blow highlights in high contrast scenes, because you'll be limited in your ability to correct (brighten) dark tones in post-processing."

If Leica claims to have made progress with the SL2 and improved it over the original SL, they better have addressed the IQ issues DPR raised in their review four years ago.  You may not care about all this because you have an X1D II.  I don't intend to buy an X1D.

BTW, Helge also picked up on it, but he understands that the analysis will follow once the camera is available to us.  

vor 4 Stunden schrieb helged:

Interesting! Eventually - one would think - that Leica's handling of high(er) ISO beats ISO-invariance. At which ISO? In 10+ days time we will know... 

We basically want to know, is it better to shoot at base ISO and push the results later (camera is ISO-invariant) or rely on Leica's implementation of hardware amplification and bump up the ISO for proper exposure (camera is not ISO-invariant).  We don't know, yet, but my feeling is based on how much better the SL2 files are vs. the α7R III at ISO 100, that the SL2 is ISO invariant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, but only to a point.  I don't read DPR Review, and I take such writing with a huge grain of salt - like MP, we are well past the point of diminishing returns.  I'm much more interested in the camera in use, rather than what are to me theoretical limitations.  Coming from Kodachrome 25 & 64, the dynamic range of the SL is plenty, and if I need more (as you say), I have the X1D II.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One issue we/DxOMark/someone should sort out, IS the ISO giving optimal DR. I sort of understand that base ISO of SL2 is 100 (?). But for SL we know that the DR is largest for ISO 50, followed by ISO 200, then ISO 100, ISO 400, and so on. For this reason, I have been primarily using ISO 50 and ISO 200 on the SL, avoiding ISO 100. So my question is, how is SL2's DR at ISO 50 vs ISO 100 (or ISO 200)? Is the ISO-invariance influenced by starting at ISO 50 vs ISO 100? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 1 Stunde schrieb helged:

One issue we/DxOMark/someone should sort out, IS the ISO giving optimal DR. I sort of understand that base ISO of SL2 is 100 (?). But for SL we know that the DR is largest for ISO 50, followed by ISO 200, then ISO 100, ISO 400, and so on. For this reason, I have been primarily using ISO 50 and ISO 200 on the SL, avoiding ISO 100. So my question is, how is SL2's DR at ISO 50 vs ISO 100 (or ISO 200)? Is the ISO-invariance influenced by starting at ISO 50 vs ISO 100? 

I took all the pictures in the store on Saturday at ISO 50 and ISO 100.  I guess, I didn't trust, Jono (😉) even though it was him who found out that the M10's base ISO is not 100 and then later Andy confirmed that it must be somewhere around 160.  These guys know their their ISO 101 stuff pretty well.  Based on what I've seen, I'm pretty sure it's 100, too.  I can send you links to the ISO 50 and ISO 100 DNG files, if you like.

Edit - You make a good point, Helge.  Since you brought it up, I’m going through all of the files right now and am not sure anymore that base ISO is 100.  It could be 50. 

Edited by Chaemono

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 3 Stunden schrieb helged:

One issue we/DxOMark/someone should sort out, IS the ISO giving optimal DR. I sort of understand that base ISO of SL2 is 100 (?). But for SL we know that the DR is largest for ISO 50, followed by ISO 200, then ISO 100, ISO 400, and so on. For this reason, I have been primarily using ISO 50 and ISO 200 on the SL, avoiding ISO 100. So my question is, how is SL2's DR at ISO 50 vs ISO 100 (or ISO 200)? Is the ISO-invariance influenced by starting at ISO 50 vs ISO 100? 

Jono must be right, base ISO is most likely 100.  Here are two equally exposed pictures, one at ISO 50 and one at ISO 100.  In the next post they are with the exact same tonal adjustments in LR, except the Exposure slider, to match the histograms.  In order to get an equally bright picture, the ISO 100 file required only +1.5 stops of exposure adjustment, the ISO 50 picture  +1.75.  At ISO 100 in a hight contrasts scenes (the best I could find in the store), the SL2, therefore, captures a better exposed picture overall at twice the shutter speed than at ISO 50 at half the shutter speed which means that with ISO 100 one has to push exposure less in post.  This must be an indication that base ISO is closer to 100 than to 50 because cameras are generally capable of recording their widest dynamic range at base ISO.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 50 f/2 @1/100 sec.

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL

ISO 100 f/2 @1/200 sec. Edited by Chaemono

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now the processed pictures.  Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL - Exposure +1.75 in LR

ISO 50 f/2 @1/100 sec.

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL - Exposure +1.50 in LR

ISO 100 f/2 @1/200 sec.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DPreview tested the ISO-invariance of this 47MP sensor already. There will be more noise when the shadows are pushed from low ISO, versues using higher ISO from the getgo.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr134_0=panasonic_dcs1r&attr134_1=panasonic_dcs1r&attr134_2=panasonic_dcs1r&attr134_3=panasonic_dcs1r&attr136_0=1&attr136_1=3&attr136_2=6&attr136_3=7&attr176_0=off&attr176_1=off&attr176_2=off&attr176_3=off&normalization=full&widget=667&x=0.08968396705444245&y=0.5175310810657408

And dynamic range isn't the correct term for these tests, as you are not pushing shadows AND pulling highlights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 29 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q:

DPreview tested the ISO-invariance of this 47MP sensor already.

You wish. One can't test the DR of camera's sensor independently of the processing power of that camera for, to quote Jaap, "ADC, demosaicing, interpolation, etc.  If the processor is working at the limit of its capabilities [which it is in the S1R], any power fluctuation may introduce artefacts.. The SL2 [...does... ] much better with the new CPU." 

See here:

vor 30 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q:

And dynamic range isn't the correct term for these tests, as you are not pushing shadows AND pulling highlights.

What are you talking about?  In all of the pictures in this thread highlights were pulled as well.  I'll post the Sony file vs. SL2 file, again, with pulled highlights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just wait for studio tests from dpreview and photons to photos. It's getting a bit out of hand with these claims that the Maesto processor can boost AF and IQ capabilities right past an electronics giant like Panasonic, who happens to supply most of the internal hardware + algorithms to Leica.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to popular demand, and since Jaap was kind enough to create a separate thread for the DR discussion, here is one example of the DR an SL2 file will give you vs. an α7R III file.  Not equally framed as I was in rush but equally exposed to illustrate how much the files can be pushed in post.  Links to download the RAW files are provided.

α7R III + Planar FE 50/1.4, link to download the ARW here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g206444809-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=8DEukkNX73KQStoOiMlynrm9IaMQXjyVBwli11tZIdw=

ISO 100 f/2 @1/320 sec.

SL2 + 50 Summilux-SL, link to download the DNG here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g314517939-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=Dn00eoyHJTs2c410BbJ6Z4N-hTzTm0zioECIAybUHYk=

ISO 100 f/2 @1/400 sec.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mr.Q said:

I'll just wait for studio tests from dpreview and photons to photos. It's getting a bit out of hand with these claims that the Maesto processor can boost AF and IQ capabilities right past an electronics giant like Panasonic, who happens to supply most of the internal hardware + algorithms to Leica.

Leica uses a dedicated sensor with diffrent microcrolenses and filter stack, and a different processor developed in conjunction with Fujitsi, so there is every reason to look for different results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now with the exact same pushing of Shadows (+100), Exposure (+2.50), pulling of Highlights (-64), NR (+60), Sharpening (+45) in LR we get some nice banding in the upper left hand corner in the Sony picture and a super clean SL2 picture.

α7R III

SL2

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.

  • Similar Content

    • By Rpisanojr
      My copyright information disappears as does the Artist name.  Anyone else experiencing this problem.  I have firmware 2.0
    • By :hinting image
      Century old Aldis Anastigmat B&L leaf shutter lens reviewed on Leica SL2
      https://hintingimage.com/aldis-bausch-lomb
      Better than expected.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By Bitti
      I have an opportunity to buy new equipment in the next few weeks and I’m still debating about medium format S007 or full 35 sl2. Recently I came across a non Leica product the fuji gfx 100, to get things more confusing. I have received estimate costs for the Sl2 for new and for used S 007 . I then received a proposal for a gfx that is very tempting as it is a 100 mp.sensor, maybe  very good for my big size prints. I am a commercial advertising photographer and I’ve used canon, Hasselblads all my career after abandoning LF film cameras. I am aiming to get bigger prints for my fine art work and best quality lenses. At Leica store in New York they let me try both Sl2 and S007 for a week each. At the moment I have to take a decision and buy the equipment. Could anyone give an advice? Also I’ve never owned a digital view finder camera. I shoot studio portraits, mainly lifestyle and occasionally autos. Thank you all, any comment would be precious and apreciated .
       
    • By TorbenStender
      Can the SL2 mounted with the SL2.0 / 35 ASPH fit into a Billingham Hadley Small Pro 2020?
×
×
  • Create New...