leica sl2 Leica SL2 dynamic range

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And now the crops.

α7R III

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!

 

SL2

Edited November 12, 2019 by Chaemono

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Mr.Q]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

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.

Different, I can agree too. "Better by a mile" as the author puts it, is a stretch.

[Chaemono]

vor 1 Minute schrieb Mr.Q:

Different, I can agree too. "Better by a mile" as the author puts it, is a stretch.

Don’t take it personally.  It’s just RAW files. 😁

[Chaemono]

Some more push-ability-of-files tests now with the α7 IV thrown in which sports a brand new 61 MPx BSI sensor.  As we all know, the SL2' sensor is FSI and uses aspherical microlenses, a 'waveguide' to direct light into the pixel and deep photodiodes to capture light more efficiently rather than the BSI approach which puts the photosensitive area nearer the chip surface.  I saw that the α7R III was no match at base ISO for the SL2 in high contrast scenes exposed for highlights and then pushed to recover shadow and highlight detail.  I was, therefore, intrigued to find out how the α7R IV would fair in terms of DR and malleability of files at base ISO.  The short answer is, I don't think any FF camera today can match the performance of the SL2 in this respect.  Leica simply chose an approach that gives far superior results for capturing and recovering shadow and highlight detail at base ISO.  

Having said this, the strength of the Sony cameras lies clearly at the higher ISO range and I don't mean noise.  As you'll see further down, I tried to push underexposed ISO 3200 files of the α7 IV and the SL2 and the Sony handled it with ease, the SL2 files fell apart.  Steve Huff had pointed this out with the Q2 where he was pushing severely underexposed ISO 6400 and above pictures that he had taken of bands in clubs and the files fell apart.  Therefore, the SL2 is not meant to be used in low light high contrast scenes with lots of movement where one has to bump up the ISO to avoid motion blur while at the same time carefully expose in order not to blow highlights.  I’m thinking horse-racing in the dark, for example, but the only real situation  where this would be relevant is in clubs photographing bands, IMO.

Where the SL2 shines is at base ISO in high contrast scenes.  The push-ability of the files is absolutely breathtaking there.  Let's take a look at some pictures.

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

The two here are equally exposed according to the histogram.

α7R IV + Planar FE 50/1.4 with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g799179385-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=yfH7ENwE4vGQ50SuGaPsadVnOJ8b9DK6yEp4XzcgpoE=

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!

ISO 100 f/4 @1/160 sec.

SL2 + 50 Summiliux-SL with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g621341631-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=0j-gJur2zXvMsenDC1vPDTwwDQMJkrUdCh_JESwmaw8=

ISO 100 f/4 @1/160 sec.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Chaemono

[Chaemono]

And now with the adjustments: WB tweaked to try to match, Exposure +3.7, Highlights -75, Shadows +100, Sharpening +40, NR +60.  Shadow details are simply clipped with the α7R IV resulting in green noise/banding.  This always occurs in black areas of the shadows with the Sony.

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

α7R IV same as above with adjustments

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!

SL2 same as above with adjustments

Edited November 15, 2019 by Chaemono

[Mr.Q]

My observations.
1. As snapsy over at the FM forum pointed out, I don't think that's banding. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1620956/1
2. If anything, the shadows on the SL2 images are clipped. They have no detail (black)

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let's take a look at another example where this banding in blacks of pushed shadows is prevalent.  BTW, the CADF of the Leica proved superior to nail focus in this scene.  I had to take several shots with the Sony before it finally acquired focus of the street lamp.

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

α7R IV + Planar FE 50/1.4 with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g749516557-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=RfGHNbZ6Xg24Ae7avHPynFsn3h5aaYNWat9QUgb5A8Y=

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!

ISO 100 f/4 @1/30 sec.

SL2 + 50 Summiliux-SL with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1046476211-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=BKCheuKPJ6lcX3-5XjXQiWBZK7eWGmf6HGgczTYKJww=

ISO 100 f/4 @1/30 sec.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Chaemono

[Chaemono]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q:

My observations.
1. As snapsy over at the FM forum pointed out, I don't think that's banding. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1620956/1

I haven't seen snapsy or any of the other spin doctors provide a single RAW file to support their claims.  I, therefore, don't give a monkey's what they say.

And now with the adjustments: WB tweaked to try to match, (we are pushing really hard) Exposure +4.25 (Sony)/+4.3 (Leica), Highlights -80, Shadows +100, Sharpening +40, NR +60.  These are closer but the SL2 captures the black tones of the shirts/scarf better, IMO.  It turns greenish in the Sony as if the other channels are missing. 

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

α7R IV same as above with adjustments

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!

SL2 same as above with adjustments

[Mr.Q]

OK, carry on then.

[Chaemono]

And now Sony's strength, ISO 3200 files underexposed that can be pushed hard.  This shot here is unnecessarily underexposed as there were no highlights to protect.

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

α7R IV + Planar FE 50/1.4 with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g1052091175-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=DQlcH6B9x5ADk8hMhwDnHhqYo9-dmSAvqPzaBuWxCPI=

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!

ISO 3200 f/5.6 @1/500 sec.

SL2: believe me, you don't want to push an ISO 3200 SL2 file like this too hard.  Depending on exposure adjustments, Shadows +30 is max what it can take.

Edited November 15, 2019 by Chaemono

[Chaemono]

Now Exposure +2.5, Highlights -30, Shadows +100, Sharpening +80, NR +80.

The less compressed 69.6 MB (😁) JPEG can be found here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

α7R IV same as above with adjustments

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!

 

[Chaemono]

How about the SL2 vs. the S1R at base ISO?  Well, the fact is, there are issues with pushing the S1R flies too hard in certain situations even at base ISO.  They are so subtle but you'll be able to see in the next posts what they are. 😁

These are equally exposed according to the histogram which required a slightly slower shutter speed on the S1R.  Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-tzdLng/

S1R + 50 Summicron-SL with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g897448550-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=oJJQhDElsVrFgGXm2oHCl7o48PUhAZVSFVifdpfEzHo=

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!

ISO 100 f/2 @1/160 sec.

SL2. + 50 Summicron-SL with LR defaults. RAW file download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g631422748-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=1pdnciFRIPwHBOcgldNodbq9GzErwVKOFx5mzjU482g=

ISO 100 f/2 @1/200 sec.

[Chaemono]

Now with the adjustments: WB tweaked to try to match, Exposure +2.4 (S1R)/+2.25 (SL2), Highlights -80, Shadows +100, Sharpening +40, NR +40. 

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

S1R same as above with adjustments

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!

SL2 same as above with adjustments

[Chaemono]

So, what are the issues?  You can hear starting at 0:33 here (don't start before that, it's unbearable): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPSeTM4Rn98&list=RDKPSeTM4Rn98&start_radio=1&t=28

 

Or see here in the crops.

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

S1R crop from same as above

.

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!

 

SL2 crop from same as above

 

[helged]

Thanks for this comprehensible analysis @Chaemono, much appreciated! And yes, things looks great. It will be interesting to see the charateristics of high(er) ISO, say in the 800-1600 range. Time will tell, or you will have the answer(s) before the rest of us get a hand on the body next week....

[Chaemono]

vor 38 Minuten schrieb helged:

Thanks for this comprehensible analysis @Chaemono, much appreciated! And yes, things looks great. It will be interesting to see the charateristics of high(er) ISO, say in the 800-1600 range. Time will tell, or you will have the answer(s) before the rest of us get a hand on the body next week....

Interesting questions.  First, on pushing shadows to the limit, meaning the LR slider to +100, the files can take it up until ISO 800.  After that they start to fall apart as one increases exposure and the Shadows slider is left at +100.  Second, ISO 100 pushed one stop equals ISO 200 in the histogram.  ISO 400 is brighter than ISO 100 pushed two stops and ISO 800 is slightly brighter than ISO 100 pushed three stops.  All of the higher ISO pictures (only checked until ISO 800) have lower noise than the pushed ISO 100 file.  I haven't checked for treatment of highlights but it's quite possible that it's better to shoot at ISO 400 than at ISO 100 and increase exposure by two stops.  Would be really interesting to hear what you'll have to say.

[Dr. G]

This topic interests me as I am switching from Sony to the SL2 (I had switched from the original SL to the Sony a few years ago).  I had the A7r iii and now the iv.  The iv has more noise at a than the iii at higher ISOs.  Nonetheless, with the iii and the iv I could comfortably shoot to 6400.  When I had the Q2 I made a real effort to keep the ISO under 3200 as I found that it started to show more noise than I liked.  I've heard conflicting reports that the SL2 sensor is or isn't the same as the Q2.  I will say that it was the images I was getting from the Q2 that made me switch back to Leica.  

[Chaemono]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Dr. G:

This topic interests me as I am switching from Sony to the SL2 (I had switched from the original SL to the Sony a few years ago).  I had the A7r iii and now the iv.  The iv has more noise at a than the iii at higher ISOs.  Nonetheless, with the iii and the iv I could comfortably shoot to 6400.  When I had the Q2 I made a real effort to keep the ISO under 3200 as I found that it started to show more noise than I liked.  I've heard conflicting reports that the SL2 sensor is or isn't the same as the Q2.  I will say that it was the images I was getting from the Q2 that made me switch back to Leica.  

There are two issues here, I think, one is high ISO noise and the other is high ISO noise in pushed shadows.  ISO 3200 and ISO 6400 noise per se is not a concern with the SL2 if a picture is exposed properly.  It only becomes 'a pushed shadows issue' in an ISO 3200 file, for example, if a picture is too dark because exposure was determined by the highlights.  One will either have to accept this pushed shadows noise there or be limited in one's ability to recover shadow details.  I don't see this being a problem unless there is a lot of fast movement in a low light, high contrast scene where shutter speed needs to be bumped up, ISO accordingly, AND most of the picture needs to be underexposed.  The SL2 offers great push-ability of low ISO files, more limited push-ability of high ISO files. It's in the latter where noise can become an issue if the files are pushed to the limit.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[helged]

34 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

There are two issues here, I think, one is high ISO noise and the other is high ISO noise in pushed shadows.  ISO 3200 and ISO 6400 noise per se is not a concern with the SL2 if a picture is exposed properly.  It only becomes 'a pushed shadows issue' in an ISO 3200 file, for example, if a picture is too dark because exposure was determined by the highlights.  One will either have to accept this pushed shadows noise there or be limited in one's ability to recover shadow details.  I don't see this being a problem unless there is a lot of fast movement in a low light, high contrast scene where shutter speed needs to be bumped up, ISO accordingly, AND most of the picture needs to be underexposed.  The SL2 offers great push-ability of low ISO files, more limited push-ability of high ISO files. It's in the latter where noise can become an issue if the files are pushed to the limit.

Thanks again! Regarding high(ish) ISO, say ISO 1600 or 3200, and an overall 'correctly' exposed image: How many stops can deep shadows be lifted before artefacts start to deteriorate the image? Yes, there are many subjective measures here ('correctly' exposed, shadow artefacts, deterioration of the final image, etc, and tricks can be used in pp), but I think the above is realistic for many real-life shooting settings. I ask since things look very promising at base (=100) ISO, but what is the available adjustment 'latitude' at high ISO? 

[Chaemono]

vor einer Stunde schrieb helged:

Thanks again! Regarding high(ish) ISO, say ISO 1600 or 3200, and an overall 'correctly' exposed image: How many stops can deep shadows be lifted before artefacts start to deteriorate the image? Yes, there are many subjective measures here ('correctly' exposed, shadow artefacts, deterioration of the final image, etc, and tricks can be used in pp), but I think the above is realistic for many real-life shooting settings. I ask since things look very promising at base (=100) ISO, but what is the available adjustment 'latitude' at high ISO? 

Okay, I need to make myself more clear.  It's not the pushing of the Exposure slider alone that results in shadow artefacts in the SL2's ISO 3200 files, it's the combination of lifting exposure AND pushing the Shadows slider at the same time.  This is the best I have right now but it serves to illustrate the point. 

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

SL2 + 50 Summicron-SL, LR defaults, WB adjusted

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!

ISO 3200 f/2 @1/100 sec.

Same as above with Exposure +3, Highlights -68, Shadows +10, Sharpening +40, NR +60ISO 3200 f/2 @1/100 sec.

Same as above with Exposure +4, Highlights -68, Sharpening +40, NR +60SO 3200 f/2 @1/100 sec.

You see how sparsely I used the Shadows slider?  Go to +20 in the second one to recover more shadows detail in the upper right hand corner, if you like that sort of thing, and artefacts will set in.  Go to +10 in the third and the same thing.  The only reason I brought it up is because the SL2 files can be pushed to the limit at low ISO more so than any other FF camera I've seen, while they can't at higher ISO.  As you push Exposure by four stops, for example, you won't be able to touch the Shadows slider in ISO 1600 SL2 files and above (not a big issue at ISO 800 and below).  This is different for all the Sony cameras or those that use a Sony sensor, like the S1 or the Simga fp.

First, I personally prefer greater DR at base ISO and second, I would have never taken this picture at ISO 3200.  With IBIS I would have shot it either at ISO 100 or ISO 400 (still to be determines what would be best) and at a shutter speed of 1/10 sec. or 1/30 sec.  If there is fast movement in the scene, it may be a different matter.  Depending on how much shadow detail you want to recover in the background, you may have to revert to the S1 then.

Edit - this was taken basically in the dark

Edited November 16, 2019 by Chaemono