SL3 with 24 megapixels for low-light

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Minuten schrieb sillbeers15:

We all agree that high resolution image is not all rosy and solution to better camera user wise, but I’m sure ‘high resolution’ sells camera! 

Furthermore camera designers do not get the freedom to select any image sensor but from a selected range.

Perhaps a 24 to 36MPx sensor may be more ideal for producing an ideal digital camera at this day and age. But unless there are enough buyers specifically looking to buy such a camera, it is a risky business for the camera maker.

Too bad you’re right. 😁

[LocalHero1953]

11 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

The Sigma FP is a bit more interesting imo. That thing is so small you can mount it on the hot shoe of the SL2.

 

7 hours ago, Bob Andersson said:

There's a challenge for the Photoshoppers if ever I saw one. 🤣

No need for photoshop. This is on the SL, and explains one reason why I got the fp, not SL2. That is a Summaron 35/2.8 on the fp, my smallest full frame lens.

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!

Edited November 20, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[Chaemono]

The fp will likely exhibit too much camera shake with the SL Summicrons in low-light and slow shutter speed.  The S1 is really the low-light back up for the SL2, IMO.

[LocalHero1953]

1 minute ago, Chaemono said:

The fp will likely exhibit too much camera shake with the SL Summicrons in low-light and slow shutter speed.  The S1 is really the low-light back up for the SL2, IMO.

It will behave the same as the M series with 90mm lenses and any other camera without IBIS/OIS. While I have noticed a greater risk of shake when switching from the 24-90 (or 90-280) zoom to the Summicron-SL 90, as long as I take care it is not a problem. For my photography in low light (people), I have more of a problem with subject movement than camera shake, and IBIS/OIS doesn't help that.

But, sure, any camera with IBIS/OIS will help you for static subjects in low light.

[tom0511]

If I wanted a compact FF-camera with moderate wideangle I would prefer a Q/Q2 or Sony RX1II. 

For using small M lenses I would choose a M10, when using bigger lenses (zooms or tele) I prefer a body with adequate size.

But I think it is good to have different body conceps for L-Mount so anybody can choose what works for him.

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

The fp will likely exhibit too much camera shake with the SL Summicrons in low-light and slow shutter speed.  The S1 is really the low-light back up for the SL2, IMO.

Why? Enhanced sensitivity to motion blur is due to smaller pixel size, not to pixel number. A larger sensor with a higher pixel count will not necessarily produce more motion blur.

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor einer Stunde schrieb jaapv:

Why? Enhanced sensitivity to motion blur is due to smaller pixel size, not to pixel number. A larger sensor with a higher pixel count will not necessarily produce more motion blur.

I was thinking that fp body is not very well balanced with the SL Summicrons and it will, therefore, be more difficult to handhold the combo.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, tom0511 said:

If I wanted a compact FF-camera with moderate wideangle I would prefer a Q/Q2 or Sony RX1II. 

For using small M lenses I would choose a M10, when using bigger lenses (zooms or tele) I prefer a body with adequate size.

But I think it is good to have different body conceps for L-Mount so anybody can choose what works for him.

I agree: much better to have a range of different bodies than very similar ones - much more interesting for us, the customers, I mean. Not so interesting for the company that produces a body type that no one wants! Essentially Panasonic produced something similar to the SL(1), planning to differentiate by features, not concept - perhaps they saw that as lower risk than doing a Sigma.

[LocalHero1953]

21 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

I was thinking that fp body is not very well balanced with the SL Summicrons and it will, therefore, be more difficult to handhold the combo.

I actually find the fp very nicely balanced and proportioned with the Summicron-SL 90. The zooms are too difficult because your left hand has to turn the zoom ring as well as carry most of the weight. None of this helps with the fundamental absence of a built in EVF, though.

[Stuart Richardson]

I find it interesting to see a few people interested in the FP as a stills camera here...to me it seems rather crippled for stills, and clearly geared towards video use in modular rigs...the lack of VF, lack of stabilization, only having an electronic shutter, lack of microlenses or coverglass suited to M lenses...it just seems an odd choice in comparison to other compact stills options...the Q, X100F, RX1II etc. Is it more that they are fixed lens? 

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I find it interesting to see a few people interested in the FP as a stills camera here...to me it seems rather crippled for stills, and clearly geared towards video use in modular rigs...the lack of VF, lack of stabilization, only having an electronic shutter, lack of microlenses or coverglass suited to M lenses...it just seems an odd choice in comparison to other compact stills options...the Q, X100F, RX1II etc. Is it more that they are fixed lens? 

though when the original T came out i didnt buy the EVF for some months..and it was great fun to shoot with the M lenses and the rear screen.

"coverglass suited to M lenses" seems to be a debatable point

[Stuart Richardson]

31 minutes ago, frame-it said:

though when the original T came out i didnt buy the EVF for some months..and it was great fun to shoot with the M lenses and the rear screen.

"coverglass suited to M lenses" seems to be a debatable point

I am not actually sure it is, if you have done a comparison...most standard and wide M lenses perform objectively worse on sensors without extra thin coverglass or offset microlenses. I have compared with the M10, Leica SL, Panasonic S1, Sony A7S, and Sony A7Rii. The only one that did a good job in the edges with non-retrofocal wide angles was the M10, and even that seems to have diminished performance with regards to those lenses on film (in particular with the 25mm biogon ZM and 18mm Distagon ZM). I have not tried the Sigma FP, but unless they specifically made it with extra thin cover glass and offset microlenses, a number of M lenses will be underperforming in comparison to what their lenses can actually resolve when they do not have to filter their rays diagonally through 1mm or more of flat glass. There are certainly M wide angle lenses that are good stopped down on some of these bodies (the S1 is the best non Leica body for M lenses I have tried), but they are not AS good, and at least in my opinion, a bad value for adapted use in comparison to native lenses. The effect is so strong with some cameras that even longer lenses are affected. I found that the 75mm APO Summicron M was not as sharp in the edges wide open as an older 75mm Summilux on the A7Rii...the same lens being significantly sharper on the M10 and on film. This was not a focus issue, but one where the design of the APO Summicron seemed to struggle with thicker glass. I noticed the same effect with the 50mm Summilux ASPH, which is a similar design...it also did worse on the non-M bodies than the 35mm Summilux ASPH, for example. Anyway, if one is happy, one is happy. I just am putting it out there based on actually testing them in hand. I talked with Jono about it once...I think he is pretty aware of it as well. If you go looking, you will find it. Obviously for the wider angles you don't need to look very hard...

Edited November 21, 2019 by Stuart Richardson

[Chuck Albertson]

9 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

 

No need for photoshop. This is on the SL, and explains one reason why I got the fp, not SL2. That is a Summaron 35/2.8 on the fp, my smallest full frame lens.

 

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!

 

What is the handstrap you're using on the SL, Paul?

Edited November 21, 2019 by Chuck Albertson

[m9photo]

51 minutes ago, Chuck Albertson said:

What is the handstrap you're using on the SL, Paul?

Looks like this one

https://www.amazon.com/Herringbone-Heritage-Leather-Camera-Strap/dp/B00FR75THA

[Chaemono]

vor 20 Stunden schrieb Stuart Richardson:

If you get it right in camera, generally you do not need these corrections. I recently compared the S1 to the SL by photographing a sunlit wall with a room in deep shadow behind it. Lifting the shadows +100 and taking the highlights down -100 gave me a photo that looked a little better on the S1...less noise and more highlight gradation, but both photos looked absolutely terrible because their tonal balance had been destroyed. In any case, I think what you are looking for is an important feature of cameras, but it seems like it is one aspect of sensor quality which is perhaps not as highly valued by the market as noise levels in a properly exposed photo at high ISO or in resolution. 

You make some valid points, but sometimes high contrast scenes require some underexposing and lifting of shadows.  In any case, +100 on the Shadows and -100 on the Highlights slider is way too much, I agree.  I did it in order to see which files could take it and which not.

Anyway, in order to show that the SL2's ISO 3200 noise is not an issue at all if shadows aren't lifted too much, here are two pictures taken at ISO 3200, one with the Z7 and one with the SL2.  The 'kit' zoom (😁) was used for each.  I won't provide the RAW files because each can be made to look terrible if pushed to the limit.  If one wants to check the adjustments, one can use an EXIF analyzer.

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

It seems to me that with the SL2, one can protect highlights more easily while getting a better exposure overall

Z7 with no tonal adjustments, Sharpening +40, zero NR

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 @1/640 sec.

SL2 with no tonal adjustments, Sharpening +40, zero NRISO 3200 f/5.6 @1/500 sec.

Edited November 21, 2019 by Chaemono

[Chaemono]

And now with equal amounts of Sharpening and NR for each.  Keep in mind, the Z7 uses a BSI sensor.

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

These are equally exposed according to the histogram.

Z7 with Camera Standard profile, WB tweaked, Exposure +1.3, Highlights -54, Shadows +30, Sharpening +60, NR +50

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 @1/640 sec.

SL2 with Adobe Color profile and some calibration adjustments, WB tweaked, Exposure +1.45, Highlights -50, Shadows +30, Sharpening +60, NR +50ISO 3200 f/5.6 @1/500 sec.

So, don't be afraid to use ISO 3200 in high contrast low light scenes with the SL2, just don't push the files too hard. 😁

Edited November 21, 2019 by Chaemono

[LocalHero1953]

5 hours ago, Chuck Albertson said:

What is the handstrap you're using on the SL, Paul?

Herringbone Heritage - the original version before they were designated Type I or Type II. It fastens to baseplate. It was an improvement I'd hoped for in the SL2: a strap lug on the base, just for this purpose. (They simply redesigned the upper lugs, for the worse, to protrude).

Edited November 21, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[LocalHero1953]

9 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I find it interesting to see a few people interested in the FP as a stills camera here...to me it seems rather crippled for stills, and clearly geared towards video use in modular rigs...the lack of VF, lack of stabilization, only having an electronic shutter, lack of microlenses or coverglass suited to M lenses...it just seems an odd choice in comparison to other compact stills options...the Q, X100F, RX1II etc. Is it more that they are fixed lens? 

The fp does not recognise M lenses with Leica's M-T adapter, so no in-camera corrections are made, and some options (including focus peaking) are disabled. I agree it's not a great choice for stills with the available manual lenses; I haven't done much testing with M lenses (and have nothing wider than 35), but I doubt its IQ is stellar wall-to-wall. Where that is not a requirement, though, it is no worse than the Leica T without the EVF. In the end, these comparisons are being made just because the camera is out there. It doesn't mean it's what it is best at, or what it was designed for. If I use it for taking stills, I am more likely to use a compact AF prime, like the Sigma 45/2.8, or one of the Summicron-SL family.

Edited November 21, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[Stuart Richardson]

If I seemed like I was trying to invalidate people's choices, I apologize. I was not trying to. I was genuinely curious about the motivations, because it did not seem ideal to me (whereas on the other hand, it seems like a no-brainer for video). But what I am photographing and how I photograph is rather different than a lot of other people. I certainly understand the appeal of a compact camera with small lenses for example, but in this case it seemed to me like there were purpose built cameras that might do a better job, so I was curious.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Chaemono]

Am 20.11.2019 um 05:08 schrieb ropo54:

But, a question (from ignorance!):  Is the low light limitation not offset by IBIS, so that lower ISOs may be used in light challenging situations? Rob

Rob, if you download the JPEGs from the SmugMug link in #36, and look at the recovered shadow details on the left side of each picture closely, you'll see what I mean.  The SL2 has certain strengths vs. the Z7 and the α7R III/IV, but detail recovery in extreme shadows particularly of high ISO files in low-light, high contrast scenes is its weak point.  The S1R is even weaker there, the S1 shines.  For me, the SL2's superior DR and 'push-ability' especially of lower ISO files make it a winner.

Edited November 21, 2019 by Chaemono