Mr.Q Posted November 23, 2019 Share #21 Posted November 23, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 43 minutes ago, Chaemono said: And the point is, this display panel is smaller in the SL2, S1/R, and the α7R IV that in the SL1 which means it needs to by magnified more for the same size viewfinder. Hence, the higher resolution of 5.76M-dots vs. 4.4M-dots for the SL1 display panel is somewhat negated. How is it negated? I don't follow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 23, 2019 Posted November 23, 2019 Hi Mr.Q, Take a look here Thoughts on the Leica SL2 compared to the S1/S1R. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Chaemono Posted November 23, 2019 Share #22 Posted November 23, 2019 vor 43 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q: How is it negated? I don't follow. Technically, 5.76M-dots stay 5.76M dots but projected on a larger “surface” perceived sharpness/resolution drops. Think of a slide projector that one moves further back from the blank white screen to enlarge the projected images. The pictures look less sharp/crisp than if the projector is moved closer to the blank white screen. The pictures now look sharper, but are also smaller. 😂 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macberg Posted November 23, 2019 Share #23 Posted November 23, 2019 (edited) vor 9 Stunden schrieb Donzo98: I'm not sure... but I think that the EVF is similar to how the Q2 behaves. In my Q2... the image is much more clear in playback mode than it is in shooting mode. It sort of "pixelates"in shooting mode. It was discussed a lot in the Q2 forum. I just checked with my Q2, it's definitely not the case with mine (I agree with maziatr here). However, it used to be like that when I bought it (you could see it with the small numbers at the scale at the bottom of the viewer image which were a little bit pixelated, but only compared with the Q1). Maybe they fixed it with one of the fw updates or I just don't see it any more? It obviously was never decisive for my photography and the results I have been getting. Edited November 23, 2019 by Macberg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macberg Posted November 23, 2019 Share #24 Posted November 23, 2019 (edited) vor 8 Stunden schrieb Robert E: GIs the SL2 really (?) better than the S1R with M glass or is that just what Leica lovers want us to believe? I had the SL and loved it, now have the S1R and love it with my M glass. I've read somewhere that Leica optimized the microlenses on their version of the sensor. There is a chart in this (German) review (scroll down about one third of the review) which might give you an idea. And they also have fewer layers of glass which cover the sensor (2 instead of 3 with the Panasonic-version according to that review). I guess that really can make a difference for the use of M-lenses on the SL2...see also this SL2 VS S1R M-Glass comparison. Edited November 23, 2019 by Macberg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted November 23, 2019 Share #25 Posted November 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Chaemono said: Technically, 5.76M-dots stay 5.76M dots but projected on a larger “surface” perceived sharpness/resolution drops. Think of a slide projector that one moves further back from the blank white screen to enlarge the projected images. The pictures look less sharp/crisp than if the projector is moved closer to the blank white screen. The pictures now look sharper, but are also smaller. 😂 That doesn't right. More resolution should result in a sharper image when magnified to the same size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted November 23, 2019 Author Share #26 Posted November 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Macberg said: I just checked with my Q2, it's definitely not the case with mine. However, it used to be like that when I bought it (you could see it with the small numbers at the scale at the bottom of the viewer image which were a little bit pixelated, but only compared with the Q1). Maybe they fixed it with one of the fw updates or I just don't see it any more? It obviously was never decisive for my photography and the results I have been getting. It didn’t just go away... and there have been no FW updates to the Q2. I have one as well. Love the camera... but I’m pretty sure we just got used to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted November 23, 2019 Share #27 Posted November 23, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) vor 6 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q: That doesn't right. More resolution should result in a sharper image when magnified to the same size. The SL1 4.4M-dot Epson display panel is bigger to begin with and, hence, needs LESS enlargement to match the SL1 viewfinder than the 5.76M-dot Sony display panel needs to match the SL2 & and S1/R viewfinders. SL1, SL2, S1/R viewfinders are all the same size. Smaller panel more enlargement, bigger panel less enlargement to match same size window one looks through. It’s not that hard to understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macberg Posted November 23, 2019 Share #28 Posted November 23, 2019 (edited) vor 41 Minuten schrieb Donzo98: It didn’t just go away... and there have been no FW updates to the Q2. I have one as well. Love the camera... but I’m pretty sure we just got used to it. OK, I got confused with the M10 (which I own) and Q1 (which I recently owned) with their fw-updates. We probably really just got used to it...😉 @Donzo98 P.S.: I just compared it with my friend's Q1, and yes, the numbers are (still) a little bit pixelated with the Q2. I'm sure I won't see it again after a few days alone with my Q2. This shows, however, that something like that doesn't seem to be that relevant for the everyday use of such a camera. Edited November 23, 2019 by Macberg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted November 23, 2019 Share #29 Posted November 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, Chaemono said: The SL1 4.4M-dot Epson display panel is bigger to begin with and, hence, needs LESS enlargement to match the SL1 viewfinder than the 5.76M-dot Sony display panel needs to match the SL2 & and S1/R viewfinders. SL1, SL2, S1/R viewfinders are all the same size. Smaller panel more enlargement, bigger panel less enlargement to match same size window one looks through. It’s not that hard to understand. Well, isn't that the equivalent of printing a 24mp APS-C image and 16mp FF image to the same size print? Because the 24mp APS-C image will be sharper. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted November 23, 2019 Share #30 Posted November 23, 2019 vor 25 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q: Well, isn't that the equivalent of printing a 24mp APS-C image and 16mp FF image to the same size print? Because the 24mp APS-C image will be sharper. No, it’s not. You are using totally arbitrary numbers. The SL2 EVF display panel has 31 percent more dots, but the SL1 EVF display panel is 32 percent bigger. Hence, the SL1 EVF display panel needs LESS enlargement to match the window one looks through to see it and, therefore, negates the larger number but much smaller dots of the SL2 display panel that need a lot more enlargement and become blurrier in the process. Again, it’s not that hard to understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted November 23, 2019 Share #31 Posted November 23, 2019 18 minutes ago, Chaemono said: No, it’s not. You are using totally arbitrary numbers. The SL2 EVF display panel has 31 percent more dots, but the SL1 EVF display panel is 32 percent bigger. Hence, the SL1 EVF display panel needs LESS enlargement to match the window one looks through to see it and, therefore, negates the larger number but much smaller dots of the SL2 display panel that need a lot more enlargement and become blurrier in the process. Again, it’s not that hard to understand. Ah, "blurrier in the process" implies that the viewfinder optics to be incapable of magnifying without image degradation. If that is the case, Leica microsystems would be out of business manufacturing microscopes with 400x magnification. A 0.5" panel magnified to 0.78x should present no such perceived degradation. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted November 23, 2019 Share #32 Posted November 23, 2019 vor 6 Minuten schrieb Mr.Q: Ah, "blurrier in the process" implies that the viewfinder optics to be incapable of magnifying without image degradation. Yeah...whatever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted November 23, 2019 Share #33 Posted November 23, 2019 You had me confused for a second there but now I know what you mean. And I disagree. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent M10 Posted November 23, 2019 Share #34 Posted November 23, 2019 55 minutes ago, Chaemono said: No, it’s not. You are using totally arbitrary numbers. The SL2 EVF display panel has 31 percent more dots, but the SL1 EVF display panel is 32 percent bigger. Hence, the SL1 EVF display panel needs LESS enlargement to match the window one looks through to see it and, therefore, negates the larger number but much smaller dots of the SL2 display panel that need a lot more enlargement and become blurrier in the process. Again, it’s not that hard to understand. Both EVFs are listed as 0.78 magnification. Leica has said it is the only manufacturer using just glass and no plastic. What am I missing here? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted November 23, 2019 Author Share #35 Posted November 23, 2019 17 minutes ago, Artin said: What you are missing here is the bantering of guys convincing themselves why not to buy the SL2 the EVF is beautiful ,the camera is beautiful, If you have one enjoy it , if you want one just buy it. its like the corvette guys going on my Vette is faster then your Ferrari. Ya well it’s still not a Ferrari Sorry... that’s not the case at all. I can afford one... and actually had the Q, SL and currently the Q2. I am simply reporting information for those who may be thinking about buying one. Glad to see you are enjoying yours... and BTW I drive a Porsche 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted November 23, 2019 Share #36 Posted November 23, 2019 vor 30 Minuten schrieb Agent M10: Both EVFs are listed as 0.78 magnification. Leica has said it is the only manufacturer using just glass and no plastic. What am I missing here? You’re not missing anything but you’re mixing things up. Viewfinder magnification of .78 means that your camera, with a 50mm lens on it, set at infinity (just because magnification also changes slightly depending on how close or far one focuses the lens) makes things, a person, for example, appear to be 78 percent the size they look to be with your naked eye. It has nothing to do with how much an EVF display panel needs to be enlarged to match the EVF window one looks through in order to show you a person at 78 percent size. 😂 It follows that a smaller EVF display panel like in the SL2, S1/R needs to be enlarged more than a larger EVF display panel like in the SL1. BTW, this seems to be the thread for those who failed algebra three times. 🤣 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted November 23, 2019 Share #37 Posted November 23, 2019 48 minutes ago, Artin said: What you are missing here is the bantering of guys convincing themselves why not to buy the SL2 the EVF is beautiful ,the camera is beautiful, If you have one enjoy it , if you want one just buy it. its like the corvette guys going on my Vette is faster then your Ferrari. Ya well it’s still not a Ferrari Or perhaps now someone is defending his honor and choice after ‘marriage’’ and consummation of the relationship. Reactions and tastes vary, particularly when it comes to viewing experiences. I’ve yet to meet a beautiful EVF; some are just more tolerable than others. Specs are less important than experience for me. It’s just a camera, another tool...and none are perfect...but some purchase criteria are far more important than others. I’ll be a bit bummed if my eventual demo presents an unacceptable EVF experience. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted November 23, 2019 Share #38 Posted November 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, Chaemono said: BTW, this seems to be the thread for those who failed algebra three times. Well, I'm sure you would do better now if you went back.😉 Everybody's eyesight is different. The fact that it's a smaller chip, magnified more, is immaterial. I don't believe that slightly higher magnification automatically "negates" slightly greater resolution. That's just a made-up rationalization, unless proven otherwise. So where does that leave us? Some people prefer the SL2's EVF, and some prefer the SL's EVF. That's exactly what you would expect; they are close in resolution, and they use different technology. Go back 10 years, many people preferred a 720P plasma television to a 1080i LCD. We survived that debate, we can survive this one as well... Is it really helpful to claim that people with a different preference are dunces? For all I know, you both have slightly different axis of astigmatism, and that's why one or the other VF looks better. To you. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted November 23, 2019 Share #39 Posted November 23, 2019 13 hours ago, Robert E said: GIs the SL2 really (?) better than the S1R with M glass or is that just what Leica lovers want us to believe? I had the SL and loved it, now have the S1R and love it with my M glass. If you like M glass on S1R, you will love it on the SL2...significant difference. RE: The EVF, the SL EVF is superior imo. Im disappointed in the "upgrade", especially since most of the initial reviews stated it was a huge improvement. IMO its not. Hopefully many of the issues can be resolved in FW. Regarding the OP's list I think he missed a few important details 1- M lenses perform significantly better on the SL2 2- Build Quality is in a completely different league 3- EVF path is all glass optics- so far this isn't appreciated though due to issues with the display 4- SL2 is smaller and feels better in the hand imo 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted November 23, 2019 Share #40 Posted November 23, 2019 A smaller display chip will look bigger if it’s closer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now