SL2 & Lightroom

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is it just me, or does Lightroom Classic 9.0 (Adobe Camera Raw 12.0) fail to decode the SL2 DNG Len profiles?  It seems to recognise the lens type, but it doesn't know what lens corrections to apply.  This is odd, as I would have thought that they were included in the DNG.

I should say that M lenses are identified and a correction profile is applied, but SL lenses (which don't have an Adobe profile, presumably because the profile is baked into the DNG) are not corrected automatically.  I don't know whether this is an Adobe or Leica problem, but it needs to be fixed.

[hoppyman]

That may be because Adobe does not have a profile for the SL2 yet. I expect it will be added in an update.

Edited December 8, 2019 by hoppyman

[Advertisement]

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

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, jrp said:

Is it just me, or does Lightroom Classic 9.0 (Adobe Camera Raw 12.0) fail to decode the SL2 DNG Len profiles?  It seems to recognise the lens type, but it doesn't know what lens corrections to apply.  This is odd, as I would have thought that they were included in the DNG.

I should say that M lenses are identified and a correction profile is applied, but SL lenses (which don't have an Adobe profile, presumably because the profile is baked into the DNG) are not corrected automatically.  I don't know whether this is an Adobe or Leica problem, but it needs to be fixed.

How do you determine that if fails to decode SL2 DNG profiles? I have downloaded SL2 DNG files from DPReview. After importing into LR 9.0, the lens correction tab says "built-in lens applied". Clicking on 'i' button shows which lens was detected and which correction was applied.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, hoppyman said:

That may be because Adobe does not have a profile for the SL2 yet. I expect it will be added in an update.

Adobe added preliminary support for SL2 in November.

[thighslapper]

errr..... Not sure I understand this ....... I've checked and all my SL2 images have " ! Built in Lens Profile Applied " for both Leica SL and Lumix lenses.

Bear in mind that the 75/2 appears never to have had any lens profiles to apply so the 'lens corrections' panel is blank ...... and was the same with the SL.....

[jrp]

That’s what I would have expected. I’ll investigate further. 

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very early days for the camera. I haven’t even looked at lens profiles in any case. Mostly shot a few hundred frames with the 24-90 stopped well down in the 50-90 range thus far and the 35 wide open. The current state with Adobe works fine for me. I guess that the camera profile might evolve/be refined in the future?

[panoreserve]

vor 23 Stunden schrieb thighslapper:

errr..... Not sure I understand this ....... I've checked and all my SL2 images have " ! Built in Lens Profile Applied " for both Leica SL and Lumix lenses.

Bear in mind that the 75/2 appears never to have had any lens profiles to apply so the 'lens corrections' panel is blank ...... and was the same with the SL.....

And that‘s the case not only for 75mm but for all SL-Summicrons...

[jonoslack]

24 minutes ago, panoreserve said:

And that‘s the case not only for 75mm but for all SL-Summicrons...

Perhaps they don't need them? (very old school!)

[hoppyman]

It would be interesting to understand a little more on how much of the SL Summicrons’ performance derives solely from the optics and how much it’s refined by any  in-camera correction. The MTF numbers are crazily good.  That’s all  pretty academic for me at least in practice though. I just see amazing results from the 35 wide open and I feel sure that Peter Karbe would not approve if I stopped it down at all 😂

 

[Jeff S]

28 minutes ago, hoppyman said:

It would be interesting to understand a little more on how much of the SL Summicrons’ performance derives solely from the optics and how much it’s refined by any  in-camera correction. The MTF numbers are crazily good.  That’s all  pretty academic for me at least in practice though. I just see amazing results from the 35 wide open and I feel sure that Peter Karbe would not approve if I stopped it down at all 😂

 

As Karbe described in the video with Hugh Brownstone, the SL 35 is the best performer of all the SL Summicrons (because of all the available extra space), so I suspect that not much is required via software, if anything.

On the other hand, the S lenses require corrections optically, in the lens (for instance any distortions), since otherwise these would be visible through the OVF. 

Jeff

Edited December 9, 2019 by Jeff S

[PeterGA]

My take away from the Brownstone interview was that Karbe said that " the 35 cron was the best for him - because it was the easier to make compared to the other lenses which had less space to optimise in the standardised barrell...."

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, PeterGA said:

My take away from the Brownstone interview was that Karbe said that " the 35 cron was the best for him - because it was the easier to make compared to the other lenses which had less space to optimise in the standardised barrell...."

As I wrote.  The 35 would have been the smallest of the Summicrons, so the extra space provided as a result of the uniform barrel dimensions provided greater opportunity to optimize results.  Optimizing optical performance with size constraints is far more difficult, and more expensive (see 50 APO M Summicron, for example).

Jeff

[PeterGA]

59 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

As I wrote.  The 35 would have been the smallest of the Summicrons, so the extra space provided as a result of the uniform barrel dimensions provided greater opportunity to optimize results.  Optimizing optical performance with size constraints is far more difficult, and more expensive (see 50 APO M Summicron, for example).

Jeff

 

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

As Karbe described in the video with Hugh Brownstone, the SL 35 is the best performer of all the SL Summicrons (because of all the available extra space), so I suspect that not much is required via software, if anything.

On the other hand, the S lenses require corrections optically, in the lens (for instance any distortions), since otherwise these would be visible through the OVF. 

Jeff

You say that Karbe said that " the 35SL summicron is the best performer of all SL Summicrons"  - I don't think Karbe said that it was the best performer - I think he said ( under duress btw)  that it was his favourite lens because it was easier to build because of the extra space in barrell.....

 

anyway I could be wrong in my interpretation apart from Karbe's statement re easier to build - is there any other indication from Leica or Karbe that unequivocally states that the 35 Summicron is the best Summicron?

 

[MediaFotografie]

vor 47 Minuten schrieb PeterGA:

anyway I could be wrong in my interpretation apart from Karbe's statement re easier to build - is there any other indication from Leica or Karbe that unequivocally states that the 35 Summicron is the best Summicron?

 

the MTF curves from all 4 SCs!

[PeterGA]

17 minutes ago, mediafotografie said:

the MTF curves from all 4 SCs!

link?

[SrMi]

7 minutes ago, PeterGA said:

link?

All documents are on leicacamerausa.com.

E.g.: https://leicacamerausa.com/leica-apo-summicron-sl-35-f-2-asph-e67-sl.html

Click on Documents -> Technical Data

[PeterGA]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

All documents are on leicacamerausa.com.

E.g.: https://leicacamerausa.com/leica-apo-summicron-sl-35-f-2-asph-e67-sl.html

Click on Documents -> Technical Data

Thanks for the link - I've had a quick look at the 35/50 and 75 MTF's 

They are all outstanding based on the distances published @ infinity and .5 meters for 35 and 50 and 1 meter for 75 - we are splitting hairs between the 35 and 50 and some more significant difference for 75 towards the tested edges at 1 meter.

Unfortunately I rarely have any use for any of these lenses at infinity OR between .5 and 1 meter shooting distances from subject so I don't know how much to take out of these MTF charts - except to say that (in line with experience on 75) the resolution, bokeh suggested by MTF is outstanding as well as acutance for these three lenses I am interested in.

 

 

 

 

[Jeff S]

7 hours ago, PeterGA said:

 

You say that Karbe said that " the 35SL summicron is the best performer of all SL Summicrons"  - I don't think Karbe said that it was the best performer - I think he said ( under duress btw)  that it was his favourite lens because it was easier to build because of the extra space in barrell.....

 

anyway I could be wrong in my interpretation apart from Karbe's statement re easier to build - is there any other indication from Leica or Karbe that unequivocally states that the 35 Summicron is the best Summicron?

 

Wrong.  Watch it again.  He describes the situation as I presented.

Watch from 16:30 to 17:45.  He not only says it’s the best Summicron, but the best lens ever made..

Jeff

Edited December 10, 2019 by Jeff S

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[digitalfx]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Wrong.  Watch it again.  He describes the situation as I presented.

Watch from 16:30 to 17:45.  He not only says it’s the best Summicron, but the best lens ever made.

Jeff

Funny, but the first time I watched I came away with the same impression...I think it was his reluctance to answer at first that deflected his actual statement. But after watching it again, he clearly said it's the best lens ever made. And after owning the lens, I can just say WOW. Its the best lens Ive ever owned or used.