SL2 Excessive Noise and other image issues?

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

32 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

Patient: Doc, my brother thinks he’s a chicken.

Doc: So turn him in.

Patient: I can’t, I need the eggs.

😂

See Woody Allen, ending of Annie Hall.

Jeff

Edited December 26, 2019 by Jeff S

[SrMi]

22 minutes ago, 01af said:

That's a common misconception.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but I'd like to read something more than "Are you serious" or "That's a common misconception". Any docs you can link me to? Any camera output comparisons that show equal or better noise characteristics at higher resolution? Thanks!

Here is a comparison of Nikon and Sony cameras with same generation sensors but different resolutions. The noise difference is visible (at pixel level):

DPReview Z 6 vs. Z 7 vs. A7III vs. A7rIII

[SrMi]

15 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

<snip>

1.  Excessive Image Noise on images at 1600, 3200, and 6400 ISO in comparison to what I have seen with the SL.

<snip>

[Edit: the amount of noise reduction automatically applied by LR depends on ISO used;  that information is most likely part of the built-in profile]

Incorrect:

When importing SL and SL2 images into LR, SL images receive by default noise reduction (Luminance 10, Detail 50) while SL2 images do not (Luminance 0). Have you tried applying the same amount of noise reduction to SL and SL2 files? 

Edited December 26, 2019 by SrMi

[01af]

vor 40 Minuten schrieb SrMi:

The noise difference is visible (at pixel level): [...]

Yeah. "Pixel level." That's your problem exactly.

Who cares about pixels? We care about pictures. At picture level, higher pixel-level noise and higher pixel count cancel each other out. Smaller pixels do have a lower signal-to-noise ratio than bigger pixels—that's what everyone is fussing about. But at the same time, many pixels have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than few pixels—that's what everyone keeps ignoring. Hence the common misconception.

Edited December 26, 2019 by 01af

[Chaemono]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb 01af:

Yeah. "Pixel level." That's your problem exactly.

Who cares about pixels? We care about pictures. At picture level, higher pixel-level noise and higher pixel count cancel each other out. Smaller pixels do have a lower signal-to-noise ratio than bigger pixels—that's what everyone is fussing about. But at the same time, many pixels have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than few pixels—that's what everyone keeps ignoring. Hence the common misconception.

Because I don’t understand what you just wrote, I only shoot the SL2 at ISO 100. 😁

[caissa]

13 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

I have been using the SL for ~4 years and have really loved the camera.  I decided to upgrade and I just received my new SL2 this past week and I am not entirely happy with image performance.  I still have more testing be done over the next few days, but wanted to post and see if others have similar issues and/or recommendations.  I have a feeling that this has more to do with Adobe Lightroom processing of SL2 images and not actual issue with image quality.

Equipment & Software:

• SL2 with 24-90 SL Lens, 35 1.4 Summilux and 50 1.4 Summilux Lenses.
• Brand New MacBook Pro 16" with upgraded AMD Radeon Pro 5500M 8 GB graphics card, and 32GB RAM
• Adobe Lightroom Classic 9.1 and Camera Raw 12.1

Issues:  

1.  Excessive Image Noise on images at 1600, 3200, and 6400 ISO in comparison to what I have seen with the SL.

2.  Import into Lightroom with Embedded Profile produces an excessively magenta toned image.  I have to convert the image to Adobe Portrait or Adobe Color to get White Balance looking accurate.

3.  Images seem to be soft and high-contrast in comparison to my experience with SL images.

4.  Images sometimes will not load properly (high res) in Lightroom and I have to click to next image and then back to get it to load (realize this is not a camera issue)

Any thoughts or advise?

The highest ISO I use is 1600. And I prefer 800 a lot. IBIS helps me to achieve this.  I assume better firmware will improve this. That was the case with the SL.

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 minutes ago, 01af said:

Yeah. "Pixel level." That's your problem exactly.

Who cares about pixels? We care about pictures. At picture level, higher pixel-level noise and higher pixel count cancel each other out. Smaller pixels do have a lower signal-to-noise ratio than bigger pixels—that's what everyone is fussing about. But at the same time, many pixels have a higher signal-to-noise ratio than few pixels—that's what everyone keeps ignoring. Hence the common misconception.

Thank you for explaining what you meant.

I explained in one of the posts in this thread that I do not care neither about noise at pixel level, and in a reply OP wrote that he does (compares images of different dimensions).

What happens often is that people compare images on screen at pixel level and see more noise and are disappointed. I explained that this is normal, but not worrisome because what matters is the output, i.e., images scaled to the same dimensions.

[digitalfx]

13 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

 

Issues:  

1.  Excessive Image Noise on images at 1600, 3200, and 6400 ISO in comparison to what I have seen with the SL.

2.  Import into Lightroom with Embedded Profile produces an excessively magenta toned image.  I have to convert the image to Adobe Portrait or Adobe Color to get White Balance looking accurate.

3.  Images seem to be soft and high-contrast in comparison to my experience with SL images.

4.  Images sometimes will not load properly (high res) in Lightroom and I have to click to next image and then back to get it to load (realize this is not a camera issue)

Any thoughts or advise?

I don't experience anything even remotely like this...colors are perfection, image is far from soft and contrast is normal. Are you importing DNG or JPG?

Please define "Embedded Profile"...and explain how you are importing your images

[hoppyman]

13 hours ago, LikameLeica said:

I have been using the SL for ~4 years and have really loved the camera.  I decided to upgrade and I just received my new SL2 this past week and I am not entirely happy with image performance.  I still have more testing be done over the next few days, but wanted to post and see if others have similar issues and/or recommendations.  I have a feeling that this has more to do with Adobe Lightroom processing of SL2 images and not actual issue with image quality.

Equipment & Software:

• SL2 with 24-90 SL Lens, 35 1.4 Summilux and 50 1.4 Summilux Lenses.
• Brand New MacBook Pro 16" with upgraded AMD Radeon Pro 5500M 8 GB graphics card, and 32GB RAM
• Adobe Lightroom Classic 9.1 and Camera Raw 12.1

Issues:  

1.  Excessive Image Noise on images at 1600, 3200, and 6400 ISO in comparison to what I have seen with the SL.

2.  Import into Lightroom with Embedded Profile produces an excessively magenta toned image.  I have to convert the image to Adobe Portrait or Adobe Color to get White Balance looking accurate.

3.  Images seem to be soft and high-contrast in comparison to my experience with SL images.

4.  Images sometimes will not load properly (high res) in Lightroom and I have to click to next image and then back to get it to load (realize this is not a camera issue)

Any thoughts or advise?

My experience with first thousand or so images with the SL2 has been very positive, a mix of studio flash at base ISO and window light up to perhaps 1600 ISO, some higher.

In LR (with latest updates) you may want to review what capture sharpening and noise reduction is being applied on import firstly. I am finding the AWB to be very good currently and the colour rendering excellent using the Adobe Standard profile. As you have a new screen too that’s an additional factor to consider regarding what you are seeing. Many variables in all of that of course.

[SrMi]

I have compared two images taken with SL and SL2 at ISO 3200 and did not find much difference in noise. Both images have the same amount of Noise Reducton applied automatically.

[Tailwagger]

The charts suggest that who wins or ties is ISO dependent. 

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!

[LikameLeica]

First of all thank you again for everyone's replies and recmmendations to my original post.  As I mentioned I still have some more shooting and testing to do.  I am using the latest version of LR 9.1 and RAW 12.1.  Most of the pictures i have taken so far have been at higher ISO due to holiday's and being inside with relatively low light.  I have changed my import settings to use the Adobe Color Profile and this has greatly enhanced the accuracy of the color.  I look forward to seeing the print output from some files to see the output of prints.  With my SL I have printed many beautiful prints that I have done as large as 4 feet x 6 feet, so I can only imagine with the proper settings and lower ISO will deliver impressive prints.  I also think getting use to and taking advantage of IBIS will help produce solid results in low light with lower ISO, although with pictures include moving subjects the IBIS feature does not completely handle moving subjects.  So far the results I have seen with IBIS and slower shutter speeds have been very impressive.

 

I will update after the next two days of shooting some California Coastal Landscapes.

Happy Holidays.

[Chaemono]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb LikameLeica:

[...]
, although with pictures include moving subjects the IBIS feature does not completely handle moving subjects.

[...]

I will update after the next two days of shooting some California Coastal Landscapes.

Happy Holidays.

Just be aware that California’s coastal landscape includes moving subjects, its tectonic plates. 😁

[LikameLeica]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Just be aware that California’s coastal landscape includes moving subjects, its tectonic plates. 😁

LOL. I will make sure to adjust accordingly.  IBES.  Internal Body Epicenter Stabilization. 

Edited December 27, 2019 by LikameLeica

[Chaemono]

vor 37 Minuten schrieb LikameLeica:

LOL. I will make sure to adjust accordingly.  IBES.  Internal Body Epicenter Stabilization. 

It’ll still be an issue in High Res mode (to be added with FW update in 2020) for sure.  Panasonic has two High Res modes to deal with motion, tectonic or otherwise, one which attempts to blend movement, the other to remove it.  My guess is the FW update will give the SL2 just plain High Res mode (Leica folks like to reduce things to “Das Wesentliche”) and come with a warning “Do not use in California.” 😂

Edited December 27, 2019 by Chaemono

[BernardC]

18 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

The charts suggest that who wins or ties is ISO dependent. 

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!

Wow, that really is too close to matter. Differences that small only show-up in charts, you wouldn't ever notice them in photographs.

[tom0511]

My experience with both s1r and SL2 ...there is a price for high resolution. Noise in shaddows. I try to stay below 1600, max. 3200.

And yes, dont get fooled just looking at 100% pixel level.

Overall I am fine with color of the SL2 so far. I find it a bit more "powerfull" than that of the SL. (I mean a bit more saturated and less "brownish").

[scott kirkpatrick]

On 12/27/2019 at 1:52 AM, Tailwagger said:

The charts suggest that who wins or ties is ISO dependent. 

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!

Actually, what this chart  suggests to me is that AutoISO, which had to be started at ISO 200 on the SL, can now use ISO 50 as a starting point and scale everything smoothly.  In the SL, the transition from 100 to 200 was strange, probably costing some highlight room.

[nicci78]

On 12/27/2019 at 12:52 AM, Tailwagger said:

The charts suggest that who wins or ties is ISO dependent. 

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!

Just take a better look to the graph :

SL provide untouched image. However scaling (triangle pointed up) is applied upon SL2 from 3200 and higher. 
So SL2 needs some tweaking to be presentable. 

Edited December 28, 2019 by nicci78

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[blakley]

On 12/28/2019 at 11:09 AM, tom0511 said:

My experience with both s1r and SL2 ...there is a price for high resolution. Noise in shaddows. I try to stay below 1600, max. 3200.

And yes, dont get fooled just looking at 100% pixel level.

Overall I am fine with color of the SL2 so far. I find it a bit more "powerfull" than that of the SL. (I mean a bit more saturated and less "brownish").

One of the first things I shot with the SL2 was a music show at a dark club.  I shot at 6400, and the shadow luminance noise was off the charts; I thought I was going to be really disappointed in the camera.  But I discovered that I can use A LOT more luminance noise reduction on SL2 files in Lightroom (on some shots I dialed it up to 80!) without noticeably reducing overall image quality than I can with any other camera I've shot.  In the end I was quite happy with the shots, after I got over my fear of the NR slider.