Images from Panasonic L-Mount cameras

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Does the 16-35 hold up to this high resolution sensor, especially in the corners?

That's hard to assess ..... we are talking brick wall photos ...... this is the nearest I have ..... and again unpicking what is softness and what is OOF is difficult .....

This is the processed DNG:

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!

 ..... 16mm, iso 125, f4, 1/4 sec 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2019 by thighslapper

[thighslapper]

100% crop top left:

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[jplomley]

Much better than I thought. Thanks for posting :-)

[thighslapper]

by contrast this is the middle.... but it's brighter, and it is at f4 ....

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!

[thighslapper]

Tracking random folk with AFC and people detection ....... 75/2 at f2, iso 100, 1/2500 sec..... bored and drinking coffee..... 

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!

[jplomley]

Thats about the same fall off in resolution that I see on my copy of the 16-35 on the SL, so it seems not to be exacerbated by the higher resolution sensor.Between 16-19 mm is where you will observe the worst fall off in resolution, due in some part to inherent field curvature in the design. 

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

100% crop .... (OOC unprocessed DNG)....

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!

[thighslapper]

I was pestered to 'take a picture of the bird !' .... which to be honest I couldn't even see ...... 75/2, f6.3, iso 100, 1/400 sec.....

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!

[thighslapper]

100% .... it just goes to show the advantages of a fantastic lens coupled with 47mpx  .......... 

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!

a tiny bit of 'haloeing' from some added sharpening, but nothing the PS couldn't get rid of if it was critical.

Edited March 28, 2019 by thighslapper

[rscheffler]

Would love to see more examples (with corner crops or full-res download) shot with wide M-mount lenses to get a feel for across-frame sharpness relative to performance of those lenses on an M digital camera.

[thighslapper]

4 hours ago, rscheffler said:

Would love to see more examples (with corner crops or full-res download) shot with wide M-mount lenses to get a feel for across-frame sharpness relative to performance of those lenses on an M digital camera.

21/3.4 and 50/2 apo are here if you haven't already downloaded them. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1h4m2liexwmy9i5/AAChASGId81PNQo0r5E6pABsa?dl=0

I have sold all my other w/a M lenses except the WATE .... which has always performed well on non Leica sensors so I can't see the point testing it. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

56 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

21/3.4 and 50/2 apo are here if you haven't already downloaded them. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1h4m2liexwmy9i5/AAChASGId81PNQo0r5E6pABsa?dl=0

I have sold all my other w/a M lenses except the WATE .... which has always performed well on non Leica sensors so I can't see the point testing it. 

Your 21/3.4@3.4 is pretty soft in the corners, but that may just be depth of field effects.  The acid test is the 28/2.8 asph, which does really well wide open on the SL and M10, but was horrible on a Sony RII.  I assume we'll see one of those eventually.  And the hardest and most relevant test is for a subject at infinity, since then the lens' exit pupil is closest to the image plane.

[LocalHero1953]

8 hours ago, thighslapper said:

100% crop .... (OOC unprocessed DNG)....

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!

A testament to the lens, sensor and probably IBIS (and your steady hand?) - remarkable!

Edited March 28, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[mmradman]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

A testament to the lens, sensor and probably IBIS (and your steady hand?) - remarkable!

No doubt more Mp plus IBIS means more quality image providing one can utilise it correctly, pretty much same for any sensor resolution really.

It will be interesting to hear reaction of the 24Mp good enough brigade, we heard it all here before how Leica's 24Mp is/was on par with 40Mp+ competitors in that department. Really?

My position is that I am OK with 24Mp as is but double that (ball park) plus add IBIS and it has my full attention.  Due to size and lenses i use and wish to use I will probably swap SL for Z7, never used L lenses.   

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, mmradman said:

No doubt more Mp plus IBIS means more quality image providing one can utilise it correctly, pretty much same for any sensor resolution really.

It will be interesting to hear reaction of the 24Mp good enough brigade, we heard it all here before how Leica's 24Mp is/was on par with 40Mp+ competitors in that department. Really?

My position is that I am OK with 24Mp as is but double that (ball park) plus add IBIS and it has my full attention.  Due to size and lenses i use and wish to use I will probably swap SL for Z7, never used L lenses.   

Well, I am actually one of the "24mp is good enough and 47mp is too big" brigade.
I won't go through the reasons again (I have posted them before), but in the context of my comment above, the detail available with that lens, sensor and those megapixels is impressive, but I am unlikely ever to crop to that degree for anything other than utilitarian reasons. So this ability to crop and use those pixels is of no value to me.

YMMV, and I hope you recognise the same in return.

[mmradman]

5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Well, I am actually one of the "24mp is good enough and 47mp is too big" brigade.
I won't go through the reasons again (I have posted them before), but in the context of my comment above, the detail available with that lens, sensor and those megapixels is impressive, but I am unlikely ever to crop to that degree for anything other than utilitarian reasons. So this ability to crop and use those pixels is of no value to me.

YMMV, and I hope you recognise the same in return.

Absolutely, if i had any L lenses i would be keen to stick with the system.  For me SL is just digital back. 

[thighslapper]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Well, I am actually one of the "24mp is good enough and 47mp is too big" brigade.

I'm entirely ambivalent on the 24.v. 47mpx argument. 

It's IBIS + SL lenses that sells it to me regarding this camera..... and that's the one thing I'm doubtful about Leica implementing. 

To date I've not seen any 'real world use' downsides to the extra pixels, so I view them as a bonus. 

If it came down to increased DR or 23 extra mpx I suspect I would opt for the former ...... but in reality for 95% of the time neither would be particularly noticed ..... or missed. 

As has often been said before, the average semi-pro digital camera these days is overkill for most applications....... but like cars, that doesn't stop us opting for improvements, even if the usefulness is somewhat debatable....  

Edited March 28, 2019 by thighslapper

[LocalHero1953]

My wish to avoid 47mp is entirely down to processing power and storage needs: both can be bought, but I don't wish to buy them for a feature I don't need.

A smaller SL2 with IBIS, increased DR and 24mp would get me looking for my wallet, but I agree that the second and fourth seem unlikely at the moment.
But here's to hope!

[mmradman]

28 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

My wish to avoid 47mp is entirely down to processing power and storage needs: both can be bought, but I don't wish to buy them for a feature I don't need.

A smaller SL2 with IBIS, increased DR and 24mp would get me looking for my wallet, but I agree that the second and fourth seem unlikely at the moment.
But here's to hope!

Last time i looked Nikon D850 (would be same for Z7) 14-bit lossless compressed RAW file is same size as SL 24Mp file - round 40+Mb.

I think Q2 (47Mp sensor) uncompressed files are way above 40Mb mark.  I suspect SL2 if no compression is adopted would be producing files similar in size to Q2.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[thighslapper]

45 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

My wish to avoid 47mp is entirely down to processing power and storage needs.

Converted DNG's actually average in the upper 40's ....... although the range is from 22-60Mb, so not that much different to current SL files ...... and they process just as fast. 

For the sake of consistency I'll be batch converting all the original RW2 files to DNG, even after LR is upgraded to process S1/S1R files. 

Q2 files seem to average 85Mb and S1R RW2 files 69.8Mb.

If the SL2 has a similar sensor it's likely Leica will continue with uncompressed files of a similar size to the Q2

The only real issue I have with file sizes and storage is the ridiculous expense of XQD cards...... which appear to be a solution looking for a problem, rather than the other way round .....

Edited March 28, 2019 by thighslapper