S3 vs S006 vs SL resolution

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For those interested - I did run a few comparisons between the S3 (beta-version), S006 and SL (v601). First the full scene is shown, thereafter similar crops from S3, S006 and SL. No postprocessing in Lightroom except the SL file has been adjusted +1/3 stop. The lens on the S3/S006 is S120mm; the lens on SL: SL90-280mm at 100mm, so the lenses are both very, very fine. All shot at f8 at base ISO, with similar focus points, and on tripod, obviously.

Since this was a S3 beta version, this comparison is relevant for resolution, not colour rendering. And since S006 and S007 shares the same sensor, the S006 file should be comparable to S007, resolution wise. 

In the cropped versions, look at the details on the roofs and tree branches. The three combinations are all fine, as expected; but the S3 resolution is indeed in its own class.

First image: the scene with S3 (beta).

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 April 6, 2020 by helged

[helged]

Crop of the S3 (beta). 

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

[helged]

Crop of the S006.

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!

[helged]

Crop of the SL601.

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!

[sebben]

Well, I can barely tell the difference! No way I could tell if it’s a blind test 

Edited April 6, 2020 by sebben

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

It seems to me the S3-crop is a little bit smoother. But it`s a good idea to compare. I will try it, too, because my friend is using the SL2 and I got the S3 (I was told one of the first and completely handmade).

Greatings Hans

[erlingmm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very hard to see a difference as jpegs at this resolution. The S3 has a slight resolution/sharpness edge if you look at the fence on the outside staircase above the red area in the right edge of the picture. But it also be the lens, and/or the focus point.

PS: 006 and 007 does not have "same sensor" but "same megapixel".

 

- Erling

Edited April 6, 2020 by erlingmm

[mgrayson3]

Thank you, Hans.

It's worth noting how large these prints would be at that crop scale, and how much of that detail difference would be visible. The S3 definitely has an advantage, but it is VERY small in practice. Of course, some photographers make their livings selling gigantic prints, and for them, even the IQ4150 isn't enough. Everyone has different needs. I would have vastly preferred Leica to have stayed with 37.5 MP and improved the AF, manual focus aids, high ISO, and included IBIS. I do not care for the SL handling - I have all three zooms, and they are stunning lenses, but I never use them. It's all very personal.

Matt

[helged]

2 hours ago, sebben said:

Well, I can barely tell the difference! No way I could tell if it’s a blind test 

On the office screens I have, I can clearly distinguish the cropped images - and positively identify the S3 files from the other two. No problem at all.

I didn't have the SL2 at the time of testing although I could, and I may, add the SL2/S1R to the mix since the 'landscape' is rather unchanged . I would think the SL2/S1R to be close(r) to the S3, and possibly difficult to identify in a blind test.

In any case, viewing the full images on screen - or printing to 'ordinary' sizes - will hardly show differences.

1 hour ago, erlingmm said:

Very hard to see a difference as jpegs at this resolution. The S3 has a slight resolution/sharpness edge if you look at the fence on the outside staircase above the red area in the right edge of the picture. But it also be the lens, and/or the focus point.

PS: 006 and 007 does not have "same sensor" but "same megapixel".

Thanks; it was the 37.5 MP I had in mind...

1 hour ago, mgrayson3 said:

Thank you, Hans.

It's worth noting how large these prints would be at that crop scale, and how much of that detail difference would be visible. The S3 definitely has an advantage, but it is VERY small in practice. Of course, some photographers make their livings selling gigantic prints, and for them, even the IQ4150 isn't enough. Everyone has different needs. I would have vastly preferred Leica to have stayed with 37.5 MP and improved the AF, manual focus aids, high ISO, and included IBIS. I do not care for the SL handling - I have all three zooms, and they are stunning lenses, but I never use them. It's all very personal.

+1 (although I use the SL-system regularly, also with the S-lenses...). 

What I prefer with the S-system is the feeling of using an instrument; it slows me a little, which is something I like. And I find the files more malleable than those of the FF sensors I have experience with. The S-lenses are super, but at the same time not as optically perfect as e.g. the SL primes or the SL-zooms across most of their focal length ranges. But the rendering of the S-lenses are the most pleasant, based on by my subjective judgement, of course.

Edited April 6, 2020 by helged

[davidmknoble]

Look at the edges of the red SCANDIC sign.  The S3 is clearly better and the SL not near as nice as the S007.

[Stuart Richardson]

Yeah, I see the difference quite clearly, but it is obviously not going to make or break a picture in normal circumstances. The biggest advantage for me in considering the upgrade from the 006 is that it will hopefully do everything better: higher resolution, but also ISO performance and dynamic range, live view, video, faster operation, and frankly tens of thousands fewer exposures and six less years of use on the camera and battery etc. I can definitely see the warmer yellow in the S006 and it seems kind of familiar to me compared to the cooler tone of the CMOS cameras. I know that could be a variation of the white balance, but I have found the CCD cameras to be consistently warmer/more yellow than the CMOS ones that come after. In any case, as you said, this is a beta, so they may have changed the color. All in all, though the differences are not stunning in this photo, I think it bodes well...the file is even more sharp (sometimes increasing resolution diminishes per pixel acuity, but it is not showing that issue here), and it has no noticeable grain or artefacts. If it can do this while also improving on every other aspect of the camera and sensor, it seems like a good improvement. 

[paulsydaus]

The SL2 comparison will be very interesting.  I suspect that the differences would be almost invisible (but not quite).

I know this was only a test but composition wise I'd definitely chop off the top third of the image.

[xiaubauu2009]

SL2 look soft and not as highly resolve, the black lines on the wall on the left look abit on the limit of going weird... S006 has slightly better feel of resolution than the SL2, but just barely.

S3 is denitely alot better.

[helged]

1 hour ago, xiaubauu2009 said:

SL2 look soft and not as highly resolve, the black lines on the wall on the left look abit on the limit of going weird... S006 has slightly better feel of resolution than the SL2, but just barely.

S3 is denitely alot better.

Not SL2, it's SL (=24MP)... Otherwise I agree.

[Joe]

Thank you for posting your images for the comparison of the cameras. I was wondering if you would please post a foreground crop of the same image.

[helged]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

Thank you for posting your images for the comparison of the cameras. I was wondering if you would please post a foreground crop of the same image.

Sure. S3 (beta) first. (Click on the images to get the full size; look e.g. at the branches to the left, the roof ladders, or the metallic chimney top near the bottom).

 

 

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 April 7, 2020 by helged

[helged]

S006.

 

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 April 7, 2020 by helged

[helged]

SL.

 

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 April 7, 2020 by helged

[Joe]

Thank you!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jon Warwick]

Thanks for posting. I personally see a clear difference on my 27" iMac screen, in favour of S3 > S006 > SL.

But i'm not clear quite how you've done the test -- have the crops from the lower resolution cameras (S006 and SL) been resampled larger in post production in order to match the S3 crop? If so, that's presumably why i see the difference in favour of the S3 given it's the only one that is shown at "native resolution"?