Leica SL2 Firmware 2.0: 187 MP Multishot Mode

[michali]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

I would certainly agree that it looks better with the M lens. Whatever went on with the VE 24-90 doesn't look right at all, i too see the jagged pattern over the whole image in that one.

I'm using the SL Summicron 50mm APO on the SL2, and can't find that type of jagged pattern in a single image i've taken so far. 

Whilst it's  not a heavy set-up at all, I am using a good carbon fibre tripod (Gitzo GT1542) and Arca Swiss P0 that are remarkably solid and vibration free for their low weight.

I assume in your images that your camera is fully bolted down to rule out any of these artefacts coming from very slight movement? ...i'd imagine the tolerances for any camera movement is incredibly small for a flawless multi-shot, given the way the sensor is minutely moving around to create the final image. 

The camera was secure, absolutely no movement. 

7 hours ago, SrMi said:

The smaller the lens, the better the result ?!? It would have been interesting to see 90-280 result as well.

I seem to get best multi-shot results with M-lenses as well.

FWIW I'll give it a try with a couple of other lenses today- the VE 90-280mm L and compare to my Zeiss 300mm APO f2.8.

2 hours ago, helged said:

Would be interesting to see the results @24mm as well. And, as @scott kirkpatrick states, with OIS at off. The 24-90 is very sharp at all but the longest focal length(s), and should be fine for the Multishot (haven't time to do the test myself...). 

Helge I'll do some shots with with the 24-90mm @ 24mm and my 24mm Elmarit M for comparison.

As I've mentioned in other posts, based on my previous experience with the S1R,  IMO Multishot is a superfluous over-rated feature. I had tried some landscape photography in Botswana's Okavango Delta, nothing worked, even the slightest breeze in trees etc. creates a blurred background, however slight. 

It's probably OK to use for static studio shots, or landscapes with no trees and zero wind conditions.

[Arrow]

I wonder, if multi-shot is a good option for digitalising film and slides?

Just imagine a resulting 1GB Tif file of a 35mm slide and the ability to zoom into silver molecules  😇

Edited June 23, 2020 by Arrow

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I don't know about silver grains clumped from development.  The resolution after multishot is about 2-4 microns.  Maybe for Tri-X developed in dilute Rodinal.  I have some to try.

[Arrow]

I found an interesting article: https://cool.culturalheritage.org/videopreservation/library/film_grain_resolution_and_perception_v24.pdf

Quote:

"Film Grain in Black-and-White Film

B&W film is composed of numerous silver particles which are an order of magnitude (ten times) smaller than the size domain of film grain size. Silver particles range in size from 0.2 um to 2.0 um, with an average size of 0.6 um, while film grain appears to ranges in size from 6 um to 30 um. Film grain is so indistinct it is difficult to measure; a range of 8-12 um is thought to be average by many workers."

So for molecules the resolution is not enough. However, silver particles ...

The SL2 could appear being a pretty cool film digitalising tool.  

Edited June 23, 2020 by Arrow

[helged]

30 minutes ago, Arrow said:

The SL2 could appear being a pretty cool film digitalising tool.  

It certainly is 😉, similarly to e.g. Nikon D850. But using the Multishot-mode seems like an overkill for me; 50-ish MP resolution and a fairly good DR (at base ISO) are already quite something...

Edited June 23, 2020 by helged

[sillbeers15]

The real life application image quality perspective convinced me that the resolution details and depth provided by the full frame SL2 + SL glasses do indeed make a good landscape photography tool.
Until the next camera gains 47.3Mpx sensor with IBIS & Multishot function, it is clear to me that the SL2 + Q2 beats the reason to carry the M. 

 

[jplomley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

50 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

The real life application image quality perspective convinced me that the resolution details and depth provided by the full frame SL2 + SL glasses do indeed make a good landscape photography tool.
Until the next camera gains 47.3Mpx sensor with IBIS & Multishot function, it is clear to me that the SL2 + Q2 beats the reason to carry the M. 

 

Agreed. Decided to go the SL2 route instead of the Hassy X1D2 as it functions equally well for landscape, travel and documentary photography 

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, michali said:

The camera was secure, absolutely no movement. 

FWIW I'll give it a try with a couple of other lenses today- the VE 90-280mm L and compare to my Zeiss 300mm APO f2.8.

Helge I'll do some shots with with the 24-90mm @ 24mm and my 24mm Elmarit M for comparison.

As I've mentioned in other posts, based on my previous experience with the S1R,  IMO Multishot is a superfluous over-rated feature. I had tried some landscape photography in Botswana's Okavango Delta, nothing worked, even the slightest breeze in trees etc. creates a blurred background, however slight. 

It's probably OK to use for static studio shots, or landscapes with no trees and zero wind conditions.

[Sarcasm On] Multishot feature is essential as long as it is missing. Once it is here, nobody uses it. [Sarcasm off]
That said, there is some progress in that area, and maybe once we understand its limitation, we can put it to some good use. Even though it is 'over-rated,' the discussion is useful.
One possible application is to use Multishot for better DR, better colors, and less moire, resize it to 47Mp and replace any troublesome areas (leaves in the wind?) with the single-shot image that accompanies the high-res image.
But is the additional effort of Multishot images worth the gains? It is undoubtedly not a point-and-shoot experience :).

[Jon Warwick]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

One possible application is to use Multishot for better DR, better colors, and less moire, resize it to 47Mp and replace any troublesome areas (leaves in the wind?) with the single-shot image that accompanies the high-res image.
But is the additional effort of Multishot images worth the gains? It is undoubtedly not a point-and-shoot experience :).

I think that’s a good summary of some of the benefits I see with it. Sure, there are limitations for some subjects, but I personally haven’t had any problems using it and certainly not incurred any odd zig zag artefacts when using it with my SL 50 APO, even when looking at the native size of 56” wide at 200%! I do see less moire, less false colours, more detail etc with the multi shot. In fact, for the right subject, the image quality I’m getting with the above gear and multi shot is absolutely staggering imho.

There is additional effort with the SL2’s multishot .... but when I want big prints, it’s a whole lot easier than me loading 5x4 film into holders, carrying 10kg pack of equipment, battling the wind on the bellows, getting the film  processed, and getting the film drum scanned etc!! 

[caissa]

5 hours ago, SrMi said:

[Sarcasm On] Multishot feature is essential as long as it is missing. Once it is here, nobody uses it. [Sarcasm off]
That said, there is some progress in that area, and maybe once we understand its limitation, we can put it to some good use. Even though it is 'over-rated,' the discussion is useful.
One possible application is to use Multishot for better DR, better colors, and less moire, resize it to 47Mp and replace any troublesome areas (leaves in the wind?) with the single-shot image that accompanies the high-res image.
But is the additional effort of Multishot images worth the gains? It is undoubtedly not a point-and-shoot experience :).

Agreed, I will rarely use it. But not because I would not like to use it, but because I hate to haul tripods around (and sturdy tripods even less).

I use it for things invisible without (e.g. details of wine etiquettes, or bank notes) or for crazy big cityscapes, too big to find a place on my walls. (like Gursky, I love his islands) Or maybe some mountainscapes. Or if I ever went on a polar cruize.

Edited June 23, 2020 by caissa

[SrMi]

10 minutes ago, caissa said:

Agreed, I will rarely use it. But not because I would not like to use it, but because I hate to haul tripods around (and sturdy tripods even less).

I use it for things invisible without (e.g. details of wine etiquettes, or bank notes) or for crazy big cityscapes, too big to find a place on my walls. (like Gursky, I love his islands) Or maybe some mountainscapes.

It would be nice if Leica would implement hand-held Multishot mode like Olympus does :-).

[caissa]

Just now, SrMi said:

It would be nice if Leica would implement hand-held Multishot mode like Olympus does :-).

I have not seen the results of handheld m-s, so I wonder if it is worth it. For me there are now many other features that should come first. It's maybe strange, but first I would like to have a way to give IBIS just a number (for focal length), and maybe also to have a button for DoF preview again.

[michali]

 

On 6/23/2020 at 2:00 AM, SrMi said:

The smaller the lens, the better the result ?!? It would have been interesting to see 90-280 result as well.

I seem to get best multi-shot results with M-lenses as well.

 

On 6/23/2020 at 7:19 AM, helged said:

Would be interesting to see the results @24mm as well. And, as @scott kirkpatrick states, with OIS at off. The 24-90 is very sharp at all but the longest focal length(s), and should be fine for the Multishot (haven't time to do the test myself...). 

Further to my post #141 above, FWIW I ran some more tests on Multishot mode as follows:

When images are viewed @ 100% -

VE 24-90mm L @ 24mm -artefacts are there in some places but barely noticeable

VE 24-90mm L @ 90mm -artefacts are there & noticeable

24mm Elmarit M -no artefacts

VE 90-280mm L @  90mm -no artefacts

VE 90-280mm L @ 280mm -no artefacts

 

There's clearly some issue with the combination of the VE 24-90mm L and Multishot mode especially @ the 90mm end. Curiosity's satisfied, not going to lose any sleep over this 😴😴😴 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2020 by michali

[caissa]

I would be more interested in the SL16-35. Because this is the lens with the most opportunities for multi-shot. I have no 24-90, but several primes instead.

Edited June 24, 2020 by caissa

[helged]

1 hour ago, michali said:

 

 

Further to my post #141 above, FWIW I ran some more tests on Multishot mode as follows:

When images are viewed @ 100% -

VE 24-90mm L @ 24mm -artefacts are there in some places but barely noticeable

VE 24-90mm L @ 90mm -artefacts are there & noticeable

24mm Elmarit M -no artefacts

VE 90-280mm L @  90mm -no artefacts

VE 90-280mm L @ 280mm -no artefacts

 

There's clearly some issue with the combination of the VE 24-90mm L and Multishot mode especially @ the 90mm end. Curiosity's satisfied, not going to lose any sleep over this 😴😴😴 

 

 

 

Much appreciated! I strongly believe that the SL24-90 resolution is sufficient for the multishot-mode. One possible problem could be that the sensor shifting algorithm doesn't use the exact focal length of the zoom lens.

Edited June 24, 2020 by helged

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, helged said:

Much appreciated! I strongly believe that the SL24-90 resolution is sufficient for the multishot-mode. One possible problem could be that the sensor shifting algorithm doesn't use the exact focal length of the zoom lens.

Why would Multishot need the focal length of the lens? Multishot shifts by sensor pixels. It is different from stabilization that needs focal length.

[helged]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Why would Multishot need the focal length of the lens? Multishot shifts by sensor pixels. It is different from stabilization that needs focal length.

I suspect that quite some processing is involved in order to put together the 8 images, and that long focal lengths may require higher precision than short(er) focal lengths. The latter is not only related to processing, but any disturbance of the camera system.

Edited June 24, 2020 by helged

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, helged said:

I suspect that quite some processing is involved in order to put together the 8 images, and that long focal lengths may require higher precision than short(er) focal lengths. The latter is not only related to processing, but any disturbance of the camera system.

Interesting idea, but I have not read anywhere that this is actually being done.

[sillbeers15]

13 hours ago, caissa said:

I would be more interested in the SL16-35. Because this is the lens with the most opportunities for multi-shot. I have no 24-90, but several primes instead.

Multishot mode with 16-35:

https://flic.kr/p/2jdRpB4

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Arrow]

Will the Sigma Art L 70 2.8 DG Macro work with multishot? I just wonder about 1:1 macro options for the SL2.

Maybe, somebody has got some insight. Would be very much appreciated