SL2-S

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, la1402 said:

Testing and shooting over the last 10 days I somehow think that AWB is often much more off than I am used to from other brands. Especially under artifical lights and overcast skies I have have a much stronger magenta/pink tint than usually. I am aware AWB is not a very reliable method, but sometimes it can be useful and I find the extent to which the SL2S is off much worse  than I have seen in many years. Is this normal with Leica? Just some examples. First two with a manual simulation that is closer to reality. In the last one with the girl and dog, the jpg out of camera actually looks much better than the dng. No keepers affected in these examples, but anway irritating. Summicron-M 35 in all cases.

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!

Why don't you just shoot a profile for the camera? Over the years, I have not found one camera of any brand that did not improve, sometimes dramatically, by a simple dual-illuminant profile.
I must confess that none of the white balances you posted looks correct to me. For instance the girl: the left one is too red, the right one is too yellow.

[Slender]

I am surprised you say the SL2s footage is less sharp than the sony... All sample I saw on the sony were softer than say, anything fron EOS or else than use oversampling or binning from a larger pixel count sensor. vs 1:1 from Sony... Have you seen the footage of the Parrots from the RedDot presentation ? it is so crips I have a hard time imagining Sony can do better. It is even too sharp for subject other than nature/landscape.... wouldn't miss on make up if I was in front lol 😇

[jaapv]

2 minutes ago, Steven said:

I did about 50 shots side by side in every scenario. I compared them, not one shot straight out of camera with the Leica was sharper.

BUT: sony, in my opinion, which I havent shared in the previous post, is too sharp. It looks digital, computerish. Leica looks more real, "cinematic". When adjusting the sharpness setting on the Leica to the max (+2), it becomes a close match, and still the Leica looks less digital than the Sony. 

I almost took 50 screenshots of all the side by side footage and and then I thought no one would be interested by a sony comparison on a Leica forum. I have now deleted all the files. 

Sharp? How do you measure that? Change the contrast and you'll change your opinion.

[Chaemono]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb SrMi:

JPEGs or DNGs? If DNGs, which software and which profile was applied

On the one hand, this is correct. SL2-S DNGs have a stronger magenta look with AWB by the camera than S5, S1, or SL2 RAW files. On the others hand, SL2-S files always show the lowest tint value in LR. In practice, this means ones just needs to move the Tint slider in LR just a bit, from 13 to 7 for example, and, depending on how warm one wants the picture to look, WB is fixed. Trying to fix AWB by the camera on S5, S1R, SL2 RAW files with a tint value of 20-30 is much harder without messing up the rest of colors, IMO. I will shoot the SL2-S next to the S5 to show the difference but here is one example.

DNG download here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g273053130-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=5bgf3tQMwoEMsbJRKhc3-qUQAHQrDZxx--UwkcqZefw=

Edit - I will also shot the SL2-S next to the α7III. The SL2-S has the easiest to fix AWB by the camera, IMO.

 

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 December 22, 2020 by Chaemono

[frame-it]

3 minutes ago, Steven said:

Absolutely not. The log footage comparaison is much sharper on the Sony.

have you tried loading SL2S videos into da vinci resolve ? with their LUT ?

[frame-it]

17 minutes ago, Steven said:

Yes. 

and how malleable are the files ?

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, Steven said:

Extremely malleable in comparison to the Sony files. 
the colors are beautiful out of camera and they grade better, at least with my workflow. 

good to know. thanks

[la1402]

1 hour ago, Chaemono said:

On the one hand, this is correct. SL2-S DNGs have a stronger magenta look with AWB by the camera than S5, S1, or SL2 RAW files. On the others hand, SL2-S files always show the lowest tint value in LR. In practice, this means ones just needs to move the Tint slider in LR just a bit, from 13 to 7 for example, and, depending on how warm one wants the picture to look, WB is fixed.....

 

 

Thanks, indeed, that is what I found so far, too. What is strange that the amount of variation seems completley unpredictable. These two pictures are shot within 5 seconds, same position, same camera settings. All DNG imported in Lightroom with Adobe standard profile. The difference is 350K in color temperature and 7 steps of Tint (-1 vs +6).

 

 

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!

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, Steven said:

I measure it by eye because I lost my sharpness ruler 😂

 

Absolutely not. The log footage comparaison is much sharper on the Sony. It cannot be fixed by contrast. Only with the sharpening slider. You need, on color finale in FCPX, to slide it to about  55 or 60 to match the sharpness. I personally slide it to 20 and I am extremely happy with my Leica age. 

P.S. I know I am young and I sound very impulsive sometimes, but I have enough experience to not be fooled by lack of contrast in an image and not confuse it with lack of sharpness 😜

The sharpening slider IS edge contrast manipulation. You have acuity and resolution but “sharpness” is a subjective non-concept. Even MTF curves are given at contrast levels. 

[jaapv]

Make sure that you adapt the basic sharpening presets in DNG conversion to equalize the difference  of the cameras in firmware file handling before the raw file is written. 

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

Nope, where can I find that ? 

 

https://youtu.be/SzRENaHg6yU?t=5154

 

[Chaemono]

vor einer Stunde schrieb la1402:

Thanks, indeed, that is what I found so far, too. What is strange that the amount of variation seems completley unpredictable. These two pictures are shot within 5 seconds, same position, same camera settings. All DNG imported in Lightroom with Adobe standard profile. The difference is 350K in color temperature and 7 steps of Tint (-1 vs +6).

 

 

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!

I'm not sure I can repeat your test. What I can do is shoot the SL2S next to the S5 and the α7III with the same lens.

[Slender]

5 hours ago, Steven said:

Nope, where can I find that ? 

 

Here at 1:26:21.... put in in 4K and take into account it was live streamed... It is so crisp it even alliases a tiny bit.

 

 

[SJH]

Pretty positive review here and I'm definitely warming to the SL2-S now and might well order one, the issue it sort of raises is the the SL2 at the limit of what they can do with he processor, 47mb and the AF performance? He appears pretty positive about the SL2-S AF performance and was pretty realistic about the SL2 when it came out. He also like the colours/IQ as well as the video output. Definitely growing on me....

 

[la1402]

20 hours ago, la1402 said:

Testing and shooting over the last 10 days I somehow think that AWB is often much more off than I am used to from other brands. Especially under artifical lights and overcast skies I have have a much stronger magenta/pink tint than usually. I am aware AWB is not a very reliable method, but sometimes it can be useful and I find the extent to which the SL2S is off much worse  than I have seen in many years. Is this normal with Leica? Just some examples. First two with a manual simulation that is closer to reality. In the last one with the girl and dog, the jpg out of camera actually looks much better than the dng. No keepers affected in these examples, but anway irritating. Summicron-M 35 in all cases.

 

 

 

Problem solved. After still getting pretty bad results with several tests of manual WB measurements and settings, I digged deeper into the SW and found that, even though I had set LR to apply the Adobe Color Profile, it actually did not do that but apparently always used the embedded profile. I could not fix that but actually needed to remove all Adobe SW and reinstall. Now things look much much better. There is still a tendency for cooler colours, but that is fine with me. Skin tones are ok now.

[Jeff S]

19 minutes ago, la1402 said:

Problem solved. After still getting pretty bad results with several tests of manual WB measurements and settings, I digged deeper into the SW and found that, even though I had set LR to apply the Adobe Color Profile, it actually did not do that but apparently always used the embedded profile. I could not fix that but actually needed to remove all Adobe SW and reinstall. Now things look much much better. There is still a tendency for cooler colours, but that is fine with me. Skin tones are ok now.

Even better if you make your own profile. Easy with a ColorChecker Passport or similar.

Jeff

[oka]

New crude comparison between M10P/R/SL2/SL2S @ ISO6400

SL2S has best DR and colors on high iso by wide margin. For my eye, M10R is next, followed by SL2 and worst is the M10P which loses colors severely and even underexpose about 2/3rd of the stop.

M:s are shot slightly in different light form the SL as the kids hassled the lights between the shots and didn't notice during the shoot...

In my humble opinion, SL2S is the first Leica body where I don't feel like I'm trading optical excellence to the other features what other systems has (excluding AF on moving subjects).

I have depleted the battery first time, and about 1000 shots later - no burst problems even on low battery. The battery life is like specs says in real life, near double to the SL2.

1. M10P
2. M10R
3. SL2
4. SL2S

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 December 22, 2020 by oka

[oka]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

Screengrab from a video file trying to teach my jewish daughter some Christmas tradition earlier today: ISO 6400. It couldn't see that much obviously with my own eyes. Compression doesn't do it justice, but my A7SIII at this ISO would have given me a disgusting image. Also, this is HLG profile, so rather flat on purpose, in order to grade in post. 

I am everyday more impressed with the SL2-S. 

It's striking how well SL2S retains the colors on high iso where other bodies start to lose and shift the colors. From the Leica bodies the difference is huge, it's interesting see how it stacks up with the Canon and Nikon which I'll test in next couple weeks.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, la1402 said:

Problem solved. After still getting pretty bad results with several tests of manual WB measurements and settings, I digged deeper into the SW and found that, even though I had set LR to apply the Adobe Color Profile, it actually did not do that but apparently always used the embedded profile. I could not fix that but actually needed to remove all Adobe SW and reinstall. Now things look much much better. There is still a tendency for cooler colours, but that is fine with me. Skin tones are ok now.

I have posted some low natural light images in the SL2-S image thread, and don't see too much magenta cast. I actually felt the Adobe Colour profile was overcooking the colours. I found that Adobe Standard was more natural.

How did you know that LR was using the embedded profile and not Adobe Colour? As far as I could see LR was selecting its own profile (Adobe Colour by default).

Edited December 22, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[la1402]

12 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I have posted some low natural light images in the SL2-S image thread, and don't see too much magenta cast. I actually felt the Adobe Colour profile was overcooking the colours. I found that Adobe Standard was more natural.

How did you know that LR was using the embedded profile and not Adobe Colour? As far as I could see LR was selecting its own profile (Adobe Colour by default).

For me Color or  Standard depends a bit on the situation. I found the issue by trying to play with other profiles, and on some of them got a warning "profile missing". which I could not resolve. All good now.