Leica TL2 greenish tint

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Depending on where you use the grey card, relative to the various light sources, the grey card will enable you to remove all colour contamination and show the grey card as 'grey'. All other colours will look more realistic. Some the difference is very subtle; at others more obvious. I always carry a calibrated grey card for use in problematic lighting conditions.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

On 11/12/2020 at 10:42 AM, nthpeter said:

It's unfortunately the tint value that seems to be consistently off with the lights I have at home. I didn't test it with other indoor light conditions yet since it's still pandemic and we stay at home . If I set the WB manually to the perfect numerical temperature value the pictures still get the tint, so the green/magenta axis is off towards green. I'm actually confused now, when I use the greycard instead of a numeric temperature value, does that affect the tint also? So both the green/magenta axis and blue/yellow axis? Or the greycard only affects the blue/yellow temperature value? Is there any way to affect the built-in green/magenta slider?

Yes you can adjust it by profiling the camera to the light by using the Xrite color checker pass port to create a specific profile. You can then choose this particular profile to open your DNG in Lightroom. 

[nthpeter]

Sorry for bumping this topic, but had to write down my final conclusions.

Although my original explanation was off (me being not a professional photographer), I strongly believe my camera (or some other TL2s also?) is defective. The green tint I keep getting is not an error in white balance, but it's rather a green cast in shadows that comes up with low lights, which is the same as described in this page: Mastering Leica M240 green shadows (kasson.com)

I have the exact same problem with high ISOs. It's more pronounced now that I bought Lightroom as well and going through the low-light pictures I took at the family vacation - trying to increase the dimmer areas. I have similar feelings to third (a Leica camera is an expensive tool and feels bad that it's defective).

Even though this can be fixed in PP, if I'm not convinced two years ago (mostly by jaapv) that this problem is due to my lack of experience and knowledge, and the lack of screen calibration, I would have returned this camera (I opened this thread a day after the purchase and I could have returned it hassle free). But it's late for that now and I'l have to PP all the pictures I take.

[wda]

28 minutes ago, nthpeter said:

Sorry for bumping this topic, but had to write down my final conclusions.

Although my original explanation was off (me being not a professional photographer), I strongly believe my camera (or some other TL2s also?) is defective. The green tint I keep getting is not an error in white balance, but it's rather a green cast in shadows that comes up with low lights, which is the same as described in this page: Mastering Leica M240 green shadows (kasson.com)

I have the exact same problem with high ISOs. It's more pronounced now that I bought Lightroom as well and going through the low-light pictures I took at the family vacation - trying to increase the dimmer areas. I have similar feelings to third (a Leica camera is an expensive tool and feels bad that it's defective).

Even though this can be fixed in PP, if I'm not convinced two years ago (mostly by jaapv) that this problem is due to my lack of experience and knowledge, and the lack of screen calibration, I would have returned this camera (I opened this thread a day after the purchase and I could have returned it hassle free). But it's late for that now and I'l have to PP all the pictures I take.

Was the picture above shot in mixed lighting indoors?

[nthpeter]

40 minutes ago, wda said:

Was the picture above shot in mixed lighting indoors?

If you refer to the blog post, I don't know, it's not mine. The blog post describes a real problem which was thorougly tested and a LR plugin exist that fixes the issue. Unfortunately that was made for Leica M240, not the TL2. Now I'm not sure if the TL2 is built/engineered the same way (as I understood it is generally related to having more green sensory area, which is accounted for in-camera when reading the RAW data), but the outcome is exactly the same. Where there is barely any light hitting the sensor, it is unproportionately green. But when the ISO is low, even in the exact same light configuration, turning the darkest areas of the picture bright doesn't give the green cast.

My pictures in the past two years were shot in every possible lighting conditions, from natural to mixed artificial.

[Dopaco]

I have not been able to see any of the photos of you that you claim to have uploaded.
To help better, it would be interesting to see that photo with the greenish tint. I haven't noticed any greenish tint in photos taken with my TL2.

[nthpeter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/23/2022 at 7:42 PM, Dopaco said:

I have not been able to see any of the photos of you that you claim to have uploaded.
To help better, it would be interesting to see that photo with the greenish tint. I haven't noticed any greenish tint in photos taken with my TL2.

As I said, I bumped the thread, I opened it 2 years ago and (if you read any of the comments) they were seen by other commenters.

Nonetheless, I created a recent picture indoors in low natural light (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OUBZpQnrwYSmL6fL8A7Ss2aWwjds2TB6?usp=sharing). WB is completely off by camera measurements, but that can be mitigated by selecting a point on the picture. I exported 2 JPEGs demonstrating what happens with the WB, on one picture I selected something in the middle, which is sort of brigther, and the shadows look green/yellowish. I also did one where I select something in the shadowy area, and that produces completely purple/blueish overall image.

I reiterate that this happens with everything above ISO 1000, I have hundreds of examples. And it's not just the corners or lens distortion (on the sample picture shadows happen to be on the corner). Shots are taken with Leica TL 14mm F2.8, Sigma 35mm F1.4 and adapted (older) Canon 50mm F1.8 lenses, not just one lens. (My GF3 worked fine with the Canon btw.) This happens also with WB correctly set in camera when a picture is taken. I literally tried everything and really tired of fixing the images.

I eventually contacted Leica and they will direct me to a local partner. My question to them was whether this is an issue or expected behavior. If the former, I hope they will fix it, if the latter, I hope I will be able to sell it without the buyer complaining about this defect.

[Dopaco]

6 hours ago, nthpeter said:

As I said, I bumped the thread, I opened it 2 years ago and (if you read any of the comments) they were seen by other commenters.

Nonetheless, I created a recent picture indoors in low natural light (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OUBZpQnrwYSmL6fL8A7Ss2aWwjds2TB6?usp=sharing). WB is completely off by camera measurements, but that can be mitigated by selecting a point on the picture. I exported 2 JPEGs demonstrating what happens with the WB, on one picture I selected something in the middle, which is sort of brigther, and the shadows look green/yellowish. I also did one where I select something in the shadowy area, and that produces completely purple/blueish overall image.

I reiterate that this happens with everything above ISO 1000, I have hundreds of examples. And it's not just the corners or lens distortion (on the sample picture shadows happen to be on the corner). Shots are taken with Leica TL 14mm F2.8, Sigma 35mm F1.4 and adapted (older) Canon 50mm F1.8 lenses, not just one lens. (My GF3 worked fine with the Canon btw.) This happens also with WB correctly set in camera when a picture is taken. I literally tried everything and really tired of fixing the images.

I eventually contacted Leica and they will direct me to a local partner. My question to them was whether this is an issue or expected behavior. If the former, I hope they will fix it, if the latter, I hope I will be able to sell it without the buyer complaining about this defect.

All three original photos are underexposed with the histogram stuck to the left, leaving blotchy shadows and dark tones in the image.

Recover the shadows in editing/processing we are going to find color and luminance noise, which is what has happened to me.

3 Original photos downloaded from the link and reduced to less weight to upload to the forum.

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!

[Dopaco]

Of course, the original photos are not well taken and thus need a long editing process to get them back.

I have Photoshot CC 2020 and I have tried to recover easily and quickly in Camera RAW by trying to straighten the histogram by playing with the exposure and then automatically. Auto Color, Auto Contrast, and Auto Hue

With more time it could improve the color and luminance noise.

The photos look like this:

 

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 January 31, 2022 by Dopaco

[jaapv]

With photographs as underexposed as these and with dubious lighting conditions it is impossible to draw any conclusions. Even if digital offers us the possibility to recover quite a bit, sometimes it is hopeless. Do you have the same problem with properly exposed shots?

[Dopaco]

The TL2 interface is a bit difficult at first, but once you get the hang of it, it's quick and easy.
I have the iPhone 12 PRO Mobile and it came from the 6s that has more buttons, now I find the 13 Pro faster and easier.
It's a matter of taking it easy and practicing.
When taking photos with the TL2 use the histogram, both for JPG and DNG.
It would be a camera failure if the histogram is well exposed and the photo comes out underexposed.
Both JPG and DNG, TL2 make good photos, I have both set and I almost always stick with DNG, although I have used JPG a few times.

[Dopaco]

At first glance and after the quick process that I did to your photos, it seems that the worst one is the one made in DNG, which is because the ones that have been made in JPG, the camera has already made them in its internal process. a reduction of color and luminance noise, whereas DNG delivers it raw and in the quick process I've done, I haven't reduced noise at all. (That part would be missing).

Panasonic GF3, was and is an excellent camera and like all panasonics they have Intelligent Auto (iA) that the camera seems to control everything for you. (For many photos in fast plan usually works well).

You have a comparison here:      https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/leica-tl2-vs-panasonic-gf3

[nthpeter]

On 1/31/2022 at 2:23 AM, jaapv said:

With photographs as underexposed as these and with dubious lighting conditions it is impossible to draw any conclusions. Even if digital offers us the possibility to recover quite a bit, sometimes it is hopeless. Do you have the same problem with properly exposed shots?

I'm not sure if you understand how a camera makes a picture. I can't explain it as good as native english speakers, so go ahead and read the first post in the discussion below that gives you a technical description and even offers a solution to the same (slightly less protruding) problem I have - that works well: 

 

I was able to get hold of the plugin, now I'm working on making it work for my TL2 (since I'm a programmer). I consider this discussion closed.

 

On 1/31/2022 at 11:35 AM, Dopaco said:

At first glance and after the quick process that I did to your photos, it seems that the worst one is the one made in DNG, which is because the ones that have been made in JPG, the camera has already made them in its internal process. a reduction of color and luminance noise, whereas DNG delivers it raw and in the quick process I've done, I haven't reduced noise at all. (That part would be missing).

Panasonic GF3, was and is an excellent camera and like all panasonics they have Intelligent Auto (iA) that the camera seems to control everything for you. (For many photos in fast plan usually works well).

You have a comparison here:      https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/leica-tl2-vs-panasonic-gf3

I took one single picture and exported (developed) the JPEGs from that single picture using LR. I stopped taking JPEGs straight out of the camera since the baking process is appalling. I used the TL2 for 2 years now, I know every setting in it. I used my GF3 for close to 10 years so I'm well aware of the differences between the two by now.

Thanks for spending the time trying to help, though, I appreaciate it!

[jaapv]

5 minutes ago, nthpeter said:

I'm not sure if you understand how a camera makes a picture.

🤪🤪

[nthpeter]

9 minutes ago, jaapv said:

🤪🤪

You obviously believe you know, then you can explain what's the relation between the problem described in the linked post and my test picture being underexposed. Because, what you told me, underexposed pictures will be bad anyway (can't recover, so why try I guess, right?), and yet that is how Jonathan tested and fixed the error, by underexposing the image on purpose. So when pushing in PP you can see non-linear gain in the green channel. Crazy 🙃 But I go further, the other blog post I linked has shadows underexposed and they push the shadows in PP to get that horrible green cast.

You either ignore everything I link and point to and say, or you are being unhelpful and difficult on purpose. None of which are good traits from a Moderator.

[jaapv]

Sorry, but you come on here and start a thread on things that have been discussed since 2006 on this forum (Jim Kasson is known here since 2008) and post a couple of vastly underexposed images in horrible lighting to make your point. What are we supposed to think? 

[nthpeter]

15 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Sorry, but you come on here and start a thread on things that have been discussed since 2006 on this forum (Jim Kasson is known here since 2008) and post a couple of vastly underexposed images in horrible lighting to make your point. What are we supposed to think? 

I came here to get answers, but I had to look them up myself and learn everything in the process. If I came here with an M240 and describe my problem about greenish cast in technically incorrect terms, you could still help by pointing to the other thread and saying that that might explain what's happening with my camera. The proposed solutions were: I don't know enough, my screen is not color calibrated, I can't take correctly exposed pictures, etc., nothing to do with the camera. You can think a bit about what the OP (e.g. me) is asking and try to answer the question without the unbreakable axiom that everything Leica makes must be perfect and it's always the user's fault.

If I am able to create a LR plugin for TL2s I will post it here, to help others, because at least I'm being helpful here.

[jaapv]

It has indeed little to do with the camera, other than the discussion about ISO invariance of some sensors. The point is that if you start out by underexposing and/or problematic lighting you are bound to run into noise and colour shift problems in postprocessing. Claiming that a camera is defective is rather beside the point. As to the sensor of the TL2 it is a Sony sensor, so we may suppose that other brand cameras might behave the same way. BTW other than OOC JPGs, colour balance is set by your raw converter, not by the camera. The camera setting offers no more than a starting point. 
The best thing to do is to create a camera profile for your specific lighting conditions. Also you can PP one representative image to your liking and make that a camera-specific default in LR to avoid having to work extensively on all your photos separately. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[nthpeter]

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

It has indeed little to do with the camera, other than the discussion about ISO invariance of some sensors. The point is that if you start out by underexposing and/or problematic lighting you are bound to run into noise and colour shift problems in postprocessing. Claiming that a camera is defective is rather beside the point. As to the sensor of the TL2 it is a Sony sensor, so we may suppose that other brand cameras might behave the same way. BTW other than OOC JPGs, colour balance is set by your raw converter, not by the camera. The camera setting offers no more than a starting point. 
The best thing to do is to create a camera profile for your specific lighting conditions. Also you can PP one representative image to your liking and make that a camera-specific default in LR to avoid having to work extensively on all your photos separately. 

I found the Shadow Tint to be helpful (under Calibration in LR). It is mentioned by people who have the M240 also as a way to fix their green shadows, that's where I got the idea. For my TL2, at +8 towards Magenta it works for like 70% of my images, but I still check all the images 1-by-1 (over ISO 300, which have some darkish areas). For the remaining images it's either around +4/5 or +14/20. I will do a test to see whether this is strongly correlated with ISO, in which case I can make ISO dependent profiles (would cut down PP times significantly). It does not depend on lighting conditions, exposure (underexposed, overexposed, high dynamic range images with both under and overexposed parts), or anything else, not even the temperature + tint sliders (within boundaries of course), every single image turns towards green noise when raising exposure instead of uniform color noise, WB setting aside.

The ultimate is still to make the plugin which would effectively eliminate the need to fix tinted shadows with profiles.

And the most ultimate would have been if I don't have to deal with this at all, hence my frustration (that came through my posts). I wouldn't have expected this from a $2000 camera, since this is something the camera itself could do by software. (The M240 could have implemented the same thing the plugin created by Jonathan is doing, still Leica didn't do it). I also did some digging and some Sony users experience this as well, but tinted shadows are common for some other cameras, too, to certain degrees (and people also confuse it with general WB problems, like me in the beginning). I guess people who don't push shadows don't experience this at all (SOOC JPEGs are totally fine in this sense), hence the low amount of reported cases.

I wasn't claiming a defect originally, I was asking if this is expected behavior --> I buy a different camera (or find an easy way to fix), or a defect --> I return it and buy another TL2. And thank you for the civilized answer

Edited February 4, 2022 by nthpeter

[jaapv]

The answer is very simple really - you are seeking convoluted solutions for a problem that shouldn't exist. By underexposing you are losing so much dynamic range that you need to pull up the shadows to an extraordinary extent - basically from the noise floor. That makes you run into virtually insoluble postprocessing problems. I use (amongst other cameras) a CL with the same sensor. I can simulate this, but in practice will never run into it, as I do expose by the histogram and avoid pushing it all the way to the left. So my advice is to avoid trying to salvage basically failed photographs by pulling up the shadows to this extent. Of course there are tricks (*) to make something more or less acceptable out of them, but that is only needed if the content is important enough.

2 hours ago, nthpeter said:

I guess people who don't push shadows

In postprocessing I rarely have to pull up the shadows by more than 40-50%, and that only in high- contrast situations. Once again - expose properly and don't rely on Lightroom saving your bacon.

(*) Try, for instance, blending layers and the option "screen" in Photoshop.