Leica SL2-S: Versatile Alternative with 24MP Sensor

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Here are four test shots, each cropped to about 50% of the frame, taken at ISOs 100,000, 50,000, 25,000 and 8,000.  See if you can tell which is which.  Lighting is mostly kitchen LEDs.

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!

S1010005 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

S1010003 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

S1010004 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

S1010002 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

taken with SL2-S, 35 SL SC

Edited December 27, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[mhicks]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

100k

25k

50k

8k

guessed from the screen of my iPhone, in my defense. 

Same here 

I looked at the shadow and power receptacle on the machine behind the fruit and see considerable noise in the first and third, least in the last, and second least in the second photo.  

[scott kirkpatrick]

When you click thru to Flickr and open the EXIF, you can check.

As a result, I am running Auto ISO up to 12500 without worries.  Maybe even 25000.

Edited December 28, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[eab]

The lack of noise is really remarkable.  I have not been very interested in the SL platform due to the size and weight of the entire package but it may be that the SL2-S high ISO capability may allow for smaller/slower glass.  I have been looking at the SL2-S image thread and really like how some of the images look.  

I especially like the this image by Chaemono 

 

I am relatively new to photography and have been trying a number of different cameras trying to find the right balance of size/weight, flexibility and output.  My wife and I travel a lot, mostly by camper ( Instagram MoAbout ) and I have really enjoyed the combination of photography and travel.  Lately I have been using a Sony A7RIV  and recently purchased an M10-R.  I really love the flexibility of the Sony but prefer the output of the M10-R, there is something about the colors and smoothness of the images.

The photos by Eric Valli posted by Slender is the kind of content and rendering that I aspire too. I had never seen this work and thought it was just fabulous.  I realize this was not shot with an SL2-S but it had the “look”.  

  I really do prefer the ease of use of a Zoom as you never know what you are going to see and I find with a 24-70 ish zoom to be ideal.  Based on what I am seeing it may be worth giving the SL2-S a try.

I have been following most of the threads and have really enjoyed the discussions and hope someday to be able to contribute in a meaningful way.  

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Life at ISO 25000.  Here are shots by the SL2-S and the SL2.  The first rendered at 100%, the second rendered at 70%, so that the number of MPx is the same:

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!

S1010200 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2-S f/5.6@1/2000 ISO 25000

U1050313 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2 f/5.6@1.1600 ISO25000

Note that the exposure selected by the SL2 was 1/3 stop brighter than the setting that the SL2-S chose, but in fact the colors in the second shot are very slightly darker.  Click through to Flickr to see the grain.  The SL2-S wins this one by a large margin, even with the SL2 averaging its pixels by a factor of 2. 

 

Edited December 29, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Life at ISO 50,000

This time, I cropped them down.  The SL2-S comes first

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!

S1010201 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2-S f/5.6@1/3200 ISO 50,000

U1050314 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2 f/5.6@1/3200 ISO 50,000

[Slender]

DR in the white highlights of the basket are a bit different....interesting. Thanks.

[Chaemono]

Different sensors. Sony BSI sensors are very light sensitive. They need to be shot at EV -1 is my experience.

[Chaemono]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb Steven:

I have been shooting my SL2S at -1 at night and between -0.3 and -0.7 in the day light, if it’s not too gloomy. Other wise it’s way to bright. 
Not you ? 

If there are highlights in day light, I use EV -1. This one here is also at EV -1.

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!

 

[SrMi]

On 12/29/2020 at 7:23 AM, Steven said:

I have been shooting my SL2S at -1 at night and between -0.3 and -0.7 in the day light, if it’s not too gloomy. Other wise it’s way to bright. 
Not you ? 

You'd want to use negative EC to preserve highlights and not adjust the brightness; otherwise, you are losing DR.

[scott kirkpatrick]

I was curious to compare the SL2-S with the camera that it replaces, the SL[601].  So here's the setup;  which I shot from ISO 6400 up to the max that each camera is capable of.

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!

S1010269 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2-S SL SC 35@ISO 6400  uncropped

S1010275 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL2S, ISO 50,000 (cropped)

R1030068 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr SL[601] ISO 50,000 (cropped)

I used the neutral grey sample card to click-balance each frame.  The SL2-S picture is cleaner in the shadows, but the SL held up surprisingly well. The SL2-S's white balance was much more accurate than the SL's.

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by scott kirkpatrick

[scott kirkpatrick]

Someone on another thread wanted to know how multishot works out for the SL2-S.  Well, here's a convenient wall of books to check it on:  First the direct shot, then the "4X" multishot

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!

S1010279 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

S1010278 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

both with 35 SL APO-SC 35 mm.  Levelled the camera with Fotos and a level, but may not be exactly 90 degrees to the wall.  !00% rendering saved on Flicker for each.  Cropped to 3750x2140 and 7500 x 4280, resp.  Used Fotos to trigger the shot with 2 sec delay initially.

Edited January 5, 2021 by scott kirkpatrick

[scott kirkpatrick]

59 minutes ago, Steven said:

Your tests are very useful, as usual, but they could be even better with the addition of your personal commentary or conclusions. 

OK, I'll ask a question.  Do you think that 2X spatial resolution increase has been achieved with the 8 shots?  1.5X?  Can you find something not visible in the single shot that the multi-shot reveals?  I've spotted a few tiny bits of text, like "Ernie" -- the title of a book about a cat of that name -- that didn't quite make it in the single shot.  Would the difference be greater if the lens were not as sharp?

Edited January 5, 2021 by scott kirkpatrick

[beewee]

To me, it’s clear that the multi-shot does allow you to get more resolution out of the lens then the original. A very clear example is the black book on the top left corner titled ‘Photography in Franc’s Spain’. The names of the author/publisher ‘Publio Lopez Mundejar’ can be clearly read on the multi-shot image, even though it is at the corner of the frame. In contrast, the same text is heavily aliased and barely decipherable in the single shot image. The “é” in Mundéjar in the multi-shot image is clearly shows the ‘ on top of the é whereas this does not show up at all in the single shot.

 

This observations supports Peter Karbe’s claim that the 35 APO can resolve up to 200 MP with 50% contrast (i.e. sharp and for which I presume is for the frame centre) but the fact that we can get close to 50% contrast at the very far corner for 100 MP is impressive in itself.

[SrMi]

4 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

OK, I'll ask a question.  Do you think that 2X spatial resolution increase has been achieved with the 8 shots?  1.5X?  Can you find something not visible in the single shot that the multi-shot reveals?  I've spotted a few tiny bits of text, like "Ernie" -- the title of a book about a cat of that name -- that didn't quite make it in the single shot.  Would the difference be greater if the lens were not as sharp?

Pixel-shift has only perceived resolution increase because of the reduction of artifacts.

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/does-pixel-shift-increase-resolution/

With pixel-shift, aliasing is reduced. Another improvement is the dynamic range. With Olympus cameras, there is an almost two-stop DR gain when switching to the high-resolution mode. 

There are, of course, issues with pixel-shift mode. A frame averaging option (like Phase One or Olympus M1) would be a better way to improve DR.

Edited January 5, 2021 by SrMi

[adan]

6 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

Someone on another thread wanted to know how multishot works out for the SL2-S.  Well, here's a convenient wall of books to check it on:  First the direct shot, then the "4X" multishot

Very cool (and books are better than bricks!)

Now, if I can just find one of those neck-grips the portrait photographers used to use 150 years ago.

http://thephotopalace.blogspot.com/p/head-brace.html

[beewee]

30 minutes ago, SrMi said:

With pixel-shift, aliasing is reduced.

There are two ways to reduce aliasing. First is just to smooth the image with a low pass filter (i.e. add blur) and this is what an anti-aliasing filter does but the cost is reduced resolution. The second method is by increasing spatial resolution either through pixel shifting or simply using a higher resolution sensor.

Pixel-shift does quite the opposite to ‘reduce’ aliasing. It actually increases effective resolution to allow the final image to resolve detail that would otherwise cause aliasing (or moiré). What is effectively happening is that by repositioning and resampling the sensor, the camera is synthetically creating higher spatial resolution and in so doing, creating a higher resolution final image. The caveat here is that it must assume that the scene is stationary because you can’t sample the ‘same’ scene with sensor position shift if the scene changes. So the primary assumption here is that the scene is time invariant.

There has been some unofficial mention that the Leica pixel shift algorithm does have some more sophisticated methods of reducing the effect of movement in the scene. This is primarily done by comparing the multi-shot image(s) with the single-shot image. Where the images align well, the added resolution from the pixel shifted images will be applied in that localized area. Where there are large changes in tone/colour when comparing the multi-shot image with the single-shot image, the algorithm supposedly takes information primarily from the single-shot image. That being said, this was mentioned by Nick Rains from Leica Akademie in Australia and not necessarily an authoritative source from Leica such as Stephan Daniels.

Edited January 5, 2021 by beewee

[scott kirkpatrick]

13 hours ago, adan said:

Very cool (and books are better than bricks!)

Now, if I can just find one of those neck-grips the portrait photographers used to use 150 years ago.

http://thephotopalace.blogspot.com/p/head-brace.html

True.  With bricks you never really know if the texture that comes through is real or just noise.  With electronic shuitter (used in the SL multi-shot), the whole process is fast enough that you might not need the neck grip if you must make Avedon-sized portraits.  Olympus even provides a hand-held multishot option in their latest cameras.  Of course, I wouldn't use an SL Summicron 35 for a close-up portrait.  The R Summilux 80 is more appropriate.  Does anyone know if Elsa Dorfman's 20x24" Polaroid camera and her work are still on exhibit somewhere?  I'll bet she used something like a giant Cooke lens from 150 years ago.

Edited January 6, 2021 by scott kirkpatrick

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[scott kirkpatrick]

1 hour ago, beewee said:

To me, it’s clear that the multi-shot does allow you to get more resolution out of the lens then the original. A very clear example is the black book on the top left corner titled ‘Photography in Franc’s Spain’. The names of the author/publisher ‘Publio Lopez Mundejar’ can be clearly read on the multi-shot image, even though it is at the corner of the frame. In contrast, the same text is heavily aliased and barely decipherable in the single shot image. The “é” in Mundéjar in the multi-shot image is clearly shows the ‘ on top of the é whereas this does not show up at all in the single shot.

 

This observations supports Peter Karbe’s claim that the 35 APO can resolve up to 200 MP with 50% contrast (i.e. sharp and for which I presume is for the frame centre) but the fact that we can get close to 50% contrast at the very far corner for 100 MP is impressive in itself.

Well, I didn't use all of the frame, only the center quarter, so the upper left of these images was half-way to the corner.

Edited January 5, 2021 by scott kirkpatrick