Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 12/24/2020 at 3:45 PM, Steven said:

I love the idea of it. I think I'd do the trade against my Q2. While I do love the cropability, I rarely bring my Q2 out after sunset anymore. I just cant get nice low light photos. I also recently noticed that very few low light Q2 shots from the LFI gallery are selected as master shot. 

If any of you guys have some nice Q2 low light shots, share them here! 

When you start lifting shadows in low light Q2 shots, you get some horrible white pixelated noise.. 

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!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is exactly the problem. If you work as a press photographer, there is a desire for MUCH better low light preformas. I completely understand why this is so on Q2. There are many mega pixels, with the benefits it provides. But if the camera (as in the old days with the Leica M) is to be bought by many press photographers and reportage photographers then much better AF and much better low light must be preformed. So Mestro 3 - (EVF as SL2-s) - lower pixels (for better low light preforms). This is how I think as a working press photographer.

Edited by Kim Dahl
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 minutes ago, Steven said:

What was the ISO and SS? 

In checking I realise I had a few things mixed up - shutter speed wasn't as low as I remember.

The above b+w image was 1/125th ISO5000 f1.7 ( i had been shooting live music so 1/125th was min needed for that)

This one is 1/30th ISO 2000 f1.7

Q2 - Gavin by Daniel Cook, on Flickr

I could have stood to drop the shutter speed on the first black and white image, but only because the subject was still.

My comment still stands though about editing low light Q2 images, shadow noise is quite nasty - I raise the shadows to show a bit of detail in an audience, didn't look too bad due to how it was resized to fit the screen, but exported to jpg revealed a nasty noise

Edited by dancook
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love a Q2-S. I ended up selling mine because I couldn't stand the noise at or above ISO 3200.  Plus, if they use the sensor in the SL2-S it has a lot more latitude for editing files i.e shadow and highlight recovery.  I'm in.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lower price for Q2-S would certainly be attractive.  

I don't find Q2 to be more noisy.  At above ISO 6400, noise looks bad on a per pixel level.  But if you downsample to 24MP, the amount of noise is pretty comparable.  Not sure about the highlight recovery though.  The flexibility of 47MP for cropping provides a lot of flexibility, a tradeoff that I am more than happy to make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/19/2021 at 5:20 PM, Leica28 said:

What about the Q?  It's a 24MP sensor like the SL-2s.  I know the engine is different but couldn't a firmware upgrade be the solution you are looking for?

The Q sensor is not like the SL2-S sensor except for being a similar resolution. The SL2-S is a completely new, modern BSI sensor compared with the almost six year old Q sensor.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...