Leica SL2 Intervalometer

[Solsticephoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am trying to use the intervalometer on the SL2 and am hoping to compare notes with others trying to do the same.

My goal is to take consecutive 30 sec exposures at night.  The manual was a bit unclear to me on whether the interval was the time between start of captures or between the end of that last capture and the start of the next.  Some experimentation has convinced me its start of capture to start of capture.  

Also not explained in the manual is any extra time needed between frames.  My testing has shown that I need at least 3 extra seconds between frames or the camera will exit the sequence of intervals early with a "some frames may be lost" error.  

In my example of consecutive 30 second exposures, my minimum interval time is 33 seconds.

Does this sound reasonable?

[beewee]

Interval time is the time between the start of each exposure and not between the end of the previous exposure to the start of the next exposure.

I’ve only experienced the “some frames may be lost” but that was after shooting continuous 1s exposure with 1s between shots while the battery was getting low and this was after shooting the camera in intervalometer mode for 5-10 minutes. I’m curious when you saw that message, what the battery level was.  I should note however, I was using the SL2-S so the files are much smaller.

Edited November 14, 2021 by beewee

[Advertisement]

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

[Solsticephoto]

The battery was fully charged.  My test was to set exposure for 30 seconds then attempt to make 20 exposures. With an interval time set for 30, 31, or 32 seconds the lost frame error occurred after 10 frames .  When I set the interval time to 33, 34 or 35 seconds I had no issue.

in your example I assume you set exposure time for 1 sec and interval time for 2 seconds?

[beewee]

7 minutes ago, Solsticephoto said:

in your example I assume you set exposure time for 1 sec and interval time for 2 seconds?

Yes, that was what I was using.

[beewee]

I should also note that I was using Kingston React Plus 256 GB UHS-II which should be able to write continuously at 260 MB/s.

[helged]

For å project I am pondering about, I would like to take photos at the exact same (wall-clock) time every day for many days. SL2/SL2-S can be externally powered, so this should not be a problem. Anyone knowing how accurate the internal SL2/SL2-S clock is? I can/will check, but please chime in if this has been tested already.... 

Edited February 9, 2022 by helged

[beewee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

44 minutes ago, helged said:

Anyone knowing how accurate the internal SL2/SL2-S clock is?

I would expect is only as accurate as your ability to set it to the ‘real’ time if you’re not using the Fotos app. If you are using the Fotos app, and assuming you’re on iOS or iPad OS, then I would imagine it would be better than 1 second accuracy. iOS/iPad OS time synchronization is actually very good so it boils down to how good Leica’s Fotos app time sync mechanism is. I’m not sure if they would use something like NTP but even the most amateur level of time sync should be better than 1s unless some developer really botches this.

[helged]

42 minutes ago, beewee said:

I would expect is only as accurate as your ability to set it to the ‘real’ time if you’re not using the Fotos app. If you are using the Fotos app, and assuming you’re on iOS or iPad OS, then I would imagine it would be better than 1 second accuracy. iOS/iPad OS time synchronization is actually very good so it boils down to how good Leica’s Fotos app time sync mechanism is. I’m not sure if they would use something like NTP but even the most amateur level of time sync should be better than 1s unless some developer really botches this.

Thanks. I am mostly concerned about the accuracy of the internal clock over a time period of one or several years. I see that the camera clock lags the real time by several minutes since I last set the camera clock; possibly half a year ago. So I guess this answers my question: The internal clock appears inaccurate over time. Based on this, an external intervalometer seems to be the way to go. Too bad, since this requires another pice of gear that can fail - and certainly needs power over time...

[beewee]

deleted

Edited February 10, 2022 by beewee
double post

[beewee]

21 hours ago, helged said:

The internal clock appears inaccurate over time. Based on this, an external intervalometer seems to be the way to go.

I don’t think you’ll find any consumer electronics that will keep stable time over the periods that you’re thinking, on the order of one or several years without any time sync. That said, I don’t know why you would need an external intervalometer and how that would be any better over a period of 1+ year.

The limitation is not the camera but the quartz oscillator used to keep time and they’re commodity parts that are used for electronics of all types. Unless your intervelometer is GPS time steered, runs on a rubidium, cesium, or hydrogen maser oscillator, or a very expensive ovenized crystal oscillator, I don’t think it’ll be any different. In fact, it’ll probably be worse.

[Eclectic Man]

One IT system specification I read required the network time to be within 250 milliseconds of GMT.  If it is possible for IT systems to have accurate clocks then an accurate intervalometer should be possible, although it might be a custom build.  Various quartz wristwatches are certified to be accurate to within 15 seconds per year, and, in the UK at least, the  'pips' on the hour are accurate to the National Physical Laboratory's atomic clock.  GPS receivers are also highly accurate, but often quite power-hungry.  You may want to avoid radio-controlled clocks, however.  I had one once and it often re-set itself, with random abandon, and was so bad I chucked it away.

Try contacting some electronics web sites for advice on how to make your own accurate intervalometer, I'm sure there are quite a few people out there who would enjoy the challenge.

[BernardC]

On 2/9/2022 at 3:29 AM, helged said:

Thanks. I am mostly concerned about the accuracy of the internal clock over a time period of one or several years. I see that the camera clock lags the real time by several minutes since I last set the camera clock; possibly half a year ago. So I guess this answers my question: The internal clock appears inaccurate over time. Based on this, an external intervalometer seems to be the way to go. Too bad, since this requires another pice of gear that can fail - and certainly needs power over time...

I see two possible solutions:

Using FOTOS on a smartphone with a sim card. The phone will automatically synchronize with network time, even if it doesn't make any calls.

Using a commercial intervalometer, or building your own. The more sophisticated ones will solve a lot of other issues, for instance by sending files regularly via wifi or the web (so you don't need to physically access the camera).

Last time I checked, you could buy pre-built kits that include a Canon Rebel/Kiss DSLR, optional solar panels, etc. Those kits are popular with film makers, and also with contractors, architects, etc. It's best to use a manual focus lens (tape-down the focus ring!) and RAW capture.

[beewee]

If you want sub-second-level accuracy, I don’t think there’s any option that doesn’t use some form of external network time or GPS time. That said, it’s not that hard to make your own if you have some basic programming and electrical engineering skills. The triggering circuitry is the same as for Panasonic cameras and there are people who’ve reverse engineered the triggering circuit.