SL3 Rumors

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

So it will be bigger than the traditional 35mm format?  Why would they do that?

how would it be bigger ? sensors are cut from the same wafers all the time.

[frame-it]

16 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I think you are making some deterministic observations here that don't necessarily need to be the case.

my observations are in bold text, the rest is someones wishlist from leicarumors

[Stuart Richardson]

19 minutes ago, frame-it said:

my observations are in bold text, the rest is someones wishlist from leicarumors

Yes, it was the bold text I was referring to.

[IkarusJohn]

22 minutes ago, frame-it said:

how would it be bigger ? sensors are cut from the same wafers all the time.

The 100MP sensor in the X2D and the 60MP in the M11 have the same pixel pitch.  It’s simply mathematically impossible to cut a 100MP wafer to 24x36 for full frame and get 80MP.

Edited November 23, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

The 100MP sensor in the X2D and the 60MP in the M11 have the same pixel pitch.  It’s simply mathematically impossible to cut a 100MP wafer to 24x36 for full frame and get 80MP.

sure, but i simply quoted 80 from the original leicarumors post, which you hopefully read.

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Yes, it was the bold text I was referring to.

well they're fairly straightforward assumptions based on the original posters wishlist, bigger top screen and LCD would need a body redesign, why would leica make another new battery for the SL3 ? they just came out with a newer battery.

so dont understand your comment:

Stuart Richardson said:

I think you are making some deterministic observations here that don't necessarily need to be the case.

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, frame-it said:

sure, but i simply quoted 80 from the original leicarumors post, which you hopefully read.

Yep, read that, and your response that “it should be 80MP cut from the 100MP S4 sensor” (quoting from memory).

It doesn’t really matter who said what.  The assumption seems to be that sensor technology can be switched from an S camera, to an SL, an M and a Q.  I suspect there’s more to it than that.  Similarly, I can think of no plausible reason for an 80MP M camera.  Nor can I see justification for a 60MP M, but I suspect that’s just me.

[frame-it]

2 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

It doesn’t really matter who said what.  The assumption seems to be that sensor technology can be switched from an S camera, to an SL, an M and a Q.  I suspect there’s more to it than that.  Similarly, I can think of no plausible reason for an 80MP M camera.  Nor can I see justification for a 60MP M, but I suspect that’s just me.

well, for me personally, i prefer 24MP at 35mm sensor size, 50mp or higher i prefer a larger sensor size.

 

Edited November 24, 2023 by frame-it

[IkarusJohn]

40 minutes ago, frame-it said:

well, for me personally, i prefer 24MP at 35mm sensor size, 50mp or higher i prefer a larger sensor size.

 

Yes, I agree.  I do have a 100MP medium format camera, but that has IBIS, which makes it incredibly usable.

[frame-it]

 

 

[BernardC]

13 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Would it? the sensor area is double the size. The M9 was 18mp and the two M9 sensors stitched together in the S2 gave it 37.5mp. Clearly there is a bit of leeway in the exact number of pixels, but I would expect an 80mp full frame sensor would be 160mp in Leica S format. Since both are 2 to 3 aspect ratios, you don't need to do any fancier calculations. Unless I am missing something, which is quite possible...

The area difference isn't double, it's closer to 1.5:1.

• 24x36mm = 864 mm²
• 30x45mm = 1350 mm²
• 1350/864 = 1.5625

I guess the M9 has a slightly lower pixel density than the S2. That's not exactly breaking news, but it makes sense. The M9 was noisy but usable at ISO 1,600, whereas the S2 only went to ISO 1,250.

[Simone_DF]

16 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I agree that it is unlikely to overtake Sony, but is that really necessary for Leica's customer base?

Not necessary for Leica's customer base, but definitely necessary for Panasonic's customer base, which is where Leica gets the AF from. 

No Panasonic = no L2, and no L2 = no SL line.

Anyway, software can and will be improved. We are still at gen 1.0 for PDAF on L mount cameras, it will improve with the next firmware updates. 

Edited November 24, 2023 by Simone_DF

[SoCalLeicanator]

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/leica-sl3-way-leica-registers-122540650.html

[Kristofferpaulsen]

Controversial opinion I have a 100mp Phase One and an SL2, and as a busy working professional i can say that barely anyone realllllly needs a 100mp camera in 2023. Putting one in an sl would silly. 

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, Kristofferpaulsen said:

Controversial opinion I have a 100mp Phase One and an SL2, and as a busy working professional i can say that barely anyone realllllly needs a 100mp camera in 2023. Putting one in an sl would silly. 

Still, many enjoy 100MP cameras from Fuji and Hasselblad even though they do not print big.

[Kristofferpaulsen]

38 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Still, many enjoy 100MP cameras from Fuji and Hasselblad even though they do not print big.

Oh absolutely, I enjoy my iq3100 immensely, and it offers extraordinary cropping power.. BUT i can do 80% of that with 50mp, hell, i’ve had full magazine pages with images I’ve shot on the 75mm crop setting on my q2 that i’ve enlarged with the Photoshop super res tool that have come out beautifully. 

I think there’s a lot of things they could improve before they went about blowing a ton of money on a 100mp sensor.. Like.. Making the Profoto trigger work properly.. upgrading the autofocus so it’s in line with current competition.. Upgrading the buffer, or replacing an SD card with a Cfast or whatever. So many things.

Besides, they’ll probably just go with the sensor in the m11, right?

[SrMi]

38 minutes ago, Kristofferpaulsen said:

Oh absolutely, I enjoy my iq3100 immensely, and it offers extraordinary cropping power.. BUT i can do 80% of that with 50mp, hell, i’ve had full magazine pages with images I’ve shot on the 75mm crop setting on my q2 that i’ve enlarged with the Photoshop super res tool that have come out beautifully. 

I think there’s a lot of things they could improve before they went about blowing a ton of money on a 100mp sensor.. Like.. Making the Profoto trigger work properly.. upgrading the autofocus so it’s in line with current competition.. Upgrading the buffer, or replacing an SD card with a Cfast or whatever. So many things.

Besides, they’ll probably just go with the sensor in the m11, right?

I'll be very happy if SL3 has an M11 sensor. I would be also happy if SL3 does not have PDAF (no potential stripes problems in very rare cases). That would be the ultimate landscape camera.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

I'll be very happy if SL3 has an M11 sensor. I would be also happy if SL3 does not have PDAF (no potential stripes problems in very rare cases). That would be the ultimate landscape camera.

I don’t like the banding on the M11 sensor. Would prefer an improved version with full 16bit readout - I believe the Sony sensor family used can be tweaked for that, likely at the cost of readout speed = optimized for still images, not video.

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, mzbe said:

I don’t like the banding on the M11 sensor. Would prefer an improved version with full 16bit readout - I believe the Sony sensor family used can be tweaked for that, likely at the cost of readout speed = optimized for still images, not video.

What kind of banding? The banding caused by artificial light would be even worse with 16 bits.

16-bits does not help even with larger sensors (GFX100, X2D) and will therefore not help with FF (too much dither in the lowest bits). FF sensors are fine with 13 bits, as used in Nikons and Q3. MF sensors are fine with 14 bits.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Guest]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

What kind of banding? The banding caused by artificial light would be even worse with 16 bits.

16-bits does not help even with larger sensors (GFX100, X2D) and will therefore not help with FF (too much dither in the lowest bits). FF sensors are fine with 13 bits, as used in Nikons and Q3. MF sensors are fine with 14 bits.

Color banding can easily be reproduced by pushing blacks; due to the logarithmic nature of the encoding, even a +1 lift can 'break' larger gradients such as present in a night sky.

I can't scientifically say that the M11 is better/worse than other Leica cameras, but this issue is sufficiently annoying, albeit less than 5% of my images, to see an upside in higher sensor bit depth (a la Hasselblad X2D).