High ISO performance in Q3 much better than Q2

[andrewj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think I've seen anyone specifically post about this (recently), but I've tried out higher ISOs in the Q3 v. the Q2.  At e.g. ISOs of 12500, 2500, 50000, the noise level in the Q3 is much less than in the Q2.  And this is without any pixel peeping. 

(As a side note, I also tried the lower sized DNG files in the Q3, and did not really see any improve in the noise level.)

[Advertisement]

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

[anonymoose]

That's one of the major benefits of a BSI sensor--improved low-light/noise.

[SrMi]

13 minutes ago, anonymoose said:

That's one of the major benefits of a BSI sensor--improved low-light/noise.

The improved noise is not because of BSI as it has very little effect on noise with larger sensors. 

[anonymoose]

12 minutes ago, SrMi said:

The improved noise is not because of BSI as it has very little effect on noise with larger sensors. 

Maybe not for Leica, but Sony has made the claim that it decreased noise by ~2-3dB (if I recall) on their cameras.

Either way, if the BSI sensor is allowing for more light to be captured you don't need to use higher ISOs and therefore you have less noise as a result. Tomato tomahto?

Edited August 12, 2023 by anonymoose

[SrMi]

24 minutes ago, anonymoose said:

Maybe not for Leica, but Sony has made the claim that it decreased noise by ~2-3dB (if I recall) on their cameras.

Either way, if the BSI sensor is allowing for more light to be captured you don't need to use higher ISOs and therefore you have less noise as a result.

The difference in the amount of light collected between FSI and BSI sensors is too tiny to matter at pixel pitch sizes used in FF cameras.

Here is the comparison of an FSI and BSI camera: D810 (FSI) vs. D850 (BSI). Note how dual conversion gain (DCG) helps. When Nikon launched D850, they explicitly said that switching to BSI was not because of noise but speed.

Another comparison is the Z5 (FSI) vs. Z6 (BSI). DCG again causes the difference.

Marketing occasionally trumpets BSI as noise improvement, but observation and measurements show it to be untrue.

Edited August 12, 2023 by SrMi

[Steven_nl]

I feel the same. The Q3 is better at high ISO then the Q2. Never measured it, but I feel it is by a considerable margin. Dynamic range is superior as well. Less blown out highlights and better shadow recovery. Sony sensor??? No I am NOT a fanboy. I shoot Canon R5 and Fuji XT5 and the Q3.

[andrewj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here's a comparison, from a heavily cropped image, ISO 25,000, with exposure increased in LR by 2 to magnify the difference.

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!

[Steven_nl]

More detail, less noise

[CalStanford]

49 minutes ago, andrewj said:

Here's a comparison, from a heavily cropped image, ISO 25,000, with exposure increased in LR by 2 to magnify the difference.

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!

Really significant difference in chroma and luminance noise. Thanks for the shots!