Realistic print size for SL2-S

[JohnSantaF4]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am considering acquiring a SL2-S to complement my existing Q2M, but a few photographers have cautioned against the 24mg sensor size for larger prints. I shoot mainly landscape, architectural, and some events. What is a realistic upper size limit for prints with the SL2-S? I’d appreciate benefiting from your experiences. Thanks.

[trickness]

15 minutes ago, JohnSantaF4 said:

I am considering acquiring a SL2-S to complement my existing Q2M, but a few photographers have cautioned against the 24mg sensor size for larger prints. I shoot mainly landscape, architectural, and some events. What is a realistic upper size limit for prints with the SL2-S? I’d appreciate benefiting from your experiences. Thanks.

I think anyone who cautions you about 24 megapixels is someone you shouldn't listen to about really anything. So by this assertion, nothing prior to the M10R or SL2 was worth printing over what, 8x10 because of insufficient resolution? 

I mean, will the print be six feet wide and the viewer looking at it from one foot away? Mark Depaola tells a story about a show he had in China, he had sent them photos taken on his M240 (24 megapixels) for marketing materials, and when he got to the gallery there was a 3 story high banner made from one of his pictures, which looked incredible. Last year I saw Wolfgang Tillman's exhibit at Moma, he's shot digital (not medium format) since 2008. and some of the prints were 10 feet tall, looked incredible. It's not just about megapixels.

The SL2-S sensor has great color, low high, very good dynamic range, and will make very beautiful very large prints.

 

 

 

Edited February 4 by trickness

[Advertisement]

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

[David Cantor]

19 minutes ago, JohnSantaF4 said:

I am considering acquiring a SL2-S to complement my existing Q2M, but a few photographers have cautioned against the 24mg sensor size for larger prints. I shoot mainly landscape, architectural, and some events. What is a realistic upper size limit for prints with the SL2-S? I’d appreciate benefiting from your experiences. Thanks.

My experience with Leica cameras is limited to the 24 mp CL which means that my Leica knowledge is negligible as I have only printed up to 14”x11”, my last prints from a lab cost £1.40 each including VAT. The quality is superb.  However, an image taken with a 16MP camera was used for an extensive poster campaign on the London Underground, displayed at the exhibition entrance inside the National Portrait Gallery in London and also outside.  From the same camera, I have printed 50cms x 40cms for an exhibition.  That’s my experience, you haven’t defined the dimensions of ‘larger prints’, isn’t that where to start?  Good luck and if any one tells you what you need without giving facts, the advice probably is based on prejudice rather knowledge.

[trickness]

Anecdotally, back in 2003 I printed 36" wide prints for a gallery exhibition from my Fuji S2 Pro, which was a whopping 6.17 megapixels, and sold a bunch. Never heard a single complaint that the resolution wasn't good enough. 

[SoarFM]

17 minutes ago, JohnSantaF4 said:

I am considering acquiring a SL2-S to complement my existing Q2M, but a few photographers have cautioned against the 24mg sensor size for larger prints. I shoot mainly landscape, architectural, and some events. What is a realistic upper size limit for prints with the SL2-S? I’d appreciate benefiting from your experiences. Thanks.

How big do you want to print? I think the end use of the print is the real question. While I am as guilty as anyone of pixelpeeping and love seeing the massive megapixels on screen at 100% that is not how non-photographers look at pictures. Who is your audience? Client? Family? Aspirations to show in a gallery with very large prints?

I am a hobbyist/amateur/enthusiast. I also love doing what you do “landscape, architectural, and some events” and more. I’ve been down the whole MFDB route and had a go with the Fuji GFX100. All super lovely files, but not enough of a difference to warrant the narrow use limitations of the MFDB (Leaf Credo) and the Fuji GFX100 wasn’t enough of a difference. I’ve been tempted by the Hasselblad X2D but my better sense always win out and I stay with the Leica. The lens line up is universally unmatched and concentrating on lenses is the best advice I was ever given. You don’t need many.  I think Leica will be making cameras and lenses long after DJI tires of the camera business and the hasselblad is orphaned. There is a pretty robust market in Leica L mount lenses which makes acquiring a few L mount APO’s and zooms a lot less painful.

I rarely go over 11x14 and my printer is limited to 17x22. But even displaying 11x14 with frame requires a lot of wall space.

In multishot mode, you’ll get a 96 megapixel image, but it needs to be on a tripod using electronic shutter. 

I have and SL2 and SL2-S but the most important part of the kit is the lenses. I have 4 APO’s and the 24-90. Camera bodies will come and go but the lenses will be with you for far longer. BTW, my SL2-S is my go to camera for its versatility and high ISO performance.  

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

I am a selfprinter since about 20 years. Actually my equipment is Q2, M 10-R, S3 and on the other side my Epson SC P600 pigment printer together with an excellent photo paper lustre duo 250 g . There exist no problems to print my picture up to A3+ size. Starting 2005  there was my R9+DMR (10 mp) and Fuji xPro1 (16 mp) and a predecessor of my present Epson. I made a lot of prints for my exhibitions and workshops (picture design and presentation) and everything was well.

At the moment my project is to prepeare some black linen (semi-)professional photo-cassettes size 198,5 x 420 mm made according to my ideas by a regional bookbinder The first steps are done and as usual everything ist running as expected.

By the way, since 2005 (R9+DMR) my pictures are dng-based developed using Adobe-ACR/-Photoshop. Workflow Adobe-rgb 16 bit.

Edited February 4 by Hans-Dieter Gülicher

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It depends on the viewing distance. That is why 12MP iPhone images look good on huge banners when viewed from passing cars.

It also depends on your acceptable dpi number. With close viewing distances, the recommended minimum resolution for printing is 300 dpi, but you do not need to stick with that recommendation. 

At 300 dpi, the long edge of an SL2-S print would be 20".

On the other hand, the larger the print, the larger the viewing distance should be unless you "dot-peek."

[Herr Barnack]

 @JohnSantaF4    My M-P 240 has a 24 megapixel sensor. I have had exhibit quality prints made from the files that were 24x36 inches in size.  If you need to print much larger than that, maybe you do need a larger sensor than 24 megapixels.  But then again, the account of Mark Depaola's experience (above) may indicate otherwise. 

I would say that the skill and experience of whoever is making the prints is at least as important a consideration as pixel count of the camera.  As @trickness says above, "It's not just about megapixels."

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

It depends on the viewing distance. That is why 12MP iPhone images look good on huge banners when viewed from passing cars.

It also depends on your acceptable dpi number. With close viewing distances, the recommended minimum resolution for printing is 300 dpi, but you do not need to stick with that recommendation. 

At 300 dpi, the long edge of an SL2-S print would be 20".

On the other hand, the larger the print, the larger the viewing distance should be unless you "dot-peek."

Indeed…

https://www.adweek.com/creativity/apple-celebrates-summer-with-joyful-worldwide-shot-on-iphone-out-of-home-campaign/
 

Good technique too, as always, but MP not the constraint.

Jeff

[JohnSantaF4]

2 hours ago, trickness said:

I think anyone who cautions you about 24 megapixels is someone you shouldn't listen to about really anything. So by this assertion, nothing prior to the M10R or SL2 was worth printing over what, 8x10 because of insufficient resolution? 

I mean, will the print be six feet wide and the viewer looking at it from one foot away? Mark Depaola tells a story about a show he had in China, he had sent them photos taken on his M240 (24 megapixels) for marketing materials, and when he got to the gallery there was a 3 story high banner made from one of his pictures, which looked incredible. Last year I saw Wolfgang Tillman's exhibit at Moma, he's shot digital (not medium format) since 2008. and some of the prints were 10 feet tall, looked incredible. It's not just about megapixels.

The SL2-S sensor has great color, low high, very good dynamic range, and will make very beautiful very large prints.

 

 

 

Thank you and others for your comments and advice. I too am skeptical of fearing a 24mp sensor when Leica images are so well rendered. 24 x 36“ is about the largest I anticipate even for an exhibition. I’m also thinking multishot or upscaling software might extend resolution.

[Jeff S]

Well, 30x40 inch isn’t a problem with 18Mp and old technology, when the user is capable.

Jeff

[Simone_DF]

I printed 54x36” with 24mp, but I boosted the resolution via Adobe

[skahde]

Via upscaling even 6 MP from a Fuji S5 can look amazing after printing. 

[Jon Warwick]

The maximum size that I think can be printed well depends for me on the subject matter and its related texture. Distant landscapes with very fine detail may have a much smaller maximum print size, vs (say) a close-up of a face, for my taste at least. I find that landscapes have a lot of fine detail (fine branches, leaves, twigs, small rocks) that can look “wrong” if not cleanly resolved, and can incur false color issues etc with the color filter array (*). But to give a ballpark, I tend to find a +50% increase on the print’s width via resampling in post is pretty good as a reliable ceiling. So for a landscape off a 24mp camera, where the native file size is 20” at 300dpi, I’m nearly always very satisfied to 30” wide. Off my M11 with the native width of c 30” at 300dpi, I’m happy resampling in Adobe any given landscape to 45”, etc 

(*) with the camera set to high resolution mode (pixel shift) on the SL2-S on a tripod, I would assume false color and other nasties from the color filter array should largely disappear ….that certainly was the case when I used that mode on my SL2

 

Edited February 4 by Jon Warwick

[schaffi]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb SrMi:

....the recommended minimum resolution for printing is 300 dpi,....

This only applies to clos up viewing, this is not necessary for lager prints.

Even lower dpi results in very good printing!

[schaffi]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb trickness:

.....he's shot digital (not medium format) since 2008. and some of the prints were 10 feet tall, looked incredible. It's not just about megapixels.

The SL2-S sensor has great color, low high, very good dynamic range, and will make very beautiful very large prints.

Thats right!

[jaapv]

I wonder at what distance people want to look at these prints. 

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I wonder at what distance people want to look at these prints. 

If you look at the huge Burtynsky prints, people watch them from 3 to 4 meters and from 10cm 😁. Regardless of the size, people like to examine a print closely.
But that is a good question. What is the viewing distance when enjoying a print as a whole.

[chrismuc]

Considering an image with excellent sharpness on pixel-level, according my experience, at least five pixels per mm printed with a high level ink jet printer in error-diffusion print mode are required to achieve a 'very sharp' visual impression of the image, even viewed at short distance, without seeing any pixel from the camera sensor nor dots from the printer.

For a 24 MP sensor with about 6000 pixels width, that means a maximum print width of about 120 cm. Above that size, the visual quality impression is diminishing, if viewed at short distance. At farer viewing distance, the quality impressions still will be fine of course, because the resolution of the human eye is determined by a certain dihedral angle.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[chrismuc]

 

I print big 🙂

So I mostly use the GFX 100.

(But one of these were shot with the 24 MP Panasonic S1H, equivalent resolution to the SL2s.) 

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!

Edited February 5 by chrismuc