How to overcome Q3 going below set Minimum Shutter Speed?

[Qfan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, SrMi said:

ETTR makes sense only at base ISO.

No I don’t think it’s true. But then ETTR is not my upmost priority, the other issues that have been well documented in this thread are. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Qfan]

2 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Why not raise the Auto-ISO value to the maximum?

This has been discussed earlier in this thread. Please refer to earlier messages. 

[SrMi]

19 minutes ago, Qfan said:

No I don’t think it’s true. But then ETTR is not my upmost priority, the other issues that have been well documented in this thread are. 

No, it is true. Only at base ISO you can fully saturate the sensor and thus maximize the IQ. The benefits of applying ETTR at higher ISO are so small that most people avoid it in order to be safer in preserving the highlights.

[SrMi]

24 minutes ago, Qfan said:

This has been discussed earlier in this thread. Please refer to earlier messages. 

IIRC,  the solution is to raise the Auto-ISO limit to the maximum.

The only purpose of setting the Auto-ISO limit lower to maximum is to limit the amount of noise. To honor that noise limit, the camera has to start lowering the shutter speed once the ISO limit has been reached.

Reminder:

- noise is not determined by ISO

- noise is determined by exposure: shutter-speed x aperture x scene-light

- there is no such thing as an exposure tringle because exposure completes before ISO is applied.

[Qfan]

15 hours ago, SrMi said:

No, it is true. Only at base ISO you can fully saturate the sensor and thus maximize the IQ. The benefits of applying ETTR at higher ISO are so small that most people avoid it in order to be safer in preserving the highlights.

This guy seems to disagree with you in their article titled "ETTR is critical for high ISO Photography" https://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Tuts/BryanETTR/index.html (Disclaimer: I haven't read it in full and I am also not interested in reading it in full).

My original question is not about ETTR and I also don't care about ETTR, but hopefully the ETTR information you posted and the link above may be useful for others.

Edited April 2, 2024 by Qfan

[Qfan]

15 hours ago, SrMi said:

IIRC,  the solution is to raise the Auto-ISO limit to the maximum.

No, this is not my solution nor the suggestions of others with the same challenge.
 

Quote

 

The only purpose of setting the Auto-ISO limit lower to maximum is to limit the amount of noise. To honor that noise limit, the camera has to start lowering the shutter speed once the ISO limit has been reached.

 

"Only purpose of setting the Auto-ISO limit lower to maximum is to limit the amount of noise"?  No, I don't believe so.

Quote

 

Reminder:

- noise is not determined by ISO

- noise is determined by exposure: shutter-speed x aperture x scene-light

 

While the above is generally true, the statements are too crude, or oversimplified. One also needs to take into account if noise reduction is engaged or not, jpg vs raw, sensor gain design.

In any case, this thread is not for debating about the nature of noise, ISO, or even how to have the lowest noise photos. DPR even has a LOCKED thread due to people circularly arguing about this topic. See here.

As I and others have stated, we simply just want Q to stop reducing shutter speed when a specific minimum shutter speed has been set.

Quote

- there is no such thing as an exposure tringle because exposure completes before ISO is applied.

I am not sure who introduced the "exposure triangle" phrase to this thread because I didn't. Maybe this can be discussed further in a thread about "exposure triangle."

Edited April 2, 2024 by Qfan

[Pindy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Qfan said:As I and others have stated, we simply just want Q to stop reducing shutter speed when a specific minimum shutter speed has been set.

Is it so wrong that limits actually mean limits? If the camera underexposes it’s  because we set it that way. This nannying is annoying. 

[SrMi]

When shooting raw, a sticky shutter speed limit has the same IQ effect as letting the ISO go above the ISO limit (i.e., no ISO limit). If you disagree, please let me know why. Please, do not answer with just "I don't believe so" :).

The reason why most (all?) manufacturers have not implemented a sticky shutter speed limit is that it does not add any functionality. Automatic darkening of an image, once it hits Auto-ISO, is not a useful feature.

[Qfan]

2 hours ago, Pindy said:

Is it so wrong that limits actually mean limits? If the camera underexposes it’s  because we set it that way. This nannying is annoying. 

agreed.

[Qfan]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

The reason why most (all?) manufacturers have not implemented a sticky shutter speed limit is that it does not add any functionality. Automatic darkening of an image, once it hits Auto-ISO, is not a useful feature.

First, not all manufacturers have not.

Second, usefulness is in the eyes of the beholder.

Third, calling something "minimum" and giving users the illusion of control, when there is no control, is simply not cool, not to mention laziness.

[SrMi]

38 minutes ago, Qfan said:

First, not all manufacturers have not.

Second, usefulness is in the eyes of the beholder.

Third, calling something "minimum" and giving users the illusion of control, when there is no control, is simply not cool, not to mention laziness.

Sony, Nikon, Fuji, and Leica do it the same way.

Could you please explain the usefulness of a fixed minimum shutter speed limit compared to not setting an ISO limit?

I have explained the usefulness of lowering the shutter speed once the ISO limit has been reached.

Edited April 3, 2024 by SrMi

[Qfan]

9 hours ago, SrMi said:

Could you please explain the usefulness of a fixed minimum shutter speed limit compared to not setting an ISO limit?

I have explained the usefulness of lowering the shutter speed once the ISO limit has been reached.

Thanks for your continued interest in this feature.

I believe I have explained the reasons and scenarios this feature is needed in previous posts.

[SrMi]

20 hours ago, Qfan said:

This guy seems to disagree with you in their article titled "ETTR is critical for high ISO Photography" https://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Tuts/BryanETTR/index.html (Disclaimer: I haven't read it in full and I am also not interested in reading it in full).

That is a misleading article. He maximized the exposure, which is something that you should do regardless of ISO used. Once you have done it, and at higher ISO, you should move the histogram to the left (not ETTR) in order to preserve highlights. ETTR at high ISO would call for maximizing exposure and ISO, which has no benefit over lowering ISO a bit.

[Makofoto]

I use Manual Mode ... and set the stop and shutter speed myself, and use Auto ISO to correct. Typically I'm wide open, appropriate shutter speed, and Auto ISO. That guarantees the lowest ISO. I'm not concerned with ISO ... I WANT the Moment. The modern Ai Noise Reduction software is amazing. No NR needed here. Full spectrum converted Q, with a Hot Mirror filter, for normal colors. F1.7, 1/250th, 1,600 iso.

 

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!

[Pindy]

On 4/2/2024 at 10:17 PM, SrMi said:

When shooting raw, a sticky shutter speed limit has the same IQ effect as letting the ISO go above the ISO limit (i.e., no ISO limit). If you disagree, please let me know why. Please, do not answer with just "I don't believe so" :).

The reason why most (all?) manufacturers have not implemented a sticky shutter speed limit is that it does not add any functionality. Automatic darkening of an image, once it hits Auto-ISO, is not a useful feature.

I don’t think a flexible shutter speed is the same as increased ISO image quality wise, because increasing the ISO doesn’t allow more light onto the photo sites but a slower shutter speed does. I would argue that between the two, IQ is theoretically better with a slower SS for that reason. But the problem is that shutter speed is a creative exposure tool where ISO is not. 

It may seem counterintuitive, but this is why I object to the “limit” not being a limit: SS is a creative choice (even when it’s within a range the photographer has deemed acceptable). ISO is not creative, and yet inexplicably the philosophy of the feature is that ISO remains limited but SS does not!

For this camera, I will raise the auto ISO to a higher limit and deal with whatever noise comes in the occasions it comes. And often, I will shoot in manual-with-auto-ISO, because I need more creative control, not less. 
 

 

Edited April 6, 2024 by Pindy

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Pindy said:

I don’t think a flexible shutter speed is the same as increased ISO image quality wise, because increasing the ISO doesn’t allow more light onto the photo sites but a slower shutter speed does.

Yes, and that is not what I wrote. I wrote that increasing ISO does not degrade the IQ, and SS, not ISO, determines the IQ.

1 hour ago, Pindy said:

t may seem counterintuitive, but this is why I object to the “limit” not being a limit: SS is a creative choice (even when it’s within a range the photographer has deemed acceptable). ISO is not creative, and yet inexplicably the philosophy of the feature is that ISO remains limited but SS does not!

If you want an SS limit, let the ISO go up (no ISO limit). Why limit the ISO if you do not want to limit the noise (which can be guaranteed only by lowering the SS)?

1 hour ago, Pindy said:

For this camera, I will raise the auto ISO to a higher limit and deal with whatever noise comes in the occasions it comes. And often, I will shoot in manual-with-auto-ISO, because I need more creative control, not less. 

It's a good solution for Leica and most other cameras. I never set the Auto-ISO limit on my cameras.

Edited April 6, 2024 by SrMi

[mbphotox]

OP concluded that the best solution will be to simply underexpose every picture, instead of letting the iso go higher?!

Makes complete sense, since you then just increase exposure in post and add the same noise again. (or worse, depending on software, I suppose?!)

🫠

[Pindy]

8 hours ago, SrMi said:

Yes, and that is not what I wrote. I wrote that increasing ISO does not degrade the IQ, and SS, not ISO, determines the IQ.

If you want an SS limit, let the ISO go up (no ISO limit). Why limit the ISO if you do not want to limit the noise (which can be guaranteed only by lowering the SS)?

It's a good solution for Leica and most other cameras. I never set the Auto-ISO limit on my cameras.

I'm beginning to agree with you.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Wellsyboy]

18 hours ago, Makofoto said:

I use Manual Mode ... and set the stop and shutter speed myself, and use Auto ISO to correct. Typically I'm wide open, appropriate shutter speed, and Auto ISO. That guarantees the lowest ISO. I'm not concerned with ISO ... I WANT the Moment. The modern Ai Noise Reduction software is amazing. No NR needed here. Full spectrum converted Q, with a Hot Mirror filter, for normal colors. F1.7, 1/250th, 1,600 iso.

 

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!

Great moment shot - love it!!!

[WeekendWarrior]

Ive only had the Q3 for about 2 weeks and I've already experience this as well. I hope they can figure out a fix.

Never experienced this on the original Q either, and I noticed it right away on the Q3.