SL3 vs SL2...

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 51 Minuten schrieb Chaemono:

I was going to do side by sides with the SL2-S for color today but the roads were jammed due to the traditional Easter peace marches in Germany and I couldn’t get to the parking lot. I have two APO 50 Summicron-SL lenses so I don’t have to swap lenses. Eventually, I will post DNGs with both cameras but most likely with a borrowed SL3. I’m not planning to get it until I see the files, the colors, and how easy it would be for me to emulate the colors with the SL2-S. If it’s just a matter of moving the red color slider in LR by +20 to the right with the SL2-S files, then it’s not worth it, but I suspect the SL3 also has a better blue channel. The oranges, the yellows are less red-ish, too. To my eyes, the SL3 shows a more natural presentation of colors and tones in those fruit/veggie shots by Sean Reid.

@tom0511Totally agree. In a way, MF is better for hobbyists who don’t want to spend too much time in post or who don’t know how to make their own color profiles. 

Who wants to spend much time in post  or lets say - who doesn't appreciate a file where he needs to spend less time in post.

I once tried to make profiles with color checker but the result was..mmhhh..and only valid for one type of light/WB. And if adobe is not able to produce great profiles I assume one bust be really good to generate own profiles. Maybe easier if one works with studio controlled light.

Edited March 30, 2024 by tom0511

[tom0511]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb tom0511:

Who wants to spend much time in post  or lets say - who doesn't appreciate a file where he needs to spend less time in post.

I want to correct myself- for a few of the best images and a big print I could spend a lot of time post processing. But after a hanball match or a vacation if you have many shots its a different thing.

[Chaemono]

I always avoid LR for rendering DNGs now. I open them in Preview first, export them as TIFFs, and bring them into LR for further adjustments. 

The tomatoes shot from above

DNG opened in LR first with the red color slider at +20 to match the actual red color

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!

 

Imported as TIFF after the DNG was opened in Preview with the red color slider at +15

[Chaemono]

Here is another one for red color. I stole this picture from Holger Forst's Classic Car gallery. He went to the same museum first and I copied many of his shots. This one is with the 75 Noctilux on the M10-P at ISO 640. Holger Forst used the SL with the APO 75 Summicron-SL for this shot, I believe. 

This is how LR rendered the DNG with Adobe Color when I opened the file.

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!

 

This is with adjustments to the Adobe Color profile and the red color slider at +22.

This is from an exported TIFF after the DNG was opened in Preview with the red color slider at +5. I prefer this one even if the above with Adobe Color comes close.

 

It will be interesting to see if the SL3 DNGs will need to be opened in Preview first and brought into LR as TIFFs for nicer colors and less work in post or if Adobe Camera RAW with the Adobe Color profile renders them better than previous Leica FF camera files to begin with (I often do the same thing with the M10M and M11M files). It would shorten the workflow and one could avoid having to make huge TIFF files first. So far I'd say, I'm super happy with the SL2-S colors even if it means I have to make TIFFs with Preview first.

The other question is, how will M lenses perform on the SL3. They fringe like hell wide open on higher resolution sensors but not on the Z7 for some reason. Maybe it is corrected before demosaicing on the SL3. This is what Nikon seems to do. 

[helged]

Rhubarb in the garden at 60 deg N. SL3 with S120mm. Click for larger view.

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 March 31, 2024 by helged

[Chaemono]

vor 1 Minute schrieb helged:

Rhubarb in the garden at 60 deg N. SL3 with S120mm.

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!

The color and the detail is something else. Is this from a DNG opened in LR?

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

The color and the detail is something else. Is this from a DNG opened in LR?

Yes, DNG opened in LR (and a quick detour to PS, as always).

[jmannix]

I will be sticking with the SL2. 

I have zero issues with low-light ability, ISO up to 6400 provides more than decent files for even larger format printing. 

I have zero issues with AF and tracking with two crazy dogs, or tracking sports. I shot perfectly good images at the Singapore Grand Prix last year with an SL2 with a low miss rate at a night race.

I was never tempted by the SL2S as the resolution drop turns me off. I subscribe to the school of thought that a very good detail rendering lens like the APO 35 is a keeper as it gives lots of "croptions" I don't hesitate to use it as a digital zoom tool when required. When we have 150MP sensors that thing will still render amazing detail.

13MP isn't enough of a jump for me.

I'm actually against the flippy screen because I've had issues with them in the past & was sad to see it added. While I trust Leica to build them well, when you've had the experience of one of those screens just not closing properly and bouncing on your nose every time you bring it up to your eye it becomes infuriating and you'll never use that camera again without repair. Besides, fotos is awesome if you have a tricky shooting angle or the ground is too wet/muddy to get down comfortably/cleanly.

 

 

 

  

[Photoworks]

On 3/31/2024 at 9:46 AM, Chaemono said:

I always avoid LR for rendering DNGs now. I open them in Preview first, export them as TIFFs, and bring them into LR for further adjustments. 

The tomatoes shot from above

DNG opened in LR first with the red color slider at +20 to match the actual red color

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!

 

Imported as TIFF after the DNG was opened in Preview with the red color slider at +15

Preview ?

wouldn’t it be better to learn about color management?

 

[Chaemono]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Photoworks:

Preview ?

wouldn’t it be better to learn about color management?

 

Preview opens the DNG files with the embedded Leica profile and renders the colors nicer - red channel still off, though - even if the embedded profile is used in LR which is possible with the M10 but not with the SL2-S. It’s easier to adjust the colors to my liking with the SL2-S files the way Preview renders them. See the tomatoes in #103. 

[Photoworks]

5 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Preview opens the DNG files with the embedded Leica profile and renders the colors nicer - red channel still off, though - even if the embedded profile is used in LR which is possible with the M10 but not with the SL2-S. It’s easier to adjust the colors to my liking with the SL2-S files the way Preview renders them. See the tomatoes in #103. 

maybe you want to use a different color profile in Adobe. 
Just because the Preview program happened to nail it, it is not the case most of the time, adobe adopted unconventional gamma for photos and video.

maybe you will find Capture One is more color accurate to what the camera captured, they create the best starting profiles.

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!

[algrove]

In order to see how the SL3 handles the extremely wide M  18/3.8 lens, I shot the SL3 and M11 on a tripod with self timer within minutes of each other at ISO 100 and f5.6-8 @1/125 SS on SL3 and M11. Using C!, yes the M11 images came out warmer.  So it is not. big deal if you want the M11 file to look like the SL3 (or M10R) file decrease saturation and contrast. Conversely, if you want the SL3 file to look like the M11 file increase saturation and contrast. RAW files were not meant to be used without some PP. Jpegs I do not know since I do not shoot jpeg. When I export for the web in C1 I set it to whatever C1 considers a reasonable jpeg size so this site will not send me messages that the file is too big.

If there is interest I can download above images excluding an M10R image since I only mentioned it since many complain M11 images are too magenta versus their M10R files. Let me know.

[Chaemono]

Thanks, much appreciate it. I’ll take your word for it. At the end of the day, if you are shooting RAW, color is what you make it.

The more interesting question is, could the SL3 be the “better” M for some, if this is accurate:

https://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-SL3-Review-and-user-report-Page-1-mirrorless-fullframe-digital-camera.html

“Leica now specifically states that the sensor in the Leica SL3 is designed also for Leica M lenses. You can put Leica M lenses on many cameras other than Leica.…When you mount a Leica M lens on a sensor that is not designed for lens sitting that close to the focal plane, you get fringing, warping, blur and more in the corners and edges of the image.”

Tons of fringing is what makes the M there preferred body over the SL2/-S to shoot M lenses wide open IMO, plus size and weight. The Z7 fringes some but that can easily be dealt with. On the original SL, there was not more fringing than on an M body. Could Leica have fixed it? 

 

[Chaemono]

Double post 

 

Edited April 5, 2024 by Chaemono

[Sailronin]

On 3/30/2024 at 5:29 AM, Chaemono said:

No, Leica finally fixed the red channel in their FF cameras starting with the M11. 

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2018/04/03/april-lightroom-adobe-camera-raw-releases-new-profiles

“Our profiles incorporate deep imaging science and take into consideration the colors of the filters used on top of the sensors (the array of red, green, and blue filters that help an otherwise colorblind sensor “see” the colorful world around us), the specific sensitivity of the sensor used, the sensor’s characteristics in different lighting conditions and with different ISO values…”

To my eye, the absolute most accurate color "straight out of camera" comes from Hasselblad.  Their Hasselblad Natural Color Selection (HNCS) .fff files when opened in Phocus require virtually no work in post to get lovely skin tones and balanced nature scenes.  I can get to those tones with my SL2s or S(006) but it takes quite a bit of work in C1.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

19 minutes ago, Sailronin said:

To my eye, the absolute most accurate color "straight out of camera" comes from Hasselblad.  Their Hasselblad Natural Color Selection (HNCS) .fff files when opened in Phocus require virtually no work in post to get lovely skin tones and balanced nature scenes.  I can get to those tones with my SL2s or S(006) but it takes quite a bit of work in C1.

This is because Hasselblad are the only camera manufacturer to calibrate each sensor separately at the time of camera assembly. HNCS is a hardware and software colour pipeline that excels because every step is profiled or calibrated. This includes a large data file that's loaded into the camera for every HC and XCD lens.

In a colour managed processing workflow, nothing beats HNCS.

Gordon

p.s. I'm not having any significant issues with the SL3 colours in Lightroom. I like them better than the SL2 files, by some margin.

[Chaemono]

As I suspected, and as algrove reported above, SL3 has less warm but still an overall very pleasing presentation of colors. SL2-S colors look punchy. There is no way I can match the colors exactly. If I reduce saturation and contrast on the SL2-S files they start to look a bit anaemic. The SL3 colors are less warm but don't look washed out. You can see it in the yellow in the lower left hand corner, the orange in the upper left, and the greenish book on the bottom shelf. AWB is also better than with the SL2-S IMO. Keep in mind these are highly compressed.

SL2-S with 75 Noctilux @f5.6

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!

SL3 with the same lens

[Chaemono]

SL3 produces files with better DR at ISO 100 in high contrast scenes than the SL2-S to my eyes. There is visibly less purple fringing with the SL3 at and around the focus point at the border of extremely dark and extremely bright areas with the 75 Noctilux wide open which is quite an achievement considering its much smaller pixel size than the SL2-S' (blooming tends to be worst in cameras with tiny pixels according to Imatest).

I downsized the SL3 picture to match the size of the SL2-S file and then cropped.

SL2-S

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!

SL3

 

SL2-S cropped

 

SL3 cropped

 

Edited April 6, 2024 by Chaemono

[Chaemono]

Two more with the 75 Noctilux wide open opened in LR with just WB adjusted to match. These were not taken one after the other as I wasn't changing lenses after each shot. So the way light falls through the window will have an effect. Still, the SL2-S picture has a bit more contrast to my eyes. Nothing that can't be matched by the SL3.

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Chaemono]

I changed my mind and put myself on the list. Better AWB and colors as a starting point (need some contrast and vibrance depending on the lens), better DR (I saw it at ISO 100 vs. SL2-S, David Farkas showed it at ISO 200 vs. SL2 in a video review), and the IQ with M lenses are the main reasons. I never liked the way SL cameras rendered with M lenses either due to bokeh differences (original SL) vs. M and purple fringing (SL2/-S) but the SL3 sensor is absolutely outstanding with M lenses, so much so that I would prefer to use larger M lenses on the SL3 now (plus it has IBIS). 

The Z7 was the better M IMO for M lenses 50mm and longer but I hate everything about that camera except the sensor. So it never got much use. Z7 is 675g with battery vs. 850g for SL3 but the latter comes with a much better EVF, can be operated more fluidly, and is a joy to use compared to the Z7.