SL3: many discussions about form and function, but what about IQ?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Reading about the SL3, most “complaints” are about its form and function.

Having a SL2s adding a SL2 would make sense as the cameras work the same. Adding a SL3 would be very confusing if one shoots with two bodies.

But, if one has only the SL3, I guess one gets quickly used to the new form and functions.

Instead of adding the 2, I could replace the 2s with the 3.

Not doing video, so stills only, how is the IQ improvement over the 2(s)? Would this be a reason to upgrade? @medienfotograf says the images from the SL50lux looks nicer. What about long exposures? 

Curious to read about the IQ. At current, there is to much clutter about its design and charger (which in the end is prices the same as HB, so obviously not that bad).

[Advertisement]

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

[Jon Warwick]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Reading about the SL3, most “complaints” are about its form and function.

Having a SL2s adding a SL2 would make sense as the cameras work the same. Adding a SL3 would be very confusing if one shoots with two bodies.

But, if one has only the SL3, I guess one gets quickly used to the new form and functions.

Instead of adding the 2, I could replace the 2s with the 3.

Not doing video, so stills only, how is the IQ improvement over the 2(s)? Would this be a reason to upgrade? @medienfotograf says the images from the SL50lux looks nicer. What about long exposures? 

Curious to read about the IQ. At current, there is to much clutter about its design and charger (which in the end is prices the same as HB, so obviously not that bad).

Exactly what I’ve been thinking, ie, most reviews and comments that I’ve seen seem to gloss over the image quality difference with the SL2, and focus mainly on the handling differences. I used to have an SL2, and now have an M11 (I prefer the M11 sensor without hestitation, and IMHO think it provides more detail, and with a less digital rendering but with more “bite” to the images, better color tone separation, less noise, and very good highlights control). I’ve played with some DNG samples and taken my own images quickly off the SL3 now. Similar thoughts to what’ve I’ve seen so far from the SL3 to what I know in the M11, but with the benefit of the finest SL primes to add a bit more resolution and clean capture. This is nothing more than an initial and casual look, and I need to do more testing, but the sensor does seem stellar in the SL3 and pairs beautifully with the 35 SL APO that I was using each time. I found the rendering off the SL2 a bit brutally sharp and “digital” at times (as I do my GFX100s), and even needing to add Blur at times in post to dial it down but my initial response to the files off the SL3 is the rendering is gentler etc, and that for me is a welcome base to work off.

Edited March 10, 2024 by Jon Warwick

[Pelu2010]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Reading about the SL3, most “complaints” are about its form and function.

Having a SL2s adding a SL2 would make sense as the cameras work the same. Adding a SL3 would be very confusing if one shoots with two bodies.

But, if one has only the SL3, I guess one gets quickly used to the new form and functions.

Instead of adding the 2, I could replace the 2s with the 3.

Not doing video, so stills only, how is the IQ improvement over the 2(s)? Would this be a reason to upgrade? @medienfotograf says the images from the SL50lux looks nicer. What about long exposures? 

Curious to read about the IQ. At current, there is to much clutter about its design and charger (which in the end is prices the same as HB, so obviously not that bad).

that's why I will wait until the SL3-s comes. 

I would like to have the Q3 and the sl3-s with the same menu.

It's not that I can't handle it > it will definitely make a problem when I am under pressure. 

I send a lot of mails to Leica that the menu of M , SL and Q should be the same. Even with different features, but 

the position of menu items are crucial for me. As I try to remember their position. If this changes from device to device it makes me crazy. 

But this is complaining on a high level. 

 

[SrMi]

4 minutes ago, Pelu2010 said:

that's why I will wait until the SL3-s comes. 

I would like to have the Q3 and the sl3-s with the same menu.

It's not that I can't handle it > it will definitely make a problem when I am under pressure. 

I send a lot of mails to Leica that the menu of M , SL and Q should be the same. Even with different features, but 

the position of menu items are crucial for me. As I try to remember their position. If this changes from device to device it makes me crazy. 

But this is complaining on a high level. 

I expect that Q4 will have the same menu as SL3.

[Olaf_ZG]

24 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I expect that Q4 will have the same menu as SL3.

Looks like the design departments are not talking to each other… but what about IQ? Again we are drifting to form and function.

[Photoworks]

The image quality of the camera is so close that there is no reason to change SL2 to SL3
But in low ISO I still have to test DR.

I don't have access to Sl2s

 

[Manicouagan1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think part of there answer as to why little discussion of image quality is simply it seems to be so good and everything else seems good enough.  May I suggest looking at Reidreviews' comments on the SL3 (behind a pay wall).   Indoor basketball and volleyball are about the biggest challenges I photograph and the camera appears to be up to the challenge.  Think about this: Exposure value 7, ISO 10,000, players and balls flying through the air, 60,000,000 pixels, good focus and shadow detail.   

[Chaemono]

vor 40 Minuten schrieb Olaf_ZG:

Looks like the design departments are not talking to each other… but what about IQ? Again we are drifting to form and function.

If you care about ISO 3200 in high contrast scenes there is a sample 60 MP ARW file from the α7R IV in #30 and #31 here https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/303396-leica-sl2-dynamic-range/page/2/ that can be dowloaded. Arguably, the SL3 high ISO DNGs will be cleaner than the Sony but it many give you an idea how the ‘push-ability’ of high ISO 60 MP BSI sensor pictures compare to a 24 MP BSI sensor. 

 

[JohnSantaF4]

Isn’t the image quality affected by slow AF? An out of focus image has no quality, regardless of the form factor of the camera, right?

[SrMi]

42 minutes ago, JohnSantaF4 said:

Isn’t the image quality affected by slow AF? An out of focus image has no quality, regardless of the form factor of the camera, right?

I would say that the image quality is mostly affected by the photographer.

[LBJ2]

4 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Reading about the SL3, most “complaints” are about its form and function.

Having a SL2s adding a SL2 would make sense as the cameras work the same. Adding a SL3 would be very confusing if one shoots with two bodies.

But, if one has only the SL3, I guess one gets quickly used to the new form and functions.

Instead of adding the 2, I could replace the 2s with the 3.

Not doing video, so stills only, how is the IQ improvement over the 2(s)? Would this be a reason to upgrade? @medienfotograf says the images from the SL50lux looks nicer. What about long exposures? 

Curious to read about the IQ. At current, there is to much clutter about its design and charger (which in the end is prices the same as HB, so obviously not that bad).

Scroll down for some SL3 noise samples here:  JPEG and RAW ISO50- ISO100,000

"Noise

There are 12 ISO settings available on the Leica SL3 running from ISO 50-100,000. Here are some 100% crops which show the noise levels for each ISO setting, with JPEG on the left and RAW on the right."

*Full Size downloadable JPEG and RAW files at the bottom of the article. *Seems latest version of LRC supports SL3 DNG already as I am able to import and edit the sample SL3 DNG files from this article.

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/leica_sl3_review

 

Edited March 10, 2024 by LBJ2

[Jean-Michel]

I had an M9, now own an M-P and SL2, an SL3 could perhaps be purchased in the future. As far as I am concerned, the image quality of the M9 is as good as anything I owned in the last 5 plus decades of my photography. The image quality of the M-P and SL2 are equally fine or ‘better’ of course, especially in lower light and the ibis of the SL2 is amazing.  For my photography, and I print up to 20 by 30 inches, even the 18 mpx of the M9 are sufficient for most images. Like most, I do like new and better equipment, but I also think that there is not much Improvement possible for an electric kettle and that I have probably reached what is best in a camera for my stuff. Still. A gifted SL3 would not be unwelcome!

[Chaemono]

Image quality looks superb in the Photography Blog samples. With the LR AI Denoise function, the ISO 12500 picture with exposure +0.64, shadows +44 and highlights -62 looks good. AI turns the not so good high ISO performance of this sensor to a really decent one. Of course, there are no extreme high contrast pictures in there at high ISO but the DR seems so good that highlights are not blown while the dark areas are not severely underexposed. And these were all with the 24-70. The SL Summicron lenses would do even better in terms of controlling the highlights IMO. 

For those who need high ISO performance and some 'push-ability of high ISO files, AI denoising makes an upgrade from the SL2 well worth it, I think. The Shell picture does get an over-the-top HDR look with exposure +2.2, shadows lifted to the max, and highlights pulled back all the way, but this is taking it to an extreme and I'm not sure how the SL2 at IS0 320/400 would have done there. 

Edited March 10, 2024 by Chaemono

[Stevejack]

I know what you mean, I've noticed the same thing in reviews - but I've always seen my Leica cameras as a user experience thing, rather than a technical thing. It's the camera I want to pick up and use because it's just such a nice experience to take photos with it so I find form + function the most important aspects for them to get right.

I think very few of us ever push the limits of our current gear. I tend to use my Leicas more like film cameras... Low ISO and shutter speeds, rarely needing to crop too much, so I don't really gain much out of an upgrade other than quality of life improvements. 

I do bounce off the limits of my Sony camera all the time because I'm trying to push it beyond what it's capable of for small birds + insects in flight. If I were only photographing motorsports or portraits, I wouldn't get anywhere near those limits.

I would upgrade my Sony in a heartbeat if something more capable came along tomorrow, whether I enjoyed using that new camera or not... But with Leica it needs to nail the form + function first, and secondly give me some improvements in other aspects. Leica isn't the camera I pick up when I have something technically challenging to do, it's the camera I pick up when I want to enjoy the process of taking photos. 

 

[hansvons]

15 hours ago, Photoworks said:

The image quality of the camera is so close that there is no reason to change SL2 to SL3

I have neither shot with the SL2 nor the SL3, but I guess @Photoworks is right with the assessment that IQ is so similar that in the real world (online photos, prints) the difference is indistinguishable. The SL2-S is a different beast as it‘s designed for best fidelity in challenging environments with a trade-off in resolution which will be visible on large prints but not online or regular prints.
In general, IQ improvements became only incremental in the last decade and that counts also for the SL3.
 

As so often, the question is, what do you want to achieve? And that’s where the new design features come into place, most notably the articulated screen, which come in handy for certain shots. But swapping two cameras, a high-resolution and a high-fidelity camera, for one articulated screen seems to me quite a trade-off.

However, if you want to clean up your shelf, only need one camera, and the fidelity virtues of the SL2-S are not crucial to your work, your suggested trade could be meaningful. 
Lastly, for many, the photography thing is an exciting hobby, and playing with the latest and greatest, pixel peeping and all that are an essential part of the game. There’s nothing wrong with that. 

[Geoff C. Bassett]

To not beat around the bush: the SL3 is significantly better than the SL2 for image quality. Namely dynamic range in highlights has at least another 1.5 stops of information, and the shadows are cleaner. Additionally high ISO is much improved. 

It terms of solely image quality, it’s a massive step up.

[huwm]

remind me of my old trade

’it doesn’t matter if it’s statistically significant if it’s not clinically significant’

oh

and we all know about confirmation bias eh?

Edited March 11, 2024 by huwm
ps

[Photoworks]

I wanted the SL3 to be so much better, believe me, I put down money for it. But I think it is nice to work with something new and see what is possible.

I have been shooting the camera in different situations, I do that with every equipment I buy, to find out the strengths and weaknesses and pick this camera for what it is good for.

you have to ignore the marketing materials and form a true opinion.

Is image quality better? a little. DR? I can't see a difference, maybe the software is getting so much better.

Video quality is better, bigger batteries help, and tilt screen. 

to me, the SL2 and SL2s are still valid cameras and don't shot their age.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Smogg]

17 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

I wanted the SL3 to be so much better, believe me, I put down money for it. But I think it is nice to work with something new and see what is possible.

I have been shooting the camera in different situations, I do that with every equipment I buy, to find out the strengths and weaknesses and pick this camera for what it is good for.

you have to ignore the marketing materials and form a true opinion.

Is image quality better? a little. DR? I can't see a difference, maybe the software is getting so much better.

Video quality is better, bigger batteries help, and tilt screen. 

to me, the SL2 and SL2s are still valid cameras and don't shot their age.

I advise you to pay attention to the noise pattern of the SL3. Most likely it is the same as on the M11. Then it is very organic and much better than the SL2, whose noise looks very unattractive, very digital

[Dr. G]

12 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I advise you to pay attention to the noise pattern of the SL3. Most likely it is the same as on the M11. Then it is very organic and much better than the SL2, whose noise looks very unattractive, very digital

This is ISO 10,000 on the SL3.  I copped my dishwasher out of the left side, but didn't touch the top or bottom of the image, so the amount of noise shouldn't be changed.  First is RAW straight out of camera, resized to 1600 on the long edge and converted to jpg.  

 

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!