SL3 - A case of what could have been(s)

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/28/2024 at 1:20 AM, trickness said:

I’m curious - where does the noise on the SL3 start to really be obtrusive? I find on anything above 800 it’s kind of obnoxious on the SL2. Would be lovely if it started to get bothersome at 6400 or higher.

Can’t speak for the SL3, but I played with Q3 files, which share the same sensor, and I find noise still acceptable at 6400. I’d expect the same results on the SL3.
I agree that the SL2 noise is terrible, that was my reason to switch to a SL2-S.

[SrMi]

3 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Can’t speak for the SL3, but I played with Q3 files, which share the same sensor, and I find noise still acceptable at 6400. I’d expect the same results on the SL3.
I agree that the SL2 noise is terrible, that was my reason to switch to a SL2-S.

Regardless of the camera, I tend to apply Adobe's Denoise AI to any worthy image taken above ISO 400 (with varying slider values).

[LeicaR10]

Trickness,   You might want to watch the last Red Dot Forum SL3 video where Josh Lehrer demonstrates the noise levels and ISOs.  It might give you a better feeling of what he found. Its more towards the 47:00 minute mark of the video too.  r/ Mark

Try:  

 

Edited March 29, 2024 by LeicaR10

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 3/28/2024 at 12:20 PM, trickness said:

I’m curious - where does the noise on the SL3 start to really be obtrusive? I find on anything above 800 it’s kind of obnoxious on the SL2. Would be lovely if it started to get bothersome at 6400 or higher.

3200 for me. I see some colour degredation at 6400.

Gordon

[Chaemono]

The “Red Dot Forum Camera Talk: Leica SL3 - A Closer Look” video on ISO comparisons between SL2 and SL3 is partly a bunch of bull, IMO. They match settings, not exposure, then process the files - we don‘t know how - and say ‘hey, look, the SL2 blows highlights at ISO 200 whereas the SL3 doesn’t.’ Weh, yeah, if you overexposure, duh.

[la1402]

9 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

The “Red Dot Forum Camera Talk: Leica SL3 - A Closer Look” video on ISO comparisons between SL2 and SL3 is partly a bunch of bull, IMO. They match settings, not exposure, then process the files - we don‘t know how - and say ‘hey, look, the SL2 blows highlights at ISO 200 whereas the SL3 doesn’t.’ Weh, yeah, if you overexposure, duh.

Yeah well, independent on what they did,my Q2 was similar. If you exposed to protect highlights and then pushed  shadows in post, things got ugly easily. At first glance, my SL3 behaves much better. 

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 32 Minuten schrieb la1402:

Yeah well, independent on what they did,my Q2 was similar. If you exposed to protect highlights and then pushed  shadows in post, things got ugly easily. At first glance, my SL3 behaves much better. 

Pushed shadows noise with the SL2 sensor at ISO 200 was never an issue. Besides, the test scene they are using has hardly any shadows in it. I think, it’s a buch of marketing bull.

[la1402]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Pushed shadows noise with the SL2 sensor at ISO 200 was never an issue. Besides, the test scene they are using has hardly any shadows in it. I think, it’s a buch of marketing bull.

No. But we are talking high ISO and above 800 it was ugly. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

9 hours ago, la1402 said:

Yeah well, independent on what they did,my Q2 was similar. If you exposed to protect highlights and then pushed  shadows in post, things got ugly easily. At first glance, my SL3 behaves much better. 

Yes, The SL3 files appear more robust and flexible. More like the M11 than Q3.

Gordon

[Dipal]

On 3/28/2024 at 9:20 AM, trickness said:

I’m curious - where does the noise on the SL3 start to really be obtrusive? I find on anything above 800 it’s kind of obnoxious on the SL2. Would be lovely if it started to get bothersome at 6400 or higher.

As others have mentioned, you can really see the noise at ISO 6400 and above. 

[Dipal]

I have another observation (repeat but I want to put it out). The screen brightness is really quite terrible when used in bright sunlight. It is very hot nowadays in Singapore and I was out with my kids yesterday. The screen was barely visible (at full brightness) and I kept thinking why am I underexposing  
So as of now, if you're shooting in bright sun, you must use the viewfinder. Which, kind of defeats the purpose of the articulating screen lol   

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, Dipal said:

I have another observation (repeat but I want to put it out). The screen brightness is really quite terrible when used in bright sunlight. It is very hot nowadays in Singapore and I was out with my kids yesterday. The screen was barely visible (at full brightness) and I kept thinking why am I underexposing  
So as of now, if you're shooting in bright sun, you must use the viewfinder. Which, kind of defeats the purpose of the articulating screen lol   

Composing with rear LCD is always a problem in bright sunlight. At least it is with all cameras that I owned.

Judging exposure by the brightness in the viewfinder or LCD is a big no-no.

[Smogg]

15 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Composing with rear LCD is always a problem in bright sunlight. At least it is with all cameras that I owned.

Judging exposure by the brightness in the viewfinder or LCD is a big no-no.

With Leica m10, m11 this is not a problem, since you can enable exposure emulation only when the shutter button is pressed halfway. It's surprising that such a feature was not included in SL3.

[Hanno]

40 minutes ago, Smogg said:

With Leica m10, m11 this is not a problem, since you can enable exposure emulation only when the shutter button is pressed halfway. It's surprising that such a feature was not included in SL3.

It is included.

Turn on enhanced live view mode.

p122 in the English SL3 manual for reference.

[Dipal]

55 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Composing with rear LCD is always a problem in bright sunlight. At least it is with all cameras that I owned.

Judging exposure by the brightness in the viewfinder or LCD is a big no-no.

Agree with you on the judging exposure part. 

Disagree with you on the composing with rear LCD part. Depends on situations and demands. 

[SrMi]

15 minutes ago, Dipal said:

Agree with you on the judging exposure part. 

Disagree with you on the composing with rear LCD part. Depends on situations and demands. 

Then you agree on both parts 😁 as I wrote that rear LCD is hard to use only in very bright light.

 

[keeping_a_balance]

4 hours ago, Dipal said:

I have another observation (repeat but I want to put it out). The screen brightness is really quite terrible when used in bright sunlight. It is very hot nowadays in Singapore and I was out with my kids yesterday. The screen was barely visible (at full brightness) and I kept thinking why am I underexposing  
So as of now, if you're shooting in bright sun, you must use the viewfinder. Which, kind of defeats the purpose of the articulating screen lol   

Have you ever had a camera with good LCD brightness/performance for bright days?

[SrMi]

On 3/29/2024 at 9:45 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Yes, The SL3 files appear more robust and flexible. More like the M11 than Q3.

Gordon

According to Bill Claff's observations, Q3 uses only 13 bits instead of 14, like SL3 and M11 cameras. That could matter at lower ISOs, but probably not by much. However, it indicates that Q3 has different in-camera processing.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2024 by SrMi

[Dipal]

17 hours ago, keeping_a_balance said:

Have you ever had a camera with good LCD brightness/performance for bright days?

Well, yes I have. I know where you're coming from. But this SL3 screen visibility outdoor is really poor. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[keeping_a_balance]

2 hours ago, Dipal said:

Well, yes I have. I know where you're coming from. But this SL3 screen visibility outdoor is really poor. 

… Can you share which camera it was… I am genuinely curious.  

Every camera I have had is garbage in bright sun… the ever lasting quest to find a perfect camera…