P2P published SL3 measurements

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting takeaways:

- ISO below 100 is not native and has lowered PDR.

- Dual gain starts at ISO 318 (320 per Leica's manual p. 337).

- ISOs higher than 6400 have NR applied.

- almost ISO invariant between 640 and 6400.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica SL3

Edited March 12, 2024 by SrMi

[Chun Chang]

Similar to Q3 then except noise reduction kick in earlier.

[MediaFotografie]

…and very similar to M11

[Miltz]

Very odd result here. Perhaps this is the difference in seeing and didn’t know what it was.

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!

[Smogg]

14 minutes ago, MediaFotografie said:

…and very similar to M11

The M11 wins by 2/3 stops DR and does not suppress noise at high ISOs. For me it's completely different behavior

[nicci78]

P2P results are not really usable for comparison, as stated on the website itself. Because ISO base value is not measured. You'll have to wait for DXOmark tests, which measure real ISO value. 

For example exemple for a given exposure Q3 may report 100 ISO whereas M11 will give us 50 and SL3 160. So without real ISO measured it is impossible to make any comparison. 

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

However what's interesting is that Q3 is applying baked in noise reduction into RAW from 25,600 ISO and upward

SL3 is worst ! Starting NR from 8,000 ISO. Very disappointing. People were criticising Pentax then Canon for doing baked in NR, now Leica has joined the club.

Previously Leica were using scaling for Q2/SL2 47MP sensor at higher ISO, which were kinda ok. But NR is a destructive process. 

Q3 and SL3 ISO 50 is a pulled value. So just stick to ISO 100. 

M11 sensor seems so much better : real ISO 64 and no baked-in NR. 

Sony is baking in NR from 16,000 ISO inside A7R IV and V RAWs

No NR for Sigma fp L, but its ISO 160 seems to behave like ISO 100 for Sony A7R V and SL3

Edited March 12, 2024 by nicci78

[nicci78]

the real question is why SL3 and Q3 need Noise reduction baked  into RAW when M11 doesn't ?

Is it due to PDAF and constant liveview ? 

[AZN]

Thanks for this @SrMi

It's interesting to compare the Leica SL generations: SL (Typ 601), SL2 and SL3

P2P comparison

Was surprised that the SL2 had slightly worse dynamic range than the SL and SL3.  Interestingly at ISO 200 the old SL has the same DR as the new SL3 😃

 

[Chaemono]

vor 59 Minuten schrieb nicci78:

the real question is why SL3 and Q3 need Noise reduction baked  into RAW when M11 doesn't ?

Is it due to PDAF and constant liveview ? 

LUMIX S5 II looks similar to SL3 except that the dual ISO kicks in at 640. PDAF must be the reason.

Edited March 12, 2024 by Chaemono

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, AZN said:

Was surprised that the SL2 had slightly worse dynamic range than the SL and SL3.  Interestingly at ISO 200 the old SL has the same DR as the new SL3

Don't forget that P2P is crowd-sourced content, so terms like "slightly" and "the same" have no meaning. You are comparing tests done in completely different conditions. P2P results a general idea of the response curve, but you can't use them to say stuff like "camera A has 0.2 stops less DR at ISO 200 than camera B."

[SrMi]

P2P is also too often used like a drunk man uses a lamppost: more for support than for illumination.

[AZN]

10 hours ago, BernardC said:

Don't forget that P2P is crowd-sourced content, so terms like "slightly" and "the same" have no meaning. You are comparing tests done in completely different conditions. P2P results a general idea of the response curve, but you can't use them to say stuff like "camera A has 0.2 stops less DR at ISO 200 than camera B."

Your comment is stated as incontrovertible fact.  Evidence?  Or just your opinion?

Notice that I took the effort to post a link to the P2P comparison.  Make of it as you will.

Edited March 12, 2024 by AZN

[TeleElmar135mm]

vor 12 Stunden schrieb AZN:

Thanks for this @SrMi

It's interesting to compare the Leica SL generations: SL (Typ 601), SL2 and SL3

P2P comparison

Was surprised that the SL2 had slightly worse dynamic range than the SL and SL3.  Interestingly at ISO 200 the old SL has the same DR as the new SL3 😃

 

and look, how good the SL2-s is in this test

 

 

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 12, 2024 by TeleElmar135mm

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, AZN said:

Your comment is stated as incontrovertible fact.  Evidence?  Or just your opinion?

What did you disagree with exactly? P2P is crowd sourced, their tests are run by end-users all over the world. You can learn more about that on their site. 

That has some positive aspects of course, especially when a popular camera is tested dozens of times over several years.

On the other hand each test is run in different conditions, at different temperatures, with different lenses, different firmware, shooting test patterns on different monitors that are calibrated differently. 

My point is that the shape of the resulting curve is probably representative, but don't get hung-up on tiny differences. A fraction of a stop difference between two curves isn't enough to draw a conclusion. 

That goes double for a camera that came-out last week and got a firmware update this week, of course. 

[ZHNL]

39 minutes ago, BernardC said:

On the other hand each test is run in different conditions, at different temperatures, with different lenses, different firmware, shooting test patterns on different monitors that are calibrated differently. 

My point is that the shape of the resulting curve is probably representative, but don't get hung-up on tiny differences. A fraction of a stop difference between two curves isn't enough to draw a conclusion. 

Here, I only see temperature could be a potential variable affect this result. I don't see lens, firmware or monitor can affect sensor DR performance. The procedure is straightforward and objective. By measure black frame read noise over different ISO, you can easily determine the where is analog gain (true ISO), where is digital gain kick in (extended ISO), where is dual gain location. and based on max white level sensor recorded, you can estimate sensor dynamic range. All based on raw data. 

There is copy variation for read noise, but first of all, the sensor has spec, copy variation has to be within spec. (I expect that has to be small) Then, copy variation just means the camera in your hand could have that performance too. 

I agree we can't trust ISO number in above comparison because that ISO number are manufacture set.  So, I wouldn't use that curve to compare SL3 ISO3200 to say A7R5 ISO3200 or even SL2 ISO 3200 results. Other than that, DR in P2P reported  is most likely valid.

Not direct to anyone here but I just don't see the logic that people credit M11 DR result from their website at the same time question SL3 results. I think the difference is most likely due to lack of video and AF for M11.      

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

On the other hand each test is run in different conditions, at different temperatures, with different lenses, different firmware, shooting test patterns on different monitors that are calibrated differently. 

FWIW, Bill has collected data from different people for the same cameras, and the results did not vary significantly.

That said, a 1/3 stop difference is not relevant.

[AZN]

3 hours ago, TeleElmar135mm said:

and look, how good the SL2-s is in this test

Yes - agree.  Although there seems to be an undercurrent in this thread from some posters that the tests cannot be trusted/ believed if your particular camera doesn't do well 😃

 

[jaapv]

My conclusion as a person who takes photographs of real life instead of test charts: It does not make the slightest difference from a DR point of view which camera you use.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

My conclusion as a person who takes photographs of real life instead of test charts: It does not make the slightest difference from a DR point of view which camera you use.

correct, but that's if one knows how to take photos properly i.e the correct exposure/aperture/shutter speed/iso..

its usually the people who like "Auto everything" that complain, have problems and seem to rarely read the manual.

 

Edited March 13, 2024 by frame-it