SL3 , am I the only one ?

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

29 minutes ago, SrMi said:

No camera applies dual native ISO at that high ISO, which is mostly around 400 or 640, IIRC. If they did, the range from ISO 400 (typical DCG point) to 6400 (your suggested DCG point) would have too much noise, and it would not show any improvement at ISO 6400 and above.

Note that Leica M11 applies dual conversion gain (DCG) quite early at ISO 200.

It is unclear to me how the engineers picked the point to apply the DCG.

 

Black Magic Pocket 6k has the dual ISO a 400 and 3200

[Advertisement]

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

[BernardC]

59 minutes ago, SrMi said:

No, that is not what the graph says, and I explained it in post #47.
The graph shows the maximum possible PDR when using a given ISO. It does not show change in PDR when changing ISO alone.

DR is the difference between a maximum and a minimum. PDR’s minimum and maximum are defined on P2P’s site.

Here's what I found on PtP:

Quote

My definition of Photographic Dynamic Range is a low endpoint with an SNR of 20 when adjusted for the appropriate Circle Of Confusion (COC) for the sensor.

For the D300 the SNR values on this curve is for a 5.5 micron square photosite.

To correct for a COC of .022mm we are looking for a log₂ SNR value of 2.49.

Clear as mud?

As I said earlier, PtP use their own definition of dynamic range which is different from industry standards, or even from what you might see by looking at raw files. That's fine: their site, their choice.

I find that PtP's numbers are only somewhat informative if you look at the maximum value on their curves. Everything below that isn't. For instance, they claim that the SL3 has less than 6 stops of "PDR" at EI 6400. That surprises me, but it should be easy enough to test with a calibrated step wedge. 6 stops is less than the reflective range of a glossy black and white print.

[SrMi]

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

According to https://www.cined.com/panasonic-lumix-s5-ii-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/

640 and 4000 for  V-Log. 

Yes, but that is for VLog. I was talking only about still photography, which P2P measurements apply to. S5 II's dual conversion gain kicks in around ISO 640 and NR is applied above ISO 16000.

VLog's ISO 640 corresponds to ISO 100 for still (base ISO). VLog's ISO 4000 corresponds to ISO 640 for still (DCG point).

[SrMi]

13 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

Black Magic Pocket 6k has the dual ISO a 400 and 3200

That is for VLog. It does not apply to still photography. No still camera has the base ISO at 400.

[SrMi]

15 minutes ago, BernardC said:

Clear as mud?

The description is straightforward but requires prior photographic science and technology knowledge.

16 minutes ago, BernardC said:

As I said earlier, PtP use their own definition of dynamic range which is different from industry standards, or even from what you might see by looking at raw files. That's fine: their site, their choice.

That is true. The main problem remains that people misuse that data (like a drunk man uses a lamppost). It measures what it says. Like most measurements, it cannot simply translate to which camera is better. However, that is not what we have been arguing about (how to interpret the graph).

19 minutes ago, BernardC said:

I find that PtP's numbers are only somewhat informative if you look at the maximum value on their curves. Everything below that isn't. For instance, they claim that the SL3 has less than 6 stops of "PDR" at EI 6400. That surprises me, but it should be easy enough to test with a calibrated step wedge. 6 stops is less than the reflective range of a glossy black and white print.

Fair points. 

The problem is that some use P2P data as the sole point of camera evaluation. P2P measures what it says, but better ways to evaluate a camera certainly exist. 

[Photoworks]

43 minutes ago, SrMi said:

That is for VLog. It does not apply to still photography. No still camera has the base ISO at 400.

that is BRAW video and images

v-log is only a Panasonic log profile

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

One thing that makes me wonder is that the camera appears to use traditional noise reduction. Surely dual gain would lead to better results? 

There is dual gain, reflected on the bump at about ISO 200-260.

[algrove]

On 4/16/2024 at 11:31 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

How do you *block* it? I can't see an option to disable any of the dials.

Gordon

Customize Cont rol/Dials/Dial Lock.

At this point it locks all dials. I would hope in the future one could select specific dials to lock or not lock.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, algrove said:

Customize Cont rol/Dials/Dial Lock.

At this point it locks all dials. I would hope in the future one could select specific dials to lock or not lock.

That won’t work for me. Mind you I’ve just left it set to ISO as well as having a custom button for it as well. (aarrgghh) So far it’s not getting in the way at least.

Gordon

[Ken Abrahams]

On 4/17/2024 at 9:03 PM, Photoworks said:

I must disagree with Hans on this one. Most camera files look best when exposed correctly. Pushing files in post does not improve the image, it will show more noise and artifacts. Plus you are reducing DR quickly.

I think you have to see what the relationship is between the sensor and the software of each camera. and I would suggest testing it for yourself. All SL cameras are not created equal, the SL3 is better than SL2 and SL2s in any iSO.

Ken needs to nail the exposure in the M10M otherwise the highlights are gone. The SL3 is in color, so I can recover a bit more, but don't overexpose too much.
For Ken, I would try setting auto ISO and limiting the Auto ISO setting, with the combination of Highlight metering it should resolve in good images.

Thanks for this, it may take some time for me to give this auto iso a good testing. Anything that helps the challenging task of setting the exposures and ISO  while shooting at 1.4 is helpful.  I have my clipping set a bit lower and constantly checking the result so while walking, the next ten images along the way are exposing correctly. Around the corner (block) I might reset to a completely different set of circumstances. I probably have five different changes of lighting so if I travel the same path that also become routine. I have tried the 4 stop ND filter but I am not confident on the brand and four stops is just too much. Not to many over exposed shots these days and I enjoy the darks found in subways.  I do long for winter when the lighting is more even.     

[ZHNL]

On 4/18/2024 at 7:12 AM, BernardC said:

Here's what I found on PtP:

Clear as mud?

As I said earlier, PtP use their own definition of dynamic range which is different from industry standards, or even from what you might see by looking at raw files. That's fine: their site, their choice.

I find that PtP's numbers are only somewhat informative if you look at the maximum value on their curves. Everything below that isn't. For instance, they claim that the SL3 has less than 6 stops of "PDR" at EI 6400. That surprises me, but it should be easy enough to test with a calibrated step wedge. 6 stops is less than the reflective range of a glossy black and white print.

As I said earlier, PtP use their own definition of dynamic range which is different from industry standards, or even from what you might see by looking at raw files. That's fine: their site, their choice.

What is industry standard? How Leica can claim achieve 15 stop dynamic range with 14 bit file?

I find that PtP's numbers are only somewhat informative if you look at the maximum value on their curves. Everything below that isn't. For instance, they claim that the SL3 has less than 6 stops of "PDR" at EI 6400. That surprises me, but it should be easy enough to test with a calibrated step wedge. 6 stops is less than the reflective range of a glossy black and white print.

Why is that? the methodology is the same, they plotted peak DR range one can achieve at given ISO.  At ISO6400, assume base ISO SL3 is 100, that means 6 stop gain applied. With same headroom of ADC, the peak DR has to be about 6 stop, (if we trust SO400 10 stop performance from there website, assume this is the dual gain setting point, from ISO400 to ISO6400, there should 4 stop gain applied, with the same headroom, DR will be 10-4= 6 stop) nothing surprising here. 

Edited April 21, 2024 by ZHNL

[Chaemono]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb ZHNL:

As I said earlier, PtP use their own definition of dynamic range which is different from industry standards, or even from what you might see by looking at raw files. That's fine: their site, their choice.

How Leica can claim achieve 15 stop dynamic range with 14 bit file?

Based on search results, here is the answer to your question:

A camera can have 15 stops of dynamic range even with a 14-bit file due to the way the dynamic range is calculated and utilized. The key points are:

- Dynamic range is measured in stops, which is a logarithmic scale. Each stop represents a doubling or halving of light intensity.[1][2][3]

- The number of stops of dynamic range is calculated as log2(full well capacity / read noise). For example, a camera with a full well capacity of 32,000 electrons and a read noise of 4 electrons would have 12.97 stops, or roughly 13 stops of dynamic range.[1]

- The optimal A/D (analog-to-digital) conversion bit depth to match this 13-stop dynamic range would be 14-bits, not 16-bits. 12-bits would lose precision, while 16-bits would be overkill.[1]

- However, some manufacturers may use clever techniques like dual-gain readout to effectively extend the dynamic range beyond the 14-bit ADC, potentially reaching 15 stops.[1][5]

- Additionally, when images are saved as 16-bit files, the extra bits are often just padding zeros, not additional meaningful data. The actual dynamic range is still limited by the sensor's capabilities, not the file format.[1][2]

So in summary, a 14-bit camera sensor can achieve 15 stops of dynamic range through advanced readout techniques, even though the file format is 14-bit. The bit depth does not directly equate to the number of stops of dynamic range.

Sources
[1] Matching bit-depth with dynamic range - AAVSO https://www.aavso.org/matching-bit-depth-dynamic-range
[2] Real world difference between 14bit and 16bit - Cloudy Nights https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/847673-real-world-difference-between-14bit-and-16bit/
[3] How to Use the Full Photographical Dynamic Range of Your Camera https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/how-to-use-the-full-dynamic-range-of-your-camera
[4] What is 'dynamic range' in photography? Here's our explainer... https://focus.picfair.com/articles/dynamic-range-explained
[5] A7Riv - how do you get 15 stops DR from 14-bit data?: Sony Alpha Full ... https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4414514

Edited April 22, 2024 by Chaemono

[ZHNL]

2 hours ago, Chaemono said:

Based on search results, here is the answer to your question:

A camera can have 15 stops of dynamic range even with a 14-bit file due to the way the dynamic range is calculated and utilized. The key points are:

- Dynamic range is measured in stops, which is a logarithmic scale. Each stop represents a doubling or halving of light intensity.[1][2][3]

- The number of stops of dynamic range is calculated as log2(full well capacity / read noise). For example, a camera with a full well capacity of 32,000 electrons and a read noise of 4 electrons would have 12.97 stops, or roughly 13 stops of dynamic range.[1]

- The optimal A/D (analog-to-digital) conversion bit depth to match this 13-stop dynamic range would be 14-bits, not 16-bits. 12-bits would lose precision, while 16-bits would be overkill.[1]

- However, some manufacturers may use clever techniques like dual-gain readout to effectively extend the dynamic range beyond the 14-bit ADC, potentially reaching 15 stops.[1][5]

- Additionally, when images are saved as 16-bit files, the extra bits are often just padding zeros, not additional meaningful data. The actual dynamic range is still limited by the sensor's capabilities, not the file format.[1][2]

So in summary, a 14-bit camera sensor can achieve 15 stops of dynamic range through advanced readout techniques, even though the file format is 14-bit. The bit depth does not directly equate to the number of stops of dynamic range.

Sources
[1] Matching bit-depth with dynamic range - AAVSO https://www.aavso.org/matching-bit-depth-dynamic-range
[2] Real world difference between 14bit and 16bit - Cloudy Nights https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/847673-real-world-difference-between-14bit-and-16bit/
[3] How to Use the Full Photographical Dynamic Range of Your Camera https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/how-to-use-the-full-dynamic-range-of-your-camera
[4] What is 'dynamic range' in photography? Here's our explainer... https://focus.picfair.com/articles/dynamic-range-explained
[5] A7Riv - how do you get 15 stops DR from 14-bit data?: Sony Alpha Full ... https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4414514

Thanks for the google search. That was not a question. That question illustrate there is no industry standard for DR definition. 

The Sony sensor used for SL3 itself don't have 15 stop DR which limited by current sensor tech. For a 14 bit file captured, quantization error limitation means DR can't be exceed 14 stop. There are ways to achieve that: oversampling or multiple capture (HDR)  For example, Leica's own high resolution mode can capture 1+ stop more dynamic range if you allow multiple capture and averaging the noise. Or if down sample the 64M image, for example to 8M which I believe Leica used for their marketing material to given 15 stop DR but what is the target output size? what is acceptable noise level for DR spec?  I don't know.

P2P downsample all image to the same target output size for their DR plot (8M?) This is the only way to evaluate DR because resolution of digital camera are all over the place. That is the way to level the battle field to give an objective evaluation on DR. Even with that, they have certain criteria for acceptable noise level hence their DR for SL3 is actually less than 12 stop even down size to 8M(to be confirmed) file. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

No it isn’t. It’s a daft system. Absolutely NO ONE buys a SL3 or A7R5 to shoot it at 8MP. P2P’s measurements have exactly zero real world use. Not only that they’re a raw score. Ignoring things like PDAF banding etc that does affect real world USABLE DR. You get better information from DP Reviews highly flawed test chart. Those using P2P’s charts to prove a point only prove they have no experience with the cameras they’re procrastinating about.

According to P2P an iPhone 14 has as much DR as an A7R5 at ISO 6400. If you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Gordon

[ZHNL]

26 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

No it isn’t. It’s a daft system. Absolutely NO ONE buys a SL3 or A7R5 to shoot it at 8MP. P2P’s measurements have exactly zero real world use. Not only that they’re a raw score. Ignoring things like PDAF banding etc that does affect real world USABLE DR. You get better information from DP Reviews highly flawed test chart. Those using P2P’s charts to prove a point only prove they have no experience with the cameras they’re procrastinating about.

According to P2P an iPhone 14 has as much DR as an A7R5 at ISO 6400. If you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

Gordon

We are not talking about resolution. How you determine sensor DR? at pixel level, if you don't consider target output size, there are zero difference for DR say comparing 100M X2D to 64M A7R5 or any APS c camera  with 3.7um pixel for a given sensor tech. 

What is special about A7R5 DR ISO6400, why you think it should beat iPhone 14 at base ISO in dynamic range department? how you really compare them if you don't compare at same target output size?  

[jrp]

One thing that I find frustrating about the way that auto iso works is that exposure bracketing seems to vary iso and not shutter time.  Since the sensor is more or less linear, the three exposure bracketed pictures are more or less equivalent, undermining the purpose of bracketing.  

[costa43]

I use the sl2s so have no first hand experience with the sl3 but I think the iso wheel in principle is a good idea. Saying that, surely it should be in addition to how things worked on the previous bodies. So it is an extra choice rather than an alternative one, which is what seems to be the case here.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, ZHNL said:

We are not talking about resolution. How you determine sensor DR? at pixel level, if you don't consider target output size, there are zero difference for DR say comparing 100M X2D to 64M A7R5 or any APS c camera  with 3.7um pixel for a given sensor tech. 

What is special about A7R5 DR ISO6400, why you think it should beat iPhone 14 at base ISO in dynamic range department? how you really compare them if you don't compare at same target output size?  

You don’t. How can you not take resolution into account when choosing a sensor? And nobody is deciding between an X2D and an iPhone. It’s a stupid metric.

I’d give it some consideration, despite its limitations as an accurate indicator, if they made the DR measurements at several output sizes. But they don’t 8MP is a useless measurement. People read this and make judgments on sensor IQ and those assumptions are often wrong becausee the data’s flawed for real world use.

And as an experiment I did compare my A7R5 to an iPhone at ISO 6400. Not even close. Even at 8MP. Not to mention the phone relied on computational factors to keep its DR reasonable. So not actually a real sensor measurement at all. But P2P doesn’t mention that.

Gordon

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Chaemono]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb ZHNL:

Thanks for the google search.

You’re welcome. Google search is the best.

vor 6 Stunden schrieb ZHNL:

…That was not a question.

There is a question mark at the end of your sentence.

Edited April 22, 2024 by Chaemono

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, jrp said:

One thing that I find frustrating about the way that auto iso works is that exposure bracketing seems to vary iso and not shutter time.  Since the sensor is more or less linear, the three exposure bracketed pictures are more or less equivalent, undermining the purpose of bracketing.  

that is the same in every camera I have used in the last 10 years.

the only two varien in bracketing are ISO and TIME, you lock on or the other for your designed result.