SL3 Viewfinder V's Reality

[Leslie22]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm new to the SL3 , I'm finding that I'm tending to shoot one full stop under to achieve close to the brightness I see in the actual scene.

Is it viewfinder brightness , or perhaps the exposure metering on the camera. I seem to be happier with the results at one stop under.

And is there a way of setting the camera permanently to one stop under ?

[Advertisement]

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

[Jonathan Levin]

Leslie.

I have been playing around with various light metering settings. Back in the film Leica M^ days, my metering was based on 2/3 highlight, 1/3 shadow. This gave me exposures I liked. With the SL3 I was testing metering using Center weighted, but like you, still find the highlights a bit "hot".

I have been testing out the "Highlight Weighted" metering setting. This might be what you are looking for. Personally, I like the Highlight Weighted.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Under Camera Settings>>Display Settings you can adjust the EVF brightness if it’s off from what you’re seeing in the final images. ie; an difference in the EVF view to the image.

If it’s a difference from your naked eye to the EVF image AND final shot image then try highlight metering.

Gordon

[Leslie22]

Thank you for your replies , I will continue to "fiddle" with the settings , however I find 1 stop under seems to solve the problem , but that's certainly not a long term solution.

[Dr. G]

I've always shot slightly underexposed with my SL2-S and now my SL3.  I find that color saturation/fidelity and contrast is slightly better at anywhere from 1/3 to 1 full stop underexposed depending on the scene.  

[Coral Palm]

Things have changed since early digital days but I still try to expose to the right of center in the histogram as that is where the most data is. Things much better now as previously underexposed would introduce noise into file bringing up the exposure.  So expose to the right just bring down exposure/histogram and colors will pop and all good. BTW complete opposite of when I shot slides and would underexpose for that saturated look.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually, as long as the histogram is correct, the actual brightness as perceived out of the camera is completely irrelevant. The real aesthetic settings are done in postprocessing. The only thing the camera has to do is to produce maximal dynamic range with non-clipped highlights and noisefree shadows. 

[Jonathan Levin]

Please try Highlight Weighted metering.

[hansvons]

On 6/26/2024 at 5:23 AM, Leslie22 said:

And is there a way of setting the camera permanently to one stop under ?

The SL2-S sensor is invariant from ISO 200 to ISO 3600, as in this ISO range there is no amplification happening.

If you are seeking to shoot with a headroom of one stop, ISO 400 will exactly provide that, assuming you shoot raw.

I shoot mostly at ISO400-800 and have the metering set to highlight protection mode. The SL2-S sensor is unbeaten regarding shadow fidelity, including noise and saturation. Tons of leeway towards underexposure. 

[dkCambridgeshire]

Whenever possible and using only DNG / RAW, I work with the live view histogram – adjusting same to obtain non-blown highlights. Also, if possible (and time permitting), check the actual resultant image's histogram – and if necessary shoot again to expose the highlights optimally. ETTR (expose to the right) technique works for most situations. Digital photography exposure assessment via the histogram, can, with practice, be achieved quickly – enabling a higher % of 'keepers'.  However, the live view histogram is 'the guide' but not necessarily 'the optimum' exposure. When necessary I'll still bracket. And when necessary, and depending on the subject and 'bag space', I'll use graduated filters.  DNG / RAW images enable optimum adjustment at the conversion stage. During the PP RAW/DNG conversion I still work with the histogram to optimise highlight and shadow detail. 

BW, dunk 

[jaapv]

The same here with any mirrorless. , and I regularly find that I need to overexpose. Correct exposure varies from -2 to +1.5 so having a fixed EV setting is just increasing the % of wrong exposures and relying on the DR of the camera to get a decent result. 

[SrMi]

19 hours ago, hansvons said:

The SL2-S sensor is invariant from ISO 200 to ISO 3600, as in this ISO range there is no amplification happening.

In SL2-S, the dual conversion gain switch occurs after ISO 400. Therefore, SL2-S should be invariant from ISO 800 to 102400.

This graph shows very little improvement in DR from ISO 800 to 102400.

We are talking about still photography, not Log ISO values (video), right?

P.S.: SL3 has gain switch after ISO 250. The “invariant” range is from 400-6400.

Edited June 30, 2024 by SrMi

[hansvons]

7 hours ago, SrMi said:

Therefore, SL2-S should be invariant from ISO 800 to 102400.

We had that a few times, and I'm afraid I happily have to disagree. I have no idea what those graphs tell me that is more tangible in my daily snapping than testing myself and looking at the pictures. The images stay the same up to ISO 6400, including noise texture. Above that, the photos look different because amplification kicks in. YMMV, of course, and that's fine with me.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, hansvons said:

We had that a few times, and I'm afraid I happily have to disagree. I have no idea what those graphs tell me that is more tangible in my daily snapping than testing myself and looking at the pictures. The images stay the same up to ISO 6400, including noise texture. Above that, the photos look different because amplification kicks in. YMMV, of course, and that's fine with me.

The graph shows how much DR improves when you increase ISO. If it is flat than it is invariant, i.e, raising ISO will not improve noise.

Are you talking video Log setting or still photography? 

We should not disagree on facts, but we can misunderstand each other. 
 

[Photoworks]

23 minutes ago, SrMi said:

The graph shows how much DR improves when you increase ISO

That is not possible, you go up in ISO and you reduce the DR on most cameras.

Your graft is talking about shadows!

What is Dynamic Range?
It is the range of exposure between the usable brightest point and the darkest point with controlled noise.

[SrMi]

11 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

That is not possible, you go up in ISO and you reduce the DR on most cameras

That is not true if you keep the exposure constant. That is true if you tie exposure to ISO settings and increasing ISO reduces exposures.

The DR is determined mainly by exposure not by ISO.

Those facts should be common knowledge by now.

We can agree that decreasing DR increases noise. If the exposure is fixed than increasing ISO will never reduce noise.

When a camera is in its invariant range, then increasing ISO (while maintaining exposure) does not improve noise. Everyone can run the experiment to verify the invariant range.

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, hansvons said:

We had that a few times, and I'm afraid I happily have to disagree. I have no idea what those graphs tell me that is more tangible in my daily snapping than testing myself and looking at the pictures. The images stay the same up to ISO 6400, including noise texture. Above that, the photos look different because amplification kicks in. YMMV, of course, and that's fine with me.

This table explains why we disagree but are (kind of) both right. You are talking about HLG in video, while I am talking about still photography. The lowest ISO in HLG is 400, while in the photo mode, it is 50. When you talk about ISO 400, you mean ISO 50 in the photo. This is a table from SL3's manual. The dual conversion gain point is different than in SL2-S:

[BernardC]

On 6/30/2024 at 9:01 AM, SrMi said:

When you talk about ISO 400, you mean ISO 50 in the photo. This is a table from SL3's manual. The dual conversion gain point is different than in SL2-S

Let's ignore HLG. It is highly-compromised; designed to jam HDR into an SDR signal.

SrMi, I think you are reading too much into the photo vs. video thing. All it means is that stills people tend to shoot right at the threshold of burning-out their pixels, whereas video people prefer to leave some headroom. That's not true of every photographer, of course. Many here (myself included) shoot stills with headroom, instead of sticking to the minimum EI.

The sensor doesn't change its physical response in stills or in video. The only difference is where you place your middle grey: in the middle of your available DR (cine-style), or as near to the top of your available DR as you can get away with (ETTR-style).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

All it means is that stills people tend to shoot right at the threshold of burning-out their pixels, whereas video people prefer to leave some headroom. That's not true of every photographer, of course. Many here (myself included) shoot stills with headroom, instead of sticking to the minimum EI.

Exactly. Film people choose headroom in their exposure because the light level will likely change in a sequence, and burning the highlights will contribute to a video look that most cinematographers try to avoid like the plague. That's also the reason why, conversely, on analogue film, the exposure index is set one stop lower than the box speed to ensure that the negative gets fat enough for proper printing or scanning. 

One more thing to note: filmmaking is mostly about portraiture in one way or another. Understanding skin tone as a reference for many things makes sense. Logically, middle grey that roughly matches a slightly tanned caucasian skin is the measure of exposure. 

Stills photography, on the other hand, has a different history, with masters like Anselm Adams, whose zone system is not used in cinematography, at least not to my knowledge. 

[Guest]

It’s just the meter which tends to overexpose. I generally underexpose by 2/3 to 1 full stop to get the desired image in the EVF which in turn matches the final image. All Nikons do this too with the exception of the Z8/9 which requires essentially zero exposure compensation for EVF to match reality under normal lighting conditions.