SL3 and noise

[lfortney57]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been shooting with an SL2 since it was released a few years ago.  It is a remarkable camera in most situations, but I get a lot of noise when shooting in low light or Milky Way photography - much more than my friend's Nikon Z8.  I have heard that the SL3 will shoot Milky Way up to 25000 ISO with little or no noise.  I would appreciate hearing about any experiences that would validate or disprove this.

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, lfortney57 said:

I have heard that the SL3 will shoot Milky Way up to 25000 ISO with little or no noise.  I would appreciate hearing about any experiences that would validate or disprove this.

i would love to see some images of the milky way at that ISO, straight outta camera, with no adjustments or Noise reduction.

Edited July 12, 2024 by frame-it

[lightsourcekauai]

16 hours ago, lfortney57 said:

I have heard that the SL3 will shoot Milky Way up to 25000 ISO with little or no noise.

I don’t think the above is accurate or good advice for night photography with the SL3 or any other camera for that matter. While noise tolerance is a very individual thing and will likely differ from photographer to photographer, I think photographing the Milky Way at 25000 ISO would produce unusable results. I have been happy with ISO 1600 and ISO 2000 for my Milky Way photography with the SL3 and 21 APO. And even at these ISO levels the final image goes through DeNoise in Lightroom before printing.

Lee

[lightsourcekauai]

For reference, here is a single exposure taken with the SL3 and 21 APO at ISO 1600. The rocky point is being lit up by the ambient light from a nearby resort. 

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!

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have yet to do any sky photography with my SL3 by I have compared noise to my SL2.

On my personal scale, I think the SL3 is 1.5 to 2 stops better at handling high ISO’s. In both noise and colour retention. Without post NR I’d stop at 1600 on my SL2 and go to around 3200 on the SL3 with slightly better results.

As was said about it’s a personal thing though.

Gordon

[lightsourcekauai]

55 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

On my personal scale, I think the SL3 is 1.5 to 2 stops better at handling high ISO’s. In both noise and colour retention

I’m amazed by the color that is possible to be found / recovered in the shadows / darker areas. I have a few images taken at dawn where I am looking into the light of the sky and the dark brown coastline still comes out in great detail and color. I concur with one of your previous comments about the SL3 producing very compliant files. 

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

SL3 and SL2-s have similar noise performance. Sl2 files look the same if the expose is correct, as soon as you have to push in software to recover shadows the SL3 is much better.

I would suggest not judging from the JPG but from the DNG files, the JPG in hi iso looks more noise than it should. Maybe Leica can adjust the profile.

Like said above I would not use 25000 ISO for most photography.

[LocalHero1953]

I use ISO 25,000 quite often for drama rehearsals with the SL2-S, and some stage-lit performances occasionally slip into 25,000. With the help of the AI Denoise tool in Lightroom I get images that retain most of the colour, though losing texture detail, resulting, at worst, in rather plastic faces. The people I take the photos for (actors and play publicists) are very happy with them. They see the strong and accurate colours, and are prepared to overlook the texture detail - so I still use 25,000 as my last-option ISO.

All that said, I wouldn't consider the SL2-S for Milky Way photography at 25,000!

Edited July 16, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[jiggyb21]

On 7/12/2024 at 3:22 PM, lightsourcekauai said:

For reference, here is a single exposure taken with the SL3 and 21 APO at ISO 1600. The rocky point is being lit up by the ambient light from a nearby resort. 

I am trying so hard to convince myself I can afford that lens.  I can earn some money with it but I really want it for night sky.  Is it really as well controlled as I think it would be when it comes to aberrations and distortion and vignetting?

[lightsourcekauai]

23 minutes ago, jiggyb21 said:

sky.  Is it really as well controlled as I think it would be when it comes to aberrations and distortion and vignetting?

Yes.

Now, I will say that I am not an overly technical photographer and when it comes to equipment I rely more on feel and in-real-life-use than on charts. But I can honestly say that this is the best wide lens I’ve used— for night sky and for general landscape/ seascape as well. I previously used Zeiss Milvus 15 (too soft) and 21 (too much distortion, especially along horizon line but excellent color and micro contrast) and several iterations of Canon’s 16-35 f/2.8 (heavy vignetting wide open). So that’s what I’m comparing the 21 APO to. The photo from my above post is now hanging in my gallery in a 24x36 metal print and it looks fantastic. I am just thrilled to see that the sharpness from rocky point to stars is so evident. I simply could not achieve this level of sharpness and clarity throughout the frame with the other lenses that I have used in the past.
Here is another shot from the night before. This location had stronger ambient light that was much closer to the store of Kaumuali’i, the last king of Kaua’i, so the galactic core of the Milky Way is a bit muted but still it’s a decent shot. I see no vignetting at all at f/2.0. The street lights and building lights are left of frame so that lower left corner is a little brighter than the other corners. 
ISO 1600, 15 seconds.

I enthusiastically recommend this lens. I think you would be very happy with it.

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!

[JTLeica]

On 7/11/2024 at 11:28 PM, lfortney57 said:

I have been shooting with an SL2 since it was released a few years ago.  It is a remarkable camera in most situations, but I get a lot of noise when shooting in low light or Milky Way photography - much more than my friend's Nikon Z8.  I have heard that the SL3 will shoot Milky Way up to 25000 ISO with little or no noise.  I would appreciate hearing about any experiences that would validate or disprove this.

On 7/12/2024 at 4:24 PM, lightsourcekauai said:

I don’t think the above is accurate or good advice for night photography with the SL3 or any other camera for that matter. While noise tolerance is a very individual thing and will likely differ from photographer to photographer, I think photographing the Milky Way at 25000 ISO would produce unusable results. I have been happy with ISO 1600 and ISO 2000 for my Milky Way photography with the SL3 and 21 APO. And even at these ISO levels the final image goes through DeNoise in Lightroom before printing.

Lee

25000 ISO? Without noise at night? I think that was a camera shop sales man that was telling you that 😉

I have shot milky way stuff with the SL3 recently with two lenses, last week in fact, the Sigma 20mm F2 and the Sigma 14mm F1.4 (amazing)... Here are some for you unedited.

Around 2500-3200 the noise is fine. I could have done a better job with these but it was the first time using the SL3, the 20 and 14mm with night photography.Around 1 stop underexposed and also needed to reduce the exposure time to 20 seconds even with the 14mm lens due to the 60mp resolution.

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!

[lightsourcekauai]

7 hours ago, JTLeica said:

Sigma 14mm F1.4 (amazing)

That lens must be made for night sky photography! Excellent photographs.