Photoworks Posted January 10 Share #161 Posted January 10 Advertisement (gone after registration) 22 hours ago, tomasis7 said: i doubt unless SL3S has built in Fan and heatsink aka GH7. build in fanboy. the body is the same to SL3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 10 Posted January 10 Hi Photoworks, Take a look here Leica SL3-S Incoming?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tomasis7 Posted January 10 Share #162 Posted January 10 gh7 looks like this 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! I didnt realize that S5IIx has ventilation under the "viewfinder box". What a strange solution. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I didnt realize that S5IIx has ventilation under the "viewfinder box". What a strange solution. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/413145-leica-sl3-s-incoming/?do=findComment&comment=5737415'>More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted January 10 Share #163 Posted January 10 (edited) 4 hours ago, jaapv said: GH 7 is MFT. But the full frame S5Ii has this as well MFT requires cooling then the 2x larger sensor 35mm - probably 2x -4x more heat? Edited January 10 by tomasis7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 10 Share #164 Posted January 10 Doesn’t matter both need cooling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted January 11 Share #165 Posted January 11 Much beefier cooling for the larger one. MFT exists for that reason. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 11 Share #166 Posted January 11 I would expect heat issues to reduce as sensors and other processors get more efficient. The Sigma fp had an aerated heat sink, but no fan (full frame video, but no EVF). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickness Posted January 11 Share #167 Posted January 11 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) On 1/5/2025 at 2:31 PM, SrMi said: I want my images to convey my emotions, not the accuracy of the scene. IMO, the older lower MP cameras do not do that better than the new breed of high MP cameras. If you truly feel this way, switch to film. That’s what I did when the SL3 came out. Although I strongly believe it’s the photographer not the tool that creates the image and any associated emotion, I do think that these super high resolution sensors are giving so much information that a viewer’s brain has to focus too much on processing all that detail. The photograph becomes more about the sharpness than the overall photograph. You can see many, many examples of this right here on the forum. Edited January 11 by trickness 3 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 11 Share #168 Posted January 11 46 minutes ago, trickness said: If you truly feel this way, switch to film. The film is cumbersome and limits me to a particular film-specific look. 47 minutes ago, trickness said: That’s what I did when the SL3 came out. Although I strongly believe it’s the photographer not the tool that creates the image and any associated emotion, I do think that these super high resolution sensors are giving so much information that a viewer’s brain has to focus too much on processing all that detail. The photograph becomes more about the sharpness than the overall photograph. You can always "degrade" sharpness and resolution to the level that suits you, not vice versa. An image of excellent technical quality does not degrade its aesthetics. The higher resolution sensors give the post-processors more data to produce better results. The viewer's brain looks at the prints and JPEG outputs. 51 minutes ago, trickness said: You can see many, many examples of this right here on the forum. I do not see what you refer to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickness Posted January 12 Share #169 Posted January 12 2 hours ago, SrMi said: The film is cumbersome and limits me to a particular film-specific look. You can always "degrade" sharpness and resolution to the level that suits you, not vice versa. An image of excellent technical quality does not degrade its aesthetics. The higher resolution sensors give the post-processors more data to produce better results. The viewer's brain looks at the prints and JPEG outputs. I do not see what you refer to. Well, seeing as I disagree with all three of your responses, I will leave it at that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted January 12 Share #170 Posted January 12 (edited) 6 hours ago, trickness said: If you truly feel this way, switch to film. That’s what I did when the SL3 came out. Although I strongly believe it’s the photographer not the tool that creates the image and any associated emotion, I do think that these super high resolution sensors are giving so much information that a viewer’s brain has to focus too much on processing all that detail. The photograph becomes more about the sharpness than the overall photograph. You can see many, many examples of this right here on the forum. Which viewing medium and output size is causing this problem for viewers’ brains? If you enjoy the aesthetic of film, or vintage lenses for that matter, shoot them. There’s no need for the pseudoscience explanation. Edited January 12 by LD_50 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olaf_ZG Posted January 12 Share #171 Posted January 12 9 hours ago, trickness said: I do think that these super high resolution sensors are giving so much information that a viewer’s brain has to focus too much on processing all that detail. The photograph becomes more about the sharpness than the overall photograph. This sentence stuck me somewhere in the head. Often, sharpness is great, f.e. Landscapes, architecture, even a portrait. But many times it aint. I had the original monochrom, which has been replaced with the m10m. The latter was a perfect night machine, seeing in the dark. Images were simply almost perfect. But, too me, it lacked the gritty feel of film (might be added maybe in post), and in the end I sold it. It was not the b/w I liked. But, I just ordered an old m8. It used to be my first m, and I am really looking forward to its imperfections (compared to a nowadays camera). 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelu2010 Posted January 12 Share #172 Posted January 12 On 10/2/2024 at 6:36 PM, PeterBoyadjian said: A rehoused S5II would be a disappointment. Maybe they will come out with a boxed cinema camera with the DJI 4D sensor. They need to do something different. What are you dreaming of? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptSlevin Posted January 12 Share #173 Posted January 12 Looking by the lack of news / rumors on SL3S 4 days before the announce date, I bet the worst is coming and SL3S might be a rehoused S5IIx with some minor changes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickness Posted January 12 Share #174 Posted January 12 9 hours ago, LD_50 said: Which viewing medium and output size is causing this problem for viewers’ brains? If you enjoy the aesthetic of film, or vintage lenses for that matter, shoot them. There’s no need for the pseudoscience explanation. It’s not pseudoscience that there is an obsession with sharpness and megapixels in modern photography, most certainly on this forum, that has warped the definition of what constitutes a good picture. “Let’s zoom in 400% - see how sharp this window is?” You’re probably right though. Shouldn’t blame the medium for these technical preoccupations 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickness Posted January 12 Share #175 Posted January 12 5 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said: This sentence stuck me somewhere in the head. Often, sharpness is great, f.e. Landscapes, architecture, even a portrait. But many times it aint. I had the original monochrom, which has been replaced with the m10m. The latter was a perfect night machine, seeing in the dark. Images were simply almost perfect. But, too me, it lacked the gritty feel of film (might be added maybe in post), and in the end I sold it. It was not the b/w I liked. But, I just ordered an old m8. It used to be my first m, and I am really looking forward to its imperfections (compared to a nowadays camera). Bingo!!! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted January 12 Share #176 Posted January 12 2 hours ago, CptSlevin said: Looking by the lack of news / rumors on SL3S 4 days before the announce date, I bet the worst is coming and SL3S might be a rehoused S5IIx with some minor changes The 100% safe bet is that some people will claim that it's a "rehoused" Lumix, no matter what its features are, or its performance, or how different they are to use. Strangely, the same people won't claim that the upcoming S1R2 is a "rehoused" SL3, no matter how similar the specifications are... 2 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted January 12 Share #177 Posted January 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, BernardC said: The 100% safe bet is that some people will claim that it's a "rehoused" Lumix, no matter what its features are, or its performance, or how different they are to use. Strangely, the same people won't claim that the upcoming S1R2 is a "rehoused" SL3, no matter how similar the specifications are... We all know that Leica hasn't made anything new since the turn of the millennium. It's all Panasonic or Sony, and not as good as Canon or Nikon. And made in Japan. IYKYK. Edit. An alternative assertion is "Leica hasn't made anything itself for the last ten years". Strangely they said that 10 years ago, and will probably say the same in 10 years time. Edited January 12 by LocalHero1953 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoworks Posted January 12 Share #178 Posted January 12 1 hour ago, BernardC said: the same people won't claim that the upcoming S1R2 is a "rehoused" SL3, no matter how similar the specifications are... there are little differences to expect: exterior and buttons layout, sensor not optimized for M lenses, and Menu options. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted January 12 Share #179 Posted January 12 10 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said: This sentence stuck me somewhere in the head. Often, sharpness is great, f.e. Landscapes, architecture, even a portrait. But many times it aint. Sharpness and resolution are different things and pretty much unrelated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LBJ2 Posted January 12 Share #180 Posted January 12 Anybody guessing a 44MP BSI sensor for the SL3-S? E.g., IMX366AJK 😉 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now