Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       end
  

Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.

  
 
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is a comment by @Peter Figen@ regarding bicubic smoother:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1654369/0&year=2020#16418375

I've been using as my default interpolation method in Photoshop, especially when manipulating files using rotation, cropping.


Interesting info. It would make a lot of sense for Leica to use a similar resampling method since the new Leica cameras have the perspective correction feature, which could provoke crosshatch pattern artifacts for in-camera JPEGs shot with perspective correction on. That would further imply that the S and M-DNGs are made by simple resizing in camera.



Apr 07, 2024 at 04:50 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


Sorry for the typo as I am on phone.


Apr 07, 2024 at 04:51 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


zhangyue wrote:
Sorry for the typo as I am on phone.


I know "standard divination" was a mistype, but I feel it makes even more sense that way



Apr 07, 2024 at 04:54 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.



It is unclear to me why you feel native 18M sensor image will be sharper than Leicas S raw implementation. I really don’t know one way or the other on this or how to test this.

And I agree with you on accidentally in S raw that what you really want is large raw. It happens to me. I map one of my custom button to this function and another for shutter type.
In general, for family picture I always use 18M. I just need it to be raw than resolution or DR. For travel and high dynamic range landscape, I am always at 60M.
highdesertmesa wrote:
I see your perspective. I'm hesitant to use the smaller DNGs because I would keep thinking about how much better the results would be at the pixel level if I shot a camera that had a native lower resolution sensor. For me to use S or M-DNG, I would want at least parity with a native sensor regarding sharpness/resolving power since we know we can get close enough to that by downsampling the L-DNG afterwards.

Perhaps when seeking a less digital, more filmic look the S and M-DNGs might be more appealing. Surely the smaller DNGs would produce less harsh results
...Show more



Apr 07, 2024 at 05:17 PM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


The IMX455 (the Sony sensor in the Q3, SL3 and M11) does not offer hardware (analogue) binning. It is a CMOS sensor, you cannot do hardware binning on a CMOS sensor.

It is software averaging of the read noise that is giving the DR advantage. It is the same as downsampling with any algorithm which averages pixels in software on your PC. They might get clever and apply some destructive NR before downsampling because the resolution reduction will be masked.

zhangyue wrote:
Let me explain this in another way.
For small raw, there are two way to do this, let’s simplify the problem say larger raw original size is 60M. And small raw is 15M. One way of doing this is pick 1 out of 4 pixel to create a 15M file. This way at pixel level, the SNR is the same because signal vs noise per pixel is not changed. However, original file have 4 time of area to collect information, if down size original file to 15M. Signal is simple summing, noise will root square sum. SNR of large raw
...Show more



Apr 07, 2024 at 05:28 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


zhangyue wrote:
It is unclear to me why you feel native 18M sensor image will be sharper than Leicas S raw implementation. I really don’t know one way or the other on this or how to test this.


There is more aliasing and sharp edges on tiny details on lower res native sensors, especially when using a high resolving lens. This gives the impression of higher sharpness at the pixel level. I would put the SL2-S DNG from a CV APO M lens up against the same lens on the M11 downsampled to M-DNG. I think the SL2-S file will look crisper. That is just based on how the M-DNGs from the M11 look a little soft to me. They're usable, but they don't appear as sharp to my eye as an image from a native lower res sensor.

It's just an anecdotal impression on my part. To test it, you'd need to use the same lens on a native sensor without an AA filter that has a resolution closer to the M-DNG – perhaps an A7R – shoot at infinity at f/4-5.6, then just compare the centers of the image.



Apr 07, 2024 at 05:59 PM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


thrice wrote:
The IMX455 (the Sony sensor in the Q3, SL3 and M11) does not offer hardware (analogue) binning. It is a CMOS sensor, you cannot do hardware binning on a CMOS sensor.

It is software averaging of the read noise that is giving the DR advantage. It is the same as downsampling with any algorithm which averages pixels in software on your PC. They might get clever and apply some destructive NR before downsampling because the resolution reduction will be masked.



Interesting. Now that you mention it, I don't seem to be able to find any Leica marketing describing Triple Resolution as pixel-binning. Or maybe I missed something.



Apr 07, 2024 at 06:25 PM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


zhangyue wrote:
I watched video while waiting for my sons competition. I couldn’t spend all the time to catch what he was doing. I can see a few things make no sense to me.

First of all, he is doing pixel level test, so that means small or medium raw will have advantage.
The conclusions he draw totally ignore the downsize advantage of large raw.

Having said that, even the methodology he draw the conclusion is flawed.

The image used makes no sense to me. He really should be using uniform gray image so that signal are uniformed like the fist example
...Show more

"Rightly, wrongly or somewhere in-between"

Thanks for watching at least some of the video and posting your thoughts which seem to lean toward "wrongly" more than somewhere in-between.



Apr 07, 2024 at 06:33 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


LBJ2 wrote:
Interesting. Now that you mention it, I don't seem to be able to find any Leica marketing describing Triple Resolution as pixel-binning. Or maybe I missed something.


Leica never called it pixel binning as far as I can recall. Everyone was left to imagine novel ways Leica could be doing this, when in fact it seems like they're just resizing the files on the fly just like you would in Photoshop.



Apr 07, 2024 at 09:43 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


I guess you are right Sony 60M sensor was not designed for pixel binning.
But I think in general, binning can be done with CMOS as many smart phone manufactures are doing that.
As mentioned, I really don’t care if it is done at hardware level or software level. As long as it offers downsized DR advantage at pixel level with lower size raw, I’d be happy.

thrice wrote:
The IMX455 (the Sony sensor in the Q3, SL3 and M11) does not offer hardware (analogue) binning. It is a CMOS sensor, you cannot do hardware binning on a CMOS sensor.

It is software averaging of the read noise that is giving the DR advantage. It is the same as downsampling with any algorithm which averages pixels in software on your PC. They might get clever and apply some destructive NR before downsampling because the resolution reduction will be masked.





Apr 07, 2024 at 11:44 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


As replied above, it really doesn’t matter if Leica is doing at hardware or software level. The concept is the same. Aren’t they?

highdesertmesa wrote:
Leica never called it pixel binning as far as I can recall. Everyone was left to imagine novel ways Leica could be doing this, when in fact it seems like they're just resizing the files on the fly just like you would in Photoshop.




Apr 07, 2024 at 11:46 PM
CVickery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


zhangyue wrote:
It is unclear to me why you feel native 18M sensor image will be sharper than Leicas S raw implementation. I really don’t know one way or the other on this or how to test this.

...



I was thinking about this as well. If you think about what I was describing above that to get an 18M image instead of a 15M image you need to sample one pixel of a four binned pixel twice...once for the original binned pixel and shared with the adjacent pixels to form the next 4 binned pixel. It seems to me that the data in the pixels is being smeared between the adjacent pixels. Wouldn't this be similar in impact to a low pass filter? It wouldn't matter if this operation is done in hardware or software I would think that anything other than an integer divisor of the full pixels (i.e. 1/2, 1/3, 1/4...) would show some smearing of detail similar to a low pass filter. A 18M original image without a low pass filter would seem sharper.




Apr 08, 2024 at 02:00 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


Are they doing that? Do you have links to a white paper of how they're combining the analogue signal of pixels on a sensor technology where each pixel is essentially read in digital?

I think you'll find they're doing exactly what Leica is doing.

zhangyue wrote:
I guess you are right Sony 60M sensor was not designed for pixel binning.
But I think in general, binning can be done with CMOS as many smart phone manufactures are doing that.
As mentioned, I really don’t care if it is done at hardware level or software level. As long as it offers downsized DR advantage at pixel level with lower size raw, I’d be happy.





Apr 08, 2024 at 05:38 AM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


LBJ2 wrote:
Interesting. Now that you mention it, I don't seem to be able to find any Leica marketing describing Triple Resolution as pixel-binning. Or maybe I missed something.


---------------------------------------------

highdesertmesa wrote:
Leica never called it pixel binning as far as I can recall. Everyone was left to imagine novel ways Leica could be doing this, when in fact it seems like they're just resizing the files on the fly just like you would in Photoshop.


Encouraged by what @thrice commented on this thread, Googling confirms pixel binning is a well covered topic for some time now.

If I'm not getting ahead of myself, perhaps the better term to describe Leica's Triple Resolution is "software or digital binning"

"How does Binning work with CMOS cameras?"
https://www.altairastro.help/info-instructions/cmos/how-does-binning-work-with-cmos-cameras/

"CMOS cameras cannot perform “hardware” binning in the same way CCD cameras do. All CMOS cameras use software or “digital” binning where the values of a pixel are either added up or averaged to make a larger “virtual” pixel. This is done off-sensor which is why it’s called “digital” binning or “software” binning. This results in a 50% improvement of the ratio of read noise to signal. Because CMOS sensors have an extremely low read noise (often a couple of electrons or less), the end result is almost always significantly better than a CCD."



Apr 08, 2024 at 07:38 AM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


thrice wrote:
Are they doing that? Do you have links to a white paper of how they're combining the analogue signal of pixels on a sensor technology where each pixel is essentially read in digital?

I think you'll find they're doing exactly what Leica is doing.



I got what you are saying. I think I should have differentiated pixel binning with pixel hardware binning in my reply.

I don’t see anything prevent binning in hardware level. It’s the cost vs benefit make it no go comparing to digital/software way because modern processes are more powerful and cheaper.




Apr 08, 2024 at 10:23 AM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


zhangyue wrote:
As replied above, it really doesn’t matter if Leica is doing at hardware or software level. The concept is the same. Aren’t they?



If all you expect/want/need is smaller files, I don't guess it matters either way. But it's the better DR claim from Leica that was the main point of contention for me. Expectations from many of us took that to mean a DR benefit beyond what normally comes from resampling an image to a smaller size.



Apr 08, 2024 at 02:14 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #17 · p.4 #17 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


LBJ2 wrote:
---------------------------------------------

Encouraged by what @thrice@ commented on this thread, Googling confirms pixel binning is a well covered topic for some time now.

If I'm not getting ahead of myself, perhaps the better term to describe Leica's Triple Resolution is "software or digital binning"

"How does Binning work with CMOS cameras?"
https://www.altairastro.help/info-instructions/cmos/how-does-binning-work-with-cmos-cameras/

"CMOS cameras cannot perform “hardware” binning in the same way CCD cameras do. All CMOS cameras use software or “digital” binning where the values of a pixel are either added up or averaged to make a larger “virtual” pixel. This is done off-sensor which is why it’s called “digital” binning or “software”
...Show more

At least I know which "bin" to put Leica's increased DR claims into now



Apr 08, 2024 at 02:16 PM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #18 · p.4 #18 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


highdesertmesa wrote:
At least I know which "bin" to put Leica's increased DR claims into now



Either way, I still find the feature useful and the way Leica does it, 36 and 18MP files result in true raw/dng files so am able to fully edit in the raw editor apps. As others have mentioned, 36/18 MP files also look very good IQ wise so I don't hesitate to use when needed/wanted.



Apr 08, 2024 at 02:47 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #19 · p.4 #19 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


LBJ2 wrote:

Either way, I still find the feature useful and the way Leica does it, 36 and 18MP files result in true raw/dng files so am able to fully edit in the raw editor apps. As others have mentioned, 36/18 MP files also look very good IQ wise so I don't hesitate to use when needed/wanted.


Agreed, but I wish they would add a resample method that would be more like Photoshop's "Bicubic Sharper" instead of how they do it now, which appears to function like Photoshop's "Bicubic Smoother". The sharper option could cause artifacts in combination with perspective correction feature, but it would perfect for everything else because it wouldn't lose that small bit of resolving power that it does now.



Apr 08, 2024 at 03:04 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #20 · p.4 #20 · Leica Triple Resolution marketing vs reality. Another look.


highdesertmesa wrote:
Agreed, but I wish they would add a resample method that would be more like Photoshop's "Bicubic Sharper" instead of how they do it now, which appears to function like Photoshop's "Bicubic Smoother". The sharper option could cause artifacts in combination with perspective correction feature, but it would perfect for everything else because it wouldn't lose that small bit of resolving power that it does now.


Maybe it was a smart move from Leica's perspective. If the smaller DNG files had introduced artifacts, someone would have noticed and criticized the feature. As it stands, I believe it's a good alternative to editing in post-processing. I learned a lot from this thread. The take away is that downsampling of image files (effectively averaging out some of the noise) can improve the SNR and consequently contribute to a perceived improvement in DR. (as the reduction in noise makes subtle details more discernible)



Apr 08, 2024 at 03:54 PM
1       2       3              5       end






FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.