Re: Official: Leica SL3-S Mirrorless camera announced!
highdesertmesa wrote: flash wrote: RustyBug wrote:
Just noticed the SL3-S on P2P.
Looks like the increased speed comes with a slight hit on IQ vs. the SL2-S. My guess is the # of bands in the readout, in order to achieve the faster, is the quid pro quo.
Noticed too, the inclusion of NR for the SL3-S vs. the SL2-S.
Looks like about 1/10th of bugger all difference to me. Likely within the error rounding of a site like P2P.
But now we get to have threads about how the IQ of the new camera has gone backwards. Excellent!!
Gordon
If you use the SL3-S at higher ISO, there will be zero difference, and that's pretty much what's been reported.
Regarding noise at low ISO/DR, we knew that adding PDAF would have a small impact.
Which I think that in terms of the -S ... most folks would consider a reasonable tradeoff to get the PDAF.
Imo, the -S is meant to be a very, versatile tool (rather than a max IQ tool) and the improvements in PDAF garner a bump in its usefulness, despite a minor trade in the DR. Which, btw ... DR isn't the end-all, do-all, tell-all attribute of IQ.
That said, the "hit" to ISO 100 in the SL3-S is still 0.5 stops more DR than my Q2 at the same ISO 100.
Also, it looks like tossing more light at it (i.e. ISO 64) makes up the difference to offset the PDAF when you can throw more light at it.
Imo, it's simply a matter of getting what you asked for ... put on the PDAF, and this is the (trivial, minor, insignificant, ymmv, etc.) DR cost of doing so, outcome.
Not meant to be a "sky is falling" thing, just an interesting (imo) observation.
Re: Official: Leica SL3-S Mirrorless camera announced!
highdesertmesa wrote: flash wrote: RustyBug wrote:
Just noticed the SL3-S on P2P.
Looks like the increased speed comes with a slight hit on IQ vs. the SL2-S. My guess is the # of bands in the readout, in order to achieve the faster, is the quid pro quo.
Noticed too, the inclusion of NR for the SL3-S vs. the SL2-S.
Looks like about 1/10th of bugger all difference to me. Likely within the error rounding of a site like P2P.
But now we get to have threads about how the IQ of the new camera has gone backwards. Excellent!!
Gordon
If you use the SL3-S at higher ISO, there will be zero difference, and that's pretty much what's been reported.
Regarding noise at low ISO/DR, we knew that adding PDAF would have a small impact.
Which I think that in terms of the -S ... most folks would consider a reasonable tradeoff to get the PDAF.
Imo, the -S is meant to be a very, versatile tool (rather than a max IQ tool) and the improvements in PDAF garner a bump in its usefulness, despite a minor trade in the DR. Which, btw ... DR isn't the end-all, do-all, tell-all attribute of IQ.
That said, the "hit" to ISO 100 in the SL3-S is still 0.5 stops more DR than my Q2 at the same ISO 100.
Also, it looks like tossing more light at it (i.e. ISO 64) makes up the difference to offset the PDAF when you can throw more light at it.
Imo, it's simply a matter of getting what you asked for ... put on the PDAF, and this is the (trivial, minor, insignificant, ymmv, etc.) DR cost of doing so, outcome.
Not meant to be a "sky is falling" thing, just an interesting (imo) observation.
Re: Official: Leica SL3-S Mirrorless camera announced!
highdesertmesa wrote: flash wrote: RustyBug wrote:
Just noticed the SL3-S on P2P.
Looks like the increased speed comes with a slight hit on IQ vs. the SL2-S. My guess is the # of bands in the readout, in order to achieve the faster, is the quid pro quo.
Noticed too, the inclusion of NR for the SL3-S vs. the SL2-S.
Looks like about 1/10th of bugger all difference to me. Likely within the error rounding of a site like P2P.
But now we get to have threads about how the IQ of the new camera has gone backwards. Excellent!!
Gordon
If you use the SL3-S at higher ISO, there will be zero difference, and that's pretty much what's been reported.
Regarding noise at low ISO/DR, we knew that adding PDAF would have a small impact.
Which I think that in terms of the -S ... most folks would consider a reasonable tradeoff to get the PDAF.
Imo, the -S is meant to be a very, versatile tool (rather than a max IQ tool) and the improvements in PDAF garner a bump in its usefulness, despite a minor trade in the DR. Which, btw ... DR isn't the end-all, do-all, tell-all attribute of IQ.
That said, the "hit" to ISO 100 in the SL3-S is still 0.5 stops more DR than my Q2 at the same ISO 100.
Also, it looks like tossing more light at it (i.e. ISO 64) makes up the difference to offset the PDAF when you can throw more light at it.
Imo, it's simply a matter of getting what you asked for ... put on the PDAF, and this is the (trivial, minor, insignificant, ymmv, etc.) DR cost of doing so, outcome.
Not meant to be a "sky is falling" thing, just an interesting (imo) observation.
Re: Official: Leica SL3-S Mirrorless camera announced!
highdesertmesa wrote: flash wrote: RustyBug wrote:
Just noticed the SL3-S on P2P.
Looks like the increased speed comes with a slight hit on IQ vs. the SL2-S. My guess is the # of bands in the readout, in order to achieve the faster, is the quid pro quo.
Noticed too, the inclusion of NR for the SL3-S vs. the SL2-S.
Looks like about 1/10th of bugger all difference to me. Likely within the error rounding of a site like P2P.
But now we get to have threads about how the IQ of the new camera has gone backwards. Excellent!!
Gordon
If you use the SL3-S at higher ISO, there will be zero difference, and that's pretty much what's been reported.
Regarding noise at low ISO/DR, we knew that adding PDAF would have a small impact.
Which I think that in terms of the -S ... most folks would consider a reasonable tradeoff to get the PDAF.
Imo, the -S is meant to be a very, versatile tool (rather than a max IQ tool) and the improvements in PDAF garner a bump in its usefulness, despite a minor trade in the DR. Which, btw ... DR isn't the end-all, do-all, tell-all attribute of IQ.
That said, the "hit" to ISO 100 in the SL3-S is still 0.5 stops more DR than my Q2 at the same ISO 100.
Imo, it's simply a matter of getting what you asked for ... put on the PDAF, and this is the (trivial, minor, insignificant, ymmv, etc.) DR cost of doing so, outcome.
Not meant to be a "sky is falling" thing, just an interesting (imo) observation.
Feb 18, 2025 at 10:23 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #16755872 « Official: Leica SL3-S Mirrorless camera announced! »
