Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica Q / T / X Series

Leica Q / T / X Series For the Leica Q, T, X series digital cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Hands on CL test - jpg vs RAW w/ MF lenses
Old 11-25-2017   #1
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Hands on CL test - jpg vs RAW w/ MF lenses

Today I had the chance to play with the CL. It had an AF lens on it but that held no interest to me, as I wanted to see how it works with M mount lenses.

Ben @ Samys Camera in Los Angeles (Fairfax shop - the only shop that has a demo at the moment) was very nice, and pulled out an M-TL adapter for me to use. What was surprising to me is how much better the RAW files looked than the jpegs. I don't know what the settings were (if there are different jpeg settings), just was told that it was set to record in RAW (dng) + Jpeg.

The RAW(DNGs) looked better w/o me doing anything, but because I would never leave them alone, I show them here w/ slight slider changes to taste. So you can see how a very very mildly breathed on RAW image compares to the jpg.

The first snap is with my iphone 4s (!) to show how the camera looks with the mighty 7Artisans 50 1.1. I was excited to use it and took a couple of snaps - shown here, but changed to my Lux 50 Asph once I realized the 7Artisans could only focus from min focus distance to about 2 meters. There is some physical interference w/in the camera mount as this lens sticks out a long long way. No issues (of course) with the Lux.

One thing of interest is I did not see any vignetting at these distances and shot wide open. I could not leave the building (the sales floor is on the 3rd floor) so obviously the test is not complete. It would be nice to try it at infinity and different apertures.

Anyway:



7Artisans 50 1.1 @ 1.1:

Jpeg



DNG



Jpeg



DNG



----------


Summilux 50 1.4 Asph:

Jpg



DNG



Jpg (shot through a glass display case)



DNG



Jpg



DNG
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2017   #2
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,072
Looks good!

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2017   #3
Mute-on
Registered User
 
Mute-on is offline
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 296
Very interesting.

I do find it incredible that jpg cannot resolve red beyond a bright orange. No such issues in RAW. Drives me nuts at Christmas
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2017   #4
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 993
Thx for that Huss!
Are you going to pony up for it?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-25-2017   #5
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mute-on View Post
Very interesting.

I do find it incredible that jpg cannot resolve red beyond a bright orange. No such issues in RAW. Drives me nuts at Christmas
Yeah that's weird. It made me think that maybe I had the jpegs and dngs swapped, but I did not. The DNGs show reds as red, the jpeg shows them as orange.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #6
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,882
Leica jpegs are never that great to be honest. Never cared though... how did it feel in your hand?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #7
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,072
The SL JPEGs are the best Leica JPEGs I've experienced. But I leave it on DNG only most of the time, and of course my M-D doesn't make JPEGs.

I could be tempted by this little body. It would make for a very compact travel kit with my R lenses. But I'll resist ... for now at least.



G
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #8
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
One thing of interest is I did not see any vignetting at these distances and shot wide open.
Why would there be any vignetting using a full frame lens on an APS-C sensor? You are only using the center of the image circle.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #9
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is online now
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 880
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
Why would there be any vignetting using a full frame lens on an APS-C sensor? You are only using the center of the image circle.
Because more of the light hits the sensor at oblique angles further from the center. This needs to be corrected with micro lenses and less depth of the "wells".
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #10
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,903
Have to agree Huss, the RAW files just seem to look very well balanced. It should be said I am crappy at color differentiation.

Thanks for sharing.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #11
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by retinax View Post
Because more of the light hits the sensor at oblique angles further from the center. This needs to be corrected with micro lenses and less depth of the "wells".
The 50 Lux Asph Huss was using (blue image circle) doesn't vignette on a full frame sensor so its not going to vignette on an APS-C sensor (pink rectangle). You are only using the center of the image circle, so the oblique angles explanation is inapplicable.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #12
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 993
The more I see this camera on youtube reviews..the more I like it..
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #13
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
Why would there be any vignetting using a full frame lens on an APS-C sensor? You are only using the center of the image circle.
I agree with you. My findings, albeit in very very limited testing, were contrary to some people reporting vignetting. Which does not make sense for the exact reasons you point out.

Which leads me to believe that some of these 'tests' in fact are not. Just throw in some catch phrases and continue with their day..
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #14
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The 50 Lux Asph Huss was using (blue image circle) doesn't vignette on a full frame sensor so its not going to vignette on an APS-C sensor (pink rectangle).
This is just a nomenclature issue. I'm not sure if you don't know this or are just continuing on trying to get them to take the hint.

The issue is "vignette" vs. "fall-off." These days a lot of folks say "vignette" when they actually mean fall-off (or another term I have seen is "peripheral shading ).

Of course "vignette" in older times would mean hard-edge loss of image past the defined imaging circle, as in the image you posted.

While some pedants might insist "vignette" is wrong, I would mention that many modern cameras have "vignette control" in the software that fixes peripheral fall-off. So, I think in modern vernacular "vignette" and "fall-off" are used interchangeably. Don't tell the folks over at the LF forum as this side topic would probably be 10 pages long of arguing about what the words meant when they started shooting seriously in 1914.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #15
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Leica jpegs are never that great to be honest. Never cared though... how did it feel in your hand?
It felt great. Like the luxury high end item that it is, and much better than the equivalent Fujis/Sonys etc. Which is how it should be given the price tag.
I'm not saying I'm getting one (I'm 95% a film shooter nowadays), but after using it, I 'get it'.

There are a couple of lenses I have that I'd love to try out on it. The killer Summicron 40 f2 and... the Lomo Minitar 32 2.8 pancake. The Lomo is sharp in the middle 1/3 and of course tiny. So it should perform very differently on the CL, as the outer edges are cropped out by the sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #16
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Which leads me to believe that some of these 'tests' in fact are not. Just throw in some catch phrases and continue with their day..
Exactly. Draws into question the whole review. If they are making up stuff about vignetting, what else are they making up? In box review?

I like the styling of the CL and can afford it. I could just never rationalize purchasing it over the A6500 or XE3 at 3x the cost. I guess I'm too pragmatic. I'm currently shooting Fuji (XE2/XT2) and like the haptics with the aperture on the lens. Makes going back and forth between film and digital seamless. And I don't get using full frame lenses on an APS-C sensor, with its 1.5x multiplier. I initially thought using my OM lens would be great. I have 18/21/24/40/50/85 and 50/90 macro. The 18 though 50 duplicate the standard (and small) 18-55 zoom. The only MF lenses I use on the Fuji are the 50/90 macro. If I bought the CL, I'd use the 18-56 zoom rather than adapted FF lenses. It covers all the focal lengths and is compact, keeping with the CL's DNA.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #17
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,903
Can you share the shot that makes you think it's darker at the sides?

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #18
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 993
Here's a good review..including some of the cons...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vef1B_r2RMo
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2017   #19
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emile de Leon View Post
Here's a good review..including some of the cons...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vef1B_r2RMo
He lost me when he started saying it was designed to be a social media camera which is why it is APS-C and only 24 mp...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #20
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
It felt great. Like the luxury high end item that it is, and much better than the equivalent Fujis/Sonys etc. Which is how it should be given the price tag.\
Thanks, that is what I wanted to hear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #21
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
He lost me when he started saying it was designed to be a social media camera which is why it is APS-C and only 24 mp...
Yeah, silly.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #22
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
 
Ken Ford's Avatar
 
Ken Ford is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago, IL USA
Age: 57
Posts: 3,030
*Fingers in ears* Lalalalalala...
__________________
"If you can control yourself and just loathe us quietly from a distance then by all means stay." - Joe

Leica: M-P Typ 240 - M6 - Leicavit M - RapidWinder - Motor M - 21 Super-Elmar - 28 Ultron - 35 Summicron ASPH - 40 Summicron - 75 APO-Summicron ASPH - 75 Summarit-M - 75 Color-Heliar - 90 Elmar-C
Nikon RF: S2 - S3 2000 - 35/2.5 - 50/2 - 50/1.4 Millennium - 105/2.5 - 135/3.4
X-Pro2, X-M1, X100s, NEX-7, dp0 Quattro, N1V1, N1V2, oodles of other stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #23
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
He lost me when he started saying it was designed to be a social media camera which is why it is APS-C and only 24 mp...
He lost me when he went on about how stylish and beautiful it was six times in the first 18 seconds.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #24
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
He lost me when he was swirling a whiskey talking about how handsome George Clooney is.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #25
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ford View Post
*Fingers in ears* Lalalalalala...
Ken, Ken, KEN!!!

It's really nice! Think about it this way, it's much smaller than the old M8, has a similar size sensor but with waaaay more resolution, has a huge ISO range, uses all the same lenses with no need for external VFs, does not need IR filters, is cheaper, etc etc...

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #26
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 993
Quote:
He lost me when he was swirling a whiskey talking about how handsome George Clooney is.
Would you like Brad Pitt better..
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #27
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emile de Leon View Post
Would you like Brad Pitt better..
Doods aint my thing..


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGAyQAkXajg
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #28
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,584
how was the evf and autofocus?
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2017   #29
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post
how was the evf and autofocus?
EVF was 'ok', seemed the same as stuff that is in the Sony A6xx series.
Wished it was better as Leica has better ones in the Q and SL.
If you're ok with the ones in the Sony A6xx series, you'd be ok with this one.

AF ? - I did not pay much attention to it as I used the camera with MF lenses. Sorry.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #30
Chemophilic
Registered User
 
Chemophilic's Avatar
 
Chemophilic is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, US
Posts: 99
This morning I had a chance to handle the CL a bit at the Leica SF store. I went with the intention to see how the CL stacked up against my Pen-F.


(Taken with the Pen-F)

Size-wise they are almost the same in my hands. The viewfinder placement and resolution are almost identical. The controls only took me about a minute to figure out. For me the handling for both cameras are quite similar. The CL is certainly quite nice to handle, and to me feels similar to the Pen-F.

The AF was able to focus quite fast inside the store and I did not feel much difference comparing to the AF speed of my Pen-F.

Finally, I took the same scene with both cameras. On my screen, except for the color, distortions, and slight framing differences, I am just not seeing a big difference in the final output. I was looking for a certain "crispness" that I saw with the Leica Q. Maybe I spent too little time with the camera, or internally tried to justify why I don't need this. But here are the results:


(Taken with CL + 23mm, f2, 1/160, iso400, taken as DNG and WB match with the Pen-F, no other adjustments)


(Taken with Pen-F + 15mm, f2, 1/100, iso200, taken as DNG and WB match with the CL, no other adjustments)

If you want to take a look at the exported jpeg at full resolution, the link to the album is here
__________________
Olympus Pen-F, Leica MM
My Flickr Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #31
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Color is way better with the Leica, that is something I noticed immediately. Not even close. And the contrast is much better - check out the pic frames and mats. The Olympus pic seems blue and murky in comparison.
I'm actually surprised by how much better the top pic looks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #32
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,882
I think you may have expected too much here...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #33
Chemophilic
Registered User
 
Chemophilic's Avatar
 
Chemophilic is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, US
Posts: 99
Huss you are right.. at first I thought that the color difference is due to the white balance. Even though I put down both as 3300k in LR, the final WB still look different.

For both pictures I can recover the highlight at the bottom right corner, so I felt that's a draw.

In any event, they won't have the CL and 18mm in stock until early next year, and the salesperson told me they had more preorder than the cameras they can actually get, so I think I am safe for now!
__________________
Olympus Pen-F, Leica MM
My Flickr Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #34
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Color is way better with the Leica, that is something I noticed immediately. Not even close. And the contrast is much better - check out the pic frames and mats. The Olympus pic seems blue and murky in comparison. I'm actually surprised by how much better the top pic looks.
I don't remember the coloring of the brick in the SF Leica store. It's been several months since I've been in. So I don't know which color is more accurate. The Leica image is definitely warmer.

By the way, I don't really trust the color temperature numbers in LR. I don't think they are consistent. I would set white balance using the eyedropper tool on one of the white mats in the image. I think you'll find you get different numbers.

As far as sharpness and contrast, it's a little hard to tell looking at jpgs at 96 resolution.

That being said, I would expect image quality to be better with the Leica. I would hope so. Larger sensor and all that.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #35
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
So I don't know which color is more accurate. The Leica image is definitely warmer.

I don't think the colour is warmer, but better. I examined the larger versions that Chemo provided links to, and when u look at the picture mats, the temp seems to be accurate. There is no warm tone to it (as far as I can judge sitting here). The Leica clearly has much better colour.

p.s. I'm not a Leica fan boy, for this money I'm getting a Nikon D850 for my gallery work (as a scanner).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #36
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,584
how did you match the white balance? the cl shot looks warmer, but that's about it.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #37
BlackXList
Registered User
 
BlackXList is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Color is way better with the Leica, that is something I noticed immediately. Not even close. And the contrast is much better - check out the pic frames and mats. The Olympus pic seems blue and murky in comparison.
I'm actually surprised by how much better the top pic looks.
It's APS-C Vs M4/3, it should look better in this instance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #38
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackXList View Post
It's APS-C Vs M4/3, it should look better in this instance.
Of course, but it was Chemo who chose this comparison.

  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #39
Chemophilic
Registered User
 
Chemophilic's Avatar
 
Chemophilic is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, US
Posts: 99
I use the eyedrop tool to select the white mat part of the CL picture to do a customize WB, take the temp (number), and then put that in the WB temp for the Pen-F.

@ptpdprinter. I did what you suggested, and the WB temp differ by 50K so not a big difference, and the results still look quite similar. Maybe I should have checked if the settings on the CL and the Pen-F were all at default.

@BlackXList. I chose this comparison because if I was to buy the CL, it will be to replace the Pen-F because of the similarity in size and also of focal length that I like. My justification to get the CL would be because of IQ. Thus the comparison...
__________________
Olympus Pen-F, Leica MM
My Flickr Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-06-2017   #40
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chemophilic View Post

@BlackXList. I chose this comparison because if I was to buy the CL, it will be to replace the Pen-F because of the similarity in size and also of focal length that I like. My justification to get the CL would be because of IQ. Thus the comparison...
If the justification is IQ, then a Sony A6xxx would make much more sense.
My justification for the CL is IQ/M lens compatibility/fantastic design that makes me want to use it.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:11.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.