RVB
Member
I'm not sure how much value there is to be found in DXO's testing but this may be interesting to S/S2 owners.. Leica S sensor review: Consummate performer? - DxOMark
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I had the Pentax 645D (which has a similar sensor as the Leica S) and compared to my Canon 5D mark 3 I found that it had about a stop more dynamic range in the shadows but less in the highlights when exposed normally to rated iso (both cameras) so dynamic range is very close but I would give the slight edge to the Pentax/Leica. Color depth is about the same but color differentiation seems better on the Kodak sensor. Resolution is about the same on the Kodak sensor as the D800E.I'm not sure how much value there is to be found in DXO's testing but this may be interesting to S/S2 owners.. Leica S sensor review: Consummate performer? - DxOMark
I love the S as a system,great glass,great viewfinder and nice ergonomic's and the leaf shutters are a real bonus,I haven't used a 5D mk3 but had a 1DX and the Canon sensor wasn't very good at handling shadows and didn't like being pushed in post..I had the Pentax 645D (which has a similar sensor as the Leica S) and compared to my Canon 5D mark 3 I found that it had about a stop more dynamic range in the shadows but less in the highlights when exposed normally to rated iso (both cameras) so dynamic range is very close but I would give the slight edge to the Pentax/Leica. Color depth is about the same but color differentiation seems better on the Kodak sensor. Resolution is about the same on the Kodak sensor as the D800E.
So my experience kind of confirms what DxO concludes.
The big advantage of the Leica are the Lenses. They are all superb from what I've been able to gather. The body itself is also very well made and feels like a dream in hand. The sensor is a bit dated but still competitive.
Compared to the Phase One IQ160 which I own, the Phase is in another WORLD of Image Quality. Dynamic Range, Color, Resolution, etc. All superb.
Keep in mind that when comparing the dynamic range figures that DXO publishes on the PhaseOne backs I checked and they are NOT done at base iso on the PhaseOne backs! They are done at the iso 100 setting which is one stop above base iso. (maybe their test software/hardware has iso 100 as a lower limit for testing dynamic range) The Phase backs have the most dynamic range at base iso.
Ditto.I am neither surprised nor disappointed (as a S user).
I never doubted that the sensor of an IQ 180 would be better than that of the S.
Also the S sensor is smaller than the other MF-backs, another disadvantage in regards of pure IQ from the sensor.
For me the S is a "in between system", making a small compromise compared to the big backs in regards of the sensor, probably compensating some part of this with the great S-lenses.
But on the other side you get a relatively fast, weatherproof, "compact" system.
Now Graham, you know better than this "measurebator" name calling.I guess this is all interesting for the measurebators
I have seen Leica S high-ISO images which, while looking quite good, would have been better if they had the much lower readout noise of an A7r or D800e. And indeed that goes for all CCD MFD units, my own included.... the real proof with all these systems is what folks produce using them. I can't say that I've ever seen a Leica S image that was bad because of the sensor test performance.
The limitations I describe does not mean that anyone should "dump" their Leicas.Evidently Leica S shooters should dump their over-priced and underperforming systems and get an A7r or D800e apparently. :facesmack:
RAY, I think we have to watch what we wish for.Now Graham, you know better than this "measurebator" name calling.
System characterisation/quantification in absolute (and more usefully, relative) terms has a valuable place in what we do.
I have seen Leica S high-ISO images which, while looking quite good, would have been better if they had the much lower readout noise of an A7r or D800e. And indeed that goes for all CCD MFD units, my own included.
I have also seen Leica S long-exposure images which, while looking quite good, would also have been better if they could have been exposed for longer than the hard firmware limit of 125 seconds, imposed by dark noise which is again higher than a modern CMOS sensor. And indeed that is a problem for most CCD MFD units, my own included.
The limitations I describe does not mean that anyone should "dump" their Leicas.
But it does mean that there is substantial room for improvement of MFD sensors, for quite a range of shooting applications.
An awful lot of us seek the best of both worlds: the resolution, colour, and highlight quality of our MFD systems combined with the low noise (high ISO, shadow detail, and very long exposures without darkframes) of 35mm CMOS. It's not there yet - the IQ250 disappoints somewhat, even ignoring cost -, but it's getting closer.
Ray
Actually this is correct the Leica has a older sensor like the P45 and that series of backs that use the Kodak sensors. I know they are different but there look is not . Kodak does have slightly less DR. Than Dalsa and the newer CMOS chips and the S is one of those that have less but also Kodak sensors have more bite or crunch to them . Which gives it the punch that many people like. Nothing wrong with this and actually a feature. So yea the data maybe looking bad but the reality is given the glass as well a very well balanced image with a certain look to them that many people enjoy. If you want to relate it to something its real easy think Kodachrome which has a lot of punch to the files and color compared to negative film. It's pretty much the call on it. Some folks love the results. So I totally get why many owners love it. Besides all that the glass is outstanding.The S sensor is ancient in digital camera years. For example, I have owned my S2 for 4 years now. I know the DxO numbers are not "competitive" in today's market, but I know better when it comes to real world use.