Leica SL2, IBIS and High Pixel Count: Putting a new telephoto in your bag

The author explains how a camera with a large sensor and IBIS, coupled with a superb telephoto lens, allows photographers to cover longer focal lengths without having to buy an extra lens.

Many photographers are quite satisfied with their current camera at 24mp (or even lower).  No doubt, you can get stunning images from well-exposed and focused shots at that level of definition. With the introduction of the Leica SL2 however, you have access to two features that might tip the balance toward this camera body.

Strengths of the Leica SL2

As existing users of the Leica SL2 know, it is an outstanding camera. But it possesses two particular features that are key to extending the effective focal length of your telephoto lenses.

  • IBIS, or In-body Image Stabilization. This provides a big boost in sharpness at lower shutter speeds. Photographers can thus use a lower setting ISO for reduced noise and more highlight and shadow detail.
  • The high pixel count sensor. This produces images that are 8000+ x 5000+ pixels or higher, on a full format sensor. The result is a 100% increase (or more) in pixel count compared to smaller sensors.

This means a big increase in the potential for cropping (and thus extending your effective lens focal length) without a significant loss in quality. The following discussion assumes you are using a very high-quality lens, typically produced by Leica.  It will be more challenging to obtain a satisfactory result with lower-quality lenses.

Let’s assume you already have a 135mm lens in your bag.  How can you make this lens effectively longer and maintain quality?  Furthermore, are there tricks available to help with quality when you crop the image? I’ll attempt to answer these questions below. Starting with a 135mm field of view, we can find out how the image will be affected by reducing that field of view (by cropping) to match longer lenses.  The table below refers to the SL2 (full-format) sensor with 8368×5584 pixels (47mp).

The impact of cropping on pixel count

First, look at some horizontal fields of view, the cropped horizontal and vertical pixel count, and the equivalent MP of the cropped image, assuming you maintain the 3:2 image aspect ratio after cropping:

Lens focal length, mmHorizontal field of view, deg.Horizontal pixel countVertical pixel countApprox. MP(3:2)
13515.28368558446.7
18810.96000400024.0
2508.24514301213.6
3006.9379825349.6

Most post-processing software will show you horizontal and vertical pixel dimensions.  Note 1 below shows the field-of-view calculation method for any lens.

In Lightroom or Photoshop (and most other editing applications), you can crop to these dimensions, while maintaining the 3:2 aspect ratio, or you may choose to use a different aspect ratio for your final image (that is, 1:1, 4:3, and so on)

Another example:  With the same sensor as the example above, an image shot with a 250mm lens, cropped to a 400mm equivalent field of view will have a very usable 5258×3522 pixel count.

To address quality, you must first determine how the image will be displayed. For projection, or display, you should know that the typical display width for most computer monitors or projectors is approximately 1920 pixels, with some ultra-high definition displays having up to 3840 pixels in width. The good news in this case is your cropped image, even at a 300mm-equivalent field of view, has more than adequate pixels to be displayed electronically at high quality without further enhancement.

What about prints?

For prints, you need to consider the print size.  Good quality prints can be made at 300 dpi (dots per inch), but may also be quite appealing at lower dpi values depending upon the printing process, print size and viewing distance.  Assuming you wish to use 300 dpi, an 8.5×11” print therefore needs an image of approximately 2550×3300 pixels, and a 12×18” print will need approximately 3600×5400 pixels. 

For all who are more familiar with it, here come metric figures. The “300mm” crop in the above example is more than enough for an A4 print in a fine 300dpi resolution. 6000×4000 pixels will safely give you a 50×34cm print if again 300dpi is the threshold. In fact, even 60×40cm can be achieved safely with a 24mp image. The uncropped 47mp file is good enough for a stunning 75×50cm print with just under 300dpi.

The Leica SL2 brings added flexibility

With the crops in the table above, you can get a very high quality 8.5×11” print without any further enhancement.  When you wish to print to 12×18”, using the crop that equals a 300mm lens angle of view, for example, you can try print settings that specify 300 dpi for a 12×18” print dimension.  Lightroom and Photoshop will automatically add the needed dpi in a process called “up-sampling”. First set the image size in inches and the dpi to 300. 

Lightroom does this in the Print settings, and in Photoshop, you simply need to re-size the image and save it as a new file before printing.  This may, in fact, provide excellent print quality.  I have produced a stunning 24×36” print from a 24MP image with this method, and I have a 12×18” print from an M8 (10.3mp) image (3936×2624) that is amazingly also good.

Software to the rescue

If the resulting print quality does not meet your needs, it may be worth trying one of the available applications that are designed to increase image size. This is especially for very severe crops where you are using only a small area of the original image. Topaz Gigapixel AI is one such application, using artificial intelligence to ‘fine tune’ the final image before printing.  Selective sharpening may also be advised.

Another more extreme example is shown below. The original uncropped image of the robin is 8368 pixels wide (taken at 379mm zoom) and the cropped version is approximately ¼ the width in pixels.  The resultant cropped image is equivalent to approximately 1532mm focal length.  A sharp lens and the IBIS capability of the Leica SL2 both help.

I used Topaz Gigapixel AI to enhance the extreme crop (sharpness, apparent grain, etc.). You can probably get similar results in Topaz Photo AI or Photoshop Super Zoom (Neural Filter).  These applications can add pixels back into the image, using AI as a way to provide a realistic result. 

The above process will work to extend any focal length lens mounted on the Leica SL2, in case you don’t have a longer lens in your bag. Here also is an opportunity to take full advantage of the older lenses you may have. The bottom line: there may not be a compelling need to burden yourself with a bulky and heavy long lens for the occasional wildlife shot. Travel light!

Notes for the mathematically inclined

  1. To calculate the horizontal field of view for any lens:  

Horiz.  FOV (deg) = 2arctan(h/2f) where, 

h=horizontal image size, mm (36 for full format)

f=lens focal length, mm

Example, 18mm lens, FOV=2arctan(36/36)=90 degrees

  1. Horizontal and vertical pixel counts vary linearly with the inverse of the angle of view (see table above)

Read more from the author



26 COMMENTS

  1. Thanks for this article. My opinion only — I think it’s natural to try to get as much resolution from our cameras as we can — though many photos don’t require it! In my case, I live in an area that had seven glaciations and several volcanic events. A landscape cut by a fast river shows an amazing number of layers, rich in geologic history: exactly where I’d like higher resolution than my M240 and older Summicron 50 can provide.

    I used a couple of ‘try for 30 days’ products, but I’ve been disappointed: higher resolution at one level blurs the image at the next level down.

    I wonder whether this AI software provides a good solution for that?

    • You can download a trial of the software for free. I use this software all the time. It is amazing but it only can do so much – garbage in, garbage out. I got rid of my SL2 because of gigapixel. I prefer the low noise performance of the SL2-S. I sell my images and am very picky about image quality and the topaz software delivers: gigapixel, sharpen, denoise. and the jpeg to dng application. Use denoise on your m 240 images (as I do) and you will be amazed. It sharpens and removes noise. Life is good!

      • Thanks, Brian! I’m in Tokyo for a couple more weeks, but when I get back home, I’ll load it up on the Monster Mac! Make a nice Xmas present to myself 🙂

        • By the way, in general, do not use both denoise and sharpen AI on the same image. Use Denoise AI on images with noise and it also sharpens nicely. If I find sharpen AI too strong even using reduced settings, I use Denoise AI to sharpen and it works perfectly to sharpen. This software has revolutionized my photography equipment and processing. I no longer desire 60 MP cameras to do cropping of images. I am now down to one camera: the Leica SL2-S. My M11 has a happy new home. I love a rangefinder but I love a single camera even more.

          • Thanks for the heads-up. I see I’’ll be traveling a bit of a learning curve. Then again — cold winter afternoons, hot chocolate spiked with matcha …

            I do have a question, though: how much de-noising do you really need to do, with M11 pix?

          • The M11 is a very low noise camera compared to the 240 at ISO 800. At lower ISO it is less noticeable. However, the big difference is the M11 has a more gorgeous rendering in my opinion. The M11 reminded me of my CCD M9 so I sold my M9.

    • Now that I’m back, first thing after groceries was downloading Topaz.

      I’m a believer. It’s as simple as that. Took a pic of a river bank: there’s a LOT going on, underbrush, rocks, eroded banks. Topaz was like when I got cataract surgery: I couldn’t believe everything I’d been missing.

      Thanks again for the great tip.

  2. Every time I pick up an SL2 it always feels too heavy. I can get 60MP in an M11 or a Q3 so lugging more weight makes no sense.

    I would love to see what an Adrian Newey or a Gordon Murray (two of the world’s best F1 designers) could do with Leica’s sumo wrestler SL2 in terms of weight and packaging. Or the ghost of Colin Chapman whispering “Just add lightness”

  3. Perhaps slightly off topic but given the Black Friday deals (in the US) on SL2 bundles it would appear that the SL3 might be around the corner. Just wondering what would make those who own and love the SL2 upgrade? 60MP? Seems like a small upgrade from 47MP… PDAF? Perhaps but if you need/want fast AF you are probably already shooting Sony or Canon… Better support for M-lenses? Potentially but the SL body is really 200-300g too heavy to appeal to most M-lens shooters. So what could Leica do that would make existing SL2 owners upgrade?

    • The SL System is already one of the most versatile systems in the market right now, so no mayor flaws to be corrected. As you mentioned AF is not on par with the competition yet and surely will see an upgrade in the SL3 given what you see happen at Panasonic. I mostly shoot the SL with M glass but from time to time I do sports and wildlife using longer zoom lenses. The AF can be a rather frustrating experience given the quality of the lenses which are available. This is definitely something to be addressed. Sony or Canon do not properly support M glass so that’s not an option.

      Weight is not an issue as long as ergonomics and balance is fine which is already very good with the latest SL cameras. Just put my M240 with an 50mm Summilux on the scale. It’s around 1000g while the SL comes in around 300g more. Adding an EVF and a handgrip to the M would make the difference even smaller. So weight is not an issue especially as you need to keep a certain balance when using a 90-280 for example.

      Long story short…fix the AF and I would be 100% happy.

      • Well, I can only say that for me personally weight is THE issue with the Leica SL, I am OK with Leica SL AFs as is and have little need/want for good AFc. Weight is what stopped me from further getting into FF L-mount. The body is about 200-300g too heavy and so are the lenses which in combination ends up being 500+g in total. My Hasselblad X1D II + 38V weighs about 1,100g, my Leica SL + 35mm APO 1,600g, too much of a difference in a messenger bag, at least for me.

        • I can sympathise with you on the weight issue. I have been in and out of the SL and SL2 several times, always starting from the premise that it really isn’t that heavy and I will be happy. But always I find it is too heavy for me, particularly when used with Leica SL lenses as it should be. At the moment I am enjoying the lighter weight of the LUMIX S5II and LUMIX L lenses when I am not using the M or Q which I generally prefer.

      • I don’t mind the weight too much but I think it depends how you carry it. All the weight on one shoulder on a strap or in a bag might be too much. Mine is in a Lowepro rucsac for walking which distributes the weight very nicely, I can walk like that comfortably for two or three hours with the camera ( and coincidently, I have one of those M Telyt lenses in the bag too! though I don’t always use it.) without fatigue. and the camera is quickly accessible when I need it. While shooting it’s not much a problem and I find the weight helps me frame the image with a steadier hand somehow. I wouldn’t complain about losing 300g though if they can manage it.
        Most of the SL lenses certainly are too heavy ( but probably by neccesity, the 24-70 is as heavy as I’m prepared to go. Leica M’s are no sparrows either especially when you compare the size/weight ratio.

        • I also find a heavy shoulder bag difficult to cope with, especially as I get older. During a recent long-weekend trip, I decided to use a backpack instead. Although I find backpacks rather awkward (compared with the easier access of a shoulder bag), there is no doubt that I can tolerate more weight when it is distributed evenly over both shoulders. Perhaps it is a new plan I need to adopt to cope with upper back pain which always gets worse when carrying a shoulder bag. The pull of the backpack does help in minimising the discomfort by pulling the shoulders backwards.

          • It certainly works for me Mike, at least with the LowePro straps which are nicely padded and I’m approaching 70 years of age ( but luckily still reasonably fit ).I’ll continue to use my Billingham small Hadley Pro for walking around the city / town where I have the luxury of tea and cake breaks. The latter being very important for photographers.

        • Hi Stephen, I comfortably carried 5 cameras in a backpack last Friday. A backpack without any doubt allows you to carry a lot more weight. I politely disagree though on the camera being quickly accessible when you need it, especially in urban surroundings getting a camera out of your backpack is not always very convenient in my opinion. About making the SL lighter, Leica was able to make the black M11 100g lighter, why would they not be able to do the same thing with the SL? They can even keep the SL2 and SL2-s as is. It would a new body, a FF CL2 if you want. After killing the APS-C L-mount bodies it would be a logical next step.

          • I guess it depends on your definition of quickly accessible? In practice, it only takes me a few seconds more to get my camera out of the bag with a side opening like the LowePro (or Peak design which I don’t own ). You do sacrifice a bit of convenience. Is it faster from a shoulder bag in urban surroundings? Yes, for sure, but that’s when I would switch to carrying a bag. Just that I’ve learned that if I have long days out and I’m carrying any significant weight ( I often hike ) the backpack is the way to go if I don’t want to get tired out and it does very effectively reduce fatigue. You can choose either of course as you prefer. I mean, if you prioritize convenience and speed and are really wanting to be ready to shoot at a moment’s notice and are chasing decisive moments you’ll probably go bagless altogether and have either an M or Q on a strap anyway.
            I totally agree they could make the cameras lighter ( though I don’t think that’s Leica’s priority with the SL system ) and I am most definitely interested in a FF CL2 so I hope Leica is listening. Put my name on the list!

          • Even if you put your name on the list your credit card is unlikely to get charged anytime soon… Leica builds cameras that complement the M, not cameras that would directly compete with it… So be it.

          • The ThinkTank rotation backpacks solve this problem in an excellent way: They have a slide-out compartment for the camera and the most frequently needed lenses. Access to the camera is fast, protection excellent, and carrying is much easier than with a shoulder bag. For me, this is the way to go when I have to carry my gear for longer times or distances. If you pack carefully, you can also use a part of the backpack for all the other stuff you need when out and about. I am planning to write a long-time review of these relatively little known backpacks in 2024. JP

      • Andy, I agree that the “enormous size” and “massive weight” of the SL(2) are often exaggerated. The 24-90 and the 90-280 are big lenses, but in return you get the image quality of the best primes. Quite an achievement, I would say. But horses for courses; for long mountaineering trips in the Alps I wouldn’t want to carry an SL either. JP

        • I have an SL2. It is a fantastic camera. I have had no difficulties with its weight. I think it is easily worth it given its quality and ease of use. With Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 and Leica 24-70 f/2.8 zooms you have an extremely accomplished kit covering a wide focal length range – perfect for excursions and events. The hybrid manual/autofocus using the joystick button is extremely slick – perfect focus on exactly the point of interest. It also works so well with Leica M-lenses. So easy to manually focus with the superb viewfinder and focusing aids. I am a big fan!

    • I still hope for a significantly smaller L-Mount body, even more compact than the S5, more in the Sony Alpha 7C style. 24 MP would be enough for me, and limited battery life can be superseded with a power bank. A Leica LC (L-Mount compact) with a Full Frame sensor would be a good fit for Sigma’s i-Series small prime lenses. JP

  4. Th-that’s a Robin? I thought a robin has a small ..almost teeny, but sharp.. thin beak, a noticeably red front, rather than these rather brown sparrow-like feathers..

    ..But that’s not what I meant to say: what I was thinking was that in the (my) days of film and enlargers, no-one – to my sparse knowledge, anyway – ever went into the mathematics of the film’s granular resolution and, say, micro-contrast ..you just put the neg in the neg carrier, wound the enlarger head up (for an ..what would the word be? ..er ‘enlargement’..) or down for a smaller pic,
    looked at it, and if it wasn’t sharp enough you used a contrastier printing paper to make it look sharp as you wanted it.

    And if you shot Kodachrome slides you never worried about ‘how sharp’ the picture would be when you projected it at, well, at whatever size the screen was ..it was always more than sharp enough!

    I wonder if cinematographers, shooting movies, examine the film grain first, before shooting, or count the pixels in their cameras, and wonder if it’ll be sufficient for ..well, I s’pose they’d better measure the dimensions of the screen at the Odeon, Leicester Square before shooting.

    ..That’s to say ..don’t worry about it! Just take the [expletive deleted] pictures!

    • “..That’s to say ..don’t worry about it! Just take the [expletive deleted] pictures!”
      David B. well said, with your comments above you hit the nail on the head here, there is an obsession these days with giant sensor sizes and over sharp over processed images.
      Those of you who chase specifications may be shocked to hear that I use an ancient M240’s 24mp jpeg images with no extra sharpening and minimal processing in CS5 and get wonderful A3 prints, even from cropped files, that look like real photographs. i.e prints made in a darkroom.

      • Fully agree, Phil and David, on the pixel race aspect. But it’s the narrative that keeps the industry going. I rarely cared if a Kodak Tri-X shows enough detail and worked in the darkroom exactly the way David is describing. This is, sadly, history now, but I am still happy with 24MP and have a 90×60 cm print behind my desk which was shot with an M10. JP

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here