Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: fredjeang on April 01, 2010, 08:22:36 am
-
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.
If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...
Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg= (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=)
page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4 (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4)
Cheers,
Fred.
-
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.
If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...
Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg= (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=)
page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4 (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4)
Cheers,
Fred.
I must say I am impressed with sample file. Reminds me of Leaf files - smooth. Excellent & thanks for posting.
-
Amazing details!! ISO 1250 is also pretty good.
-
Aside from the 100% crops, these 8 bit jpegs on the web could have been taken with almost any quality dslr. Since most work ends up on the web or printed on a web press, what is the point? Are S2 owners making 44" prints on 9900's all day, just to see the detail? Or are they just looking on screen at the glorious detail?
I've looked at some S2 tiffs, and am impressed, but dude, very little of that goodness translates into a magazine page or a web site.
I ask this seriously with no intent to offend: what is this camera for? Who is it for? I think the few remaining areas that larger than 35mm still holds an advantage is using the back on a view camera/tech camera. better lenses, better wides, movements, etc. But the S2 is like a D3x with better lenses, correct? So where is the utility?
As an aside, it is one of the best feeling cameras ever, has that Nikon F4, Leica M sturdiness to it.
-
Aside from the 100% crops, these 8 bit jpegs on the web could have been taken with almost any quality dslr. Since most work ends up on the web or printed on a web press, what is the point? Are S2 owners making 44" prints on 9900's all day, just to see the detail? Or are they just looking on screen at the glorious detail?
I've looked at some S2 tiffs, and am impressed, but dude, very little of that goodness translates into a magazine page or a web site.
I ask this seriously with no intent to offend: what is this camera for? Who is it for? I think the few remaining areas that larger than 35mm still holds an advantage is using the back on a view camera/tech camera. better lenses, better wides, movements, etc. But the S2 is like a D3x with better lenses, correct? So where is the utility?
As an aside, it is one of the best feeling cameras ever, has that Nikon F4, Leica M sturdiness to it.
But then your question concerns also MFD if not tech or view cams, not only the S2.
I think that the big boys (CaNikon) will soon play in the mfd field, and mfd brands will have to cut-down their prices...he he
Fred.
-
But then your question concerns also MFD if not tech or view cams, not only the S2.
Absolutely.
-
Well, this thread is about the S2, so it should not really mutate into a "why MFD?" thread, perhaps. When I look at the S2 samples, my first reaction is that I love the colour and the "look". And I think, perhaps fancifully and you may mock, that the pictures look European rather than Japanese or American. That is precisely the quality that Leica lenses (and Zeiss and Schneider lenses) have always had, and somehow the S2 has kept that look. Maybe there are enough people who appreciate the difference, and who love a well-crafted instrument, to make it a success. I hope so.
John
-
Well, this thread is about the S2, so it should not really mutate into a "why MFD?" thread, perhaps. When I look at the S2 samples, my first reaction is that I love the colour and the "look". And I think, perhaps fancifully and you may mock, that the pictures look European rather than Japanese or American. That is precisely the quality that Leica lenses (and Zeiss and Schneider lenses) have always had, and somehow the S2 has kept that look. Maybe there are enough people who appreciate the difference, and who love a well-crafted instrument, to make it a success. I hope so.
John
Well, the S2 is one of the most beautifull camera I've ever seen, and the iQ is at the top.
But it is a very special product that I'm not sure their efforts will be rewarded by the sales.
What I still do not understand is:
1) Why Leica did not concentrate first on a R9 successor ? And we would have a european FF 35mm with sales guarantees.
2) When they decided to take this path, why they did not developped a similar system to the Ricoh GRX, a modular gear with separate sensor unit?
Because then, onces you buy the camera and lenses, you just have to upgrade your sensor unit.
My questions make no sense because what's done is done.
Now just wish the best to the S2.
Honestly, if I was wealthy enough now, I would have probably purchased one.
Fred.
-
Nice sharp images from those Leica lenses. We shall see if the Pentax 645D meets up with this image quality for a third of the price. Same Kodak sensor, isn't it, the one that goes for $1k/ea in modest quantities?
I think Leica has sullied its name. To me it means pure predatory pricing now.
Not that I'm bitter.
-
Amazing details!! ISO 1250 is also pretty good.
I can not see the point in high iso samples converted to B&W. I want to see full colour under difficult dim and contrasty light to judge it's worth.
I do think all the images look very good and it looks like it could be an excellent machine.
Kevin.
-
Hi,
I'm not that impressed by the samples. Why?
1) I don't know if they are 1:1 samples, partly because I don't speak french
2) If they are JPEG I don't know how they had been processed
3) It's not obvious to me that the images are better than what I can achieve with my Sony Alpha 900. They may be better but it is not obvious to me.
But,
1) The samples may be great! I'm just not able to judge
2) No reason whatsoever to believe that the S2 images would not be superior, I just don't feel the samples demonstrate this
I my view Leica tries to create a new "class" of camera, essentially an MFDB sized DSLR with weather sealing . Pentax tries to do the same at a more reasonable price point. Will Leica succeed? I don't know.
Some people are willing to pay for the ultimate edge in image quality. If you make your living printing at large size it actually makes sense. For smaller prints it may just not matter.
I'd say that our host Michael Reichmann is at one end of the spectrum, in search of ultimate quality. James Russel, another frequent poster on this forums, seems to feel that does it matter little for the client what equipment has been used as long as it is good enough. My guess is that if you print large enough, any improvement in image quality is welcome.
Finally, I'd suggest that utility is as important as quality. If you don't have the lens you need, it won't help that the lenses you don't need are as good as they could be.
BR
Erik Kaffehr
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.
If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...
Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg= (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=)
page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4 (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4)
Cheers,
Fred.
-
Hi,
I'm not that impressed by the samples. Why?
1) I don't know if they are 1:1 samples, partly because I don't speak french
2) If they are JPEG I don't know how they had been processed
3) It's not obvious to me that the images are better than what I can achieve with my Sony Alpha 900. They may be better but it is not obvious to me.
But,
1) The samples may be great! I'm just not able to judge
2) No reason whatsoever to believe that the S2 images would not be superior, I just don't feel the samples demonstrate this
I my view Leica tries to create a new "class" of camera, essentially an MFDB sized DSLR with weather sealing . Pentax tries to do the same at a more reasonable price point. Will Leica succeed? I don't know.
Some people are willing to pay for the ultimate edge in image quality. If you make your living printing at large size it actually makes sense. For smaller prints it may just not matter.
I'd say that our host Michael Reichmann is at one end of the spectrum, in search of ultimate quality. James Russel, another frequent poster on this forums, seems to feel that does it matter little for the client what equipment has been used as long as it is good enough. My guess is that if you print large enough, any improvement in image quality is welcome.
Finally, I'd suggest that utility is as important as quality. If you don't have the lens you need, it won't help that the lenses you don't need are as good as they could be.
BR
Erik Kaffehr
Hi Erik,
They did use for DNG Camera Raw, Capture one 5 and Lightroom beta 64, then 16 bits converted to 8 for the web, and test being compared to the Nikon D3x.
About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.
Fred.
-
About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.
my understanding is that's exactly what he does: shooting 135 cameras. The Contax' only for fun... and in fact shooting a Contax is fun.
Too, a direct comparison of the Contax with a P31+ or P40+ with the S2 would certainly be interessting. I bet the difference (in IQ) is almost indiscernible.
As to the S2 ... boiled down to IQ only... I am simply not able to find something special in the files.
The (very) few samples available online that show 100% crops of the edges (stopped down) are rather disappointing.
-
... and in fact shooting a Contax is fun.
I completly agree with the Contax. I've been trying this week and it is a joy!!!
Cheers,
Fred.
-
Hi Erik,
They did use for DNG Camera Raw, Capture one 5 and Lightroom beta 64, then 16 bits converted to 8 for the web, and test being compared to the Nikon D3x.
About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.
Its simple Fred, use a Contax 645 for a day or two and you'll see why!
Let's not forget insignificant things like a great set of lenses along with many from Hasselblad, many useful accessories, then there's the small matter of price, you can pick up mint backup bodies and glass for very little investment today. Things that are seriously lacking with the S2. I wonder if anyone would even bother with the S2 if Pentax came out with a Leica to Pentax mount adapter?
-
I completly agree with the Contax. I've been trying this week and it is a joy!!!
especially after many, many, many weeks as this camera simply never fails. It just works...
(on the other hand there is not that much that could fail... as it is so reduced to basic features. then again exactly that is the beauty of the Contax)
-
Might as well hijack this thread properly.
I like my P45+ files, but I hate using the Mamiya AFD II, in particular the focus is a pest, never really quite where I want it and metering isn't always that good either. Camera shake is a nuisance in available light.
I have a free mount change on my Phase back.
I don't use the MF for anything that moves fast, but like imaging people. I have a D3x that is faster than anything that moves
Do you guys think switching to Contax might make sense?
Edmund
-
Do you guys think switching to Contax might make sense?
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.
edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.
-
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.
edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.
I guess the alternative would be to move to H4D50 or just dump MF - the Phase P65 looks nice filewise, but the DF camera is just more of the Mamiya, and I am developing a real allergy to that thing. I guess I should try a Contax for a few days.
Edmund
-
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.
edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.
I have a look on one in Madrid, body + 80/2 planar + prism finder all in mint conditions=1200 euros.
Well, the Leica is also very simple...but much much more expensive
Fred.
-
I guess the alternative would be to move to H4D50 or just dump MF - the Phase P65 looks nice filewise, but the DF camera is more of the Mamiya
You get the P65 also in Contax mount. The lenses are up to the task (seriously!).
Then again... if you like your P45+ for portraiture... why upgrade to a P65+? For portraits I'd rather recommend to downgrade to a P21+ as it enables you to use the continous mode of your camera... unless you want to shoot those Thomas Ruff super large portraits or so...
-
You get the P65 also in Contax mount. The lenses are up to the task (seriously!).
Then again... if you like your P45+ for portraiture... why upgrade to a P65+? For portraits I'd rather recommend to downgrade to a P21+ as it enables you to use the continous mode of your camera... unless you want to shoot those Thomas Ruff super large portraits or so...
The back is ok - I just want to swap the body type.
Edmund
-
I have a look on one in Madrid, body + 80/2 planar + prism finder all in mint conditions=1200 euros.
Well, the Leica is also very simple...but much much more expensive
well... I've only seen the images available online and you never know how they were processed etc. So I have no first hand experience. But my impression is that the S2/70mm is better wide open and up to f4 in terms of resolution. In terms of "bokeh" (wow!) the 70mm also produces ghosting beyond the focus plane. Simply a weird look.
But from 5.6 and above I'd say the Contax 80mm smokes the S2/70mm ... especially on a crop 1.3 sensor (P40+ and the like)... unless someone shows better examples (or maybe I can test a S2 for fun sometime).
"Leica" is a big name ... but looking at the results I seriously don't get the hype.
"Zeiss" is also a big name btw. But finally that doesn't mean anything...
-
The back is ok - I just want to swap the body type.
so why not just try a H? The finders are certainly very nice and I think for portraits that's a real benefit (?).
Maybe if it's really for portraits the H3D40 would be better...? I was very impressed by the ISO800 shot posted by D. Grover.
-
I have to say this....2010 and you all are talking about a system that is not supported nor likely to be resurrected.
Lenses have no appreciable loss of utility with time...not so with bodies.
Lets get real ... Contax is yesterdays darling. Find something that works today.
H4D, Phase Pentax....find the least objectionable alternative and make it work for you.
Legacy lens adapters and future upgrades.
Those who have the Contax MF system can make it work for years to come....I for one would
not want to buy in at this point.
I agree that the S2 has nothing that trumps MF but it is attractive...the files presented here look better than
a lot that Leica used to show the camera. Nothing I have seen makes me want to give away my H3DII - 39 in
order to change.
I would personally love a digital camera that supported Cooke LF lenses...wont happen!
Just some random observations.
Bob
-
so why not just try a H? The finders are certainly very nice and I think for portraits that's a real benefit (?).
Maybe if it's really for portraits the H3D40 would be better...? I was very impressed by the ISO800 shot posted by D. Grover.
I also...Jeff Grants nearly 3 minute exposure on the H4D 40 was wonderful.
Bob
-
I guess the alternative would be to move to H4D50 or just dump MF - the Phase P65 looks nice filewise, but the DF camera is just more of the Mamiya, and I am developing a real allergy to that thing. I guess I should try a Contax for a few days.
Edmund
Have you actually took the time to go shoot the DF or is the allergy just something that comes with thought. Go shoot the freaking thing , it's not even close to the AFDII. Frankly it's a much better cam by a long shot but you will not know that looking at specs. you need to actually put it in play.
Edmund just for you http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243)
-
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.
If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...
Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg= (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=)
page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4 (http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4)
Cheers,
Fred.
Most of these samples appear not to be 100% even when you click on the image, they are just downsampled to whatever resolution your screen has.
I would personnally wait for a comparison between the S2 and Pentax 645D files before even considering the Leica. The gap with top DSLR appears to be already not that huge in technical terms, my guess would be that the Pentax will be impossible to distinguish if not superior. It is by the 3.5 times cheaper in Tokyo. I could get the Pentax, a few lenses and a very nice second hand car to take me to shooting locales for the price Leica is asking for the S2 and 70mm lens.
In the end what remains might be the look of the lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Lets get real ... Contax is yesterdays darling. Find something that works today
I kind of agree.
Then again... the S2 truley doesn't work today (only 2 lenses, ludicrous tethering performace ...) but the Contax does. The Contax is a complete system including vertical grip, exchangebale finders, the whole range of lenses (incl. Hasselblad lenses via adapter) etc.... it's all there! And it works.
As to service... just buy 2 or 4 or 10 Contax' and 2 or 4 copies of the most important lenses. That's still less expensive than a current MFD system and you won't need any service at all.
Man... occasionally I look at ebay for Contax items. I've bought a 2./80 for €200.- some months ago. Mint. Actually I think it has never been used.
At this price I can buy 15 Contax 80mm lenses for 1 S2/70mm lens. From this point of view, seriously... service it not an issue. Cases for all that gear are an issue
As I am located in Germany service is not an issue at all anyhow...
-
Most of these samples appear not to be 100% even when you click on the image, they are just downsampled to whatever resolution your screen has.
I would personnally wait for a comparison between the S2 and Pentax 645D files before even considering the Leica. The gap with top DSLR appears to be already not that huge in technical terms, my guess would be that the Pentax will be impossible to distinguish if not superior. It is by the 3.5 times cheaper in Tokyo. I could get the Pentax, a few lenses and a very nice second hand car to take me to shooting locales for the price Leica is asking for the S2 and 70mm lens.
In the end what remains might be the look of the lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
End of the day I really did not see much of a different look from the s2 lenses compared to anything else. Now if we are talking some M and R glass than we are talking a different story altogether.
-
Have you actually took the time to go shoot the DF or is the allergy just something that comes with thought. Go shoot the freaking thing , it's not even close to the AFDII. Frankly it's a much better cam by a long shot but you will not know that looking at specs. you need to actually put it in play.
Edmund just for you http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243)
Spent some time with it this afternoon. Focus was actually less accurate than I thought it would be, after all the hype I'd heard. Remember I *own* a P45+, so I actually know how these things behave.
The camera had no alignment issues, because I could focus it very well manually. But I am now old enough that I cannot do MF for more than one or two shots at a time.
And I still cannot stand the new thing. It just doesn't feel like a camera, although I do agree that focus is faster, no hunting anymore, and it doesn't slap as much as the old one.
Yes, the DF is less of a kludge than the old Mamiya -but low-light focus is the sole real problem of this body, just like the LCD is the one reason one can have doubts about the Phase back.
Yes, the DF is the path of least resistance; I also think that getting one almost guarantees that I'll *never* use the back outside studio setups.
Edmund
-
Spent some time with it this afternoon. Focus was actually less accurate than I thought it would be, after all the hype I'd heard. Remember I *own* a P45+, so I actually know how these things behave.
The camera had no alignment issues, because I could focus it very well manually. But I am now old enough that I cannot do MF for more than one or two shots at a time.
And I still cannot stand the new thing. It just doesn't feel like a camera, although I do agree that focus is faster, no hunting anymore, and it doesn't slap as much as the old one.
Yes, the DF is the path of least resistance; I also think that getting one almost guarantees that I'll *never* use the back outside studio setups.
Edmund
I wasn't much impressed with the DF either. I like the Hasselblad H cams, although they are not perfect.
-
I wasn't much impressed with the DF either. I like the Hasselblad H cams, although they are not perfect.
I'm just noticing that buying the naked DF and 80mm would cost me at least as much as switching to Contax or Hassy as I have just a few old Mamiya lenses, and a VA free body switch. And if I ever do choose to do an upgrade to the back be it to Hassy or Phase I guess the dealer will donate a body. So I guess my current back is a license to experiment
Edmund
-
End of the day I really did not see much of a different look from the s2 lenses compared to anything else. Now if we are talking some M and R glass than we are talking a different story altogether.
True as of now, but they might show up in a variety of situations. Bokeh is of course a key aspect, but the look of flare, the stability of the performance at all focusing distances,... and of course the degree of exitation resulting from the usage of the most expensive 70mm lens ever that is also a nicely carved piece of gear.
The eyes of a close friend shine the moment he sits in the leather seats of his Carrera turbo, the moment his hands low pass over the black carbon transmission tunnel on the way to the gear box lever. He doesn't really have to turn on the engine to get his ROI...
Having put my hands on the new Pentax 55mm lens, it appears to be an amazing performer, but I didn't feel any erotic excitation when I touched it. Now I also don't feel anything special when I sit in the Porsche so it might be my problem, never have touched a S2 or its lenses.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I remember Jack Flesher pointing an interesting info regarding the S2:
It is a light body with heavy lenses, and this have consequences on the handling. (balance)
In Jack's case, and also in my case, I've always prefered an heavy body with light (and compact) lenses.
So I imagine that with the Leica I would never end to feel totally confortable. But: What a bloody design!!
It's like the essence of the camera.
The Contax I've tried felt inmediatly "at home" in a second, but it's just me.
Sure that for others, the S2 handling is what they want. In fact it's a pregnant R10, but, has many pointed, much more expensive
than 35mm FF and the gap between the 2 systems is getting smaller. So, is that worth the expense?
Is the IQ so much better than a Nikon D3x, or a Sony A900 ? for example...
I have the feeling that the S2 plays in another league, but that has to be demostrated.
Speaking of the S2 files, they remind me the style of the Sinar backs files for some reasons.
But I have the impression that Leica is again some years late.
Michael Reichmann pointed that the X1 arrived too late on the market to be a real competitor because of MFT,
and this S2 arrived just when Pentax released the 645 and the CaNikons are coming in MFD "reserved area"...
But the S2 IMHO does not target the same client than the Pentax.
Anyway, it looks really good, has a top IQ and it's expensive...you buy it like you buy a peace of art.
I think that reason is not involved in the choice of an S2, but passion or investment.
Fred.
-
Motivated by this "second look" on the S2,
I re-read the Lu-La testing here:http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s2.shtml
In fact I think that they pointed exactly what has been said so far in the forum.
As often, Lu-La has provided valuable information and after many posts regarding the S2 in different threads, back on the article gives a good concentrate.
I like to give value to the efforts made to provide to us a trustable information.
Thanks to all the Lu-La team that participated on this shooting session.
Fred.
-
Motivated by this "second look" on the S2,
I re-read the Lu-La testing here:http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s2.shtml
In fact I think that they pointed exactly what has been said so far in the forum.
As often, Lu-La has provided valuable information and after many posts regarding the S2 in different threads, back on the article gives a good concentrate.
I like to give value to the efforts made to provide to us a trustable information.
Thanks to all the Lu-La team that participated on this shooting session.
Fred.
one thing they did not test is capture rate at high iso...
-
Thanks to some great efforting by David Farkas I was able to get 2 S2 bodies with 70, 180 lenses for a recent 4 day trip to Bologna. I took a M9 w 21 lux as backup.
The second day in Bologna they were hit with an huge snowstorm. Snow, sleet and driving rain for 3 days in a row- many of the people had never seen the city with that much snow in their lifetime. This was great because I had purchased the Leica system to use in rough conditions. Rather than having to put the MF system away at the first sign of bad weather I wanted to be able to shoot without worries (as I had with my Canon system) and take advantage of the great glass. So for 2 days in the sub 30 degree, rain, ice and snow I walked around with the S2 and M9 hanging unprotected on my shoulders. I wiped them off when I could not see thru the viewfinder and kept shooting.
you can see the images here:
B&W- http://www.thingsnotseen.com (http://www.thingsnotseen.com)
Color- http://www.thingshopedfor.com (http://www.thingshopedfor.com)
I will have a full report on the trip shortly on my Web site ( http://www.paultornaquindici.com (http://www.paultornaquindici.com) ) . Until then I would say the camera is truly elegant, easy to get to the right menu quickly, presets worked very well and made for simple easy use. Love the lenses. And best of all the ability to have that quality when shooting out in the elements is a real joy. Which was exactly what I had wanted the camera to do in the first place.
There is an image (the second- number 2 on http://www.thingsnotseen.com (http://www.thingsnotseen.com) ) that was shot handheld at 1/6 f4 at ISO 640 and it is one of my favorites.
PaulT
-
Spent some time with it this afternoon. Focus was actually less accurate than I thought it would be, after all the hype I'd heard. Remember I *own* a P45+, so I actually know how these things behave.
The camera had no alignment issues, because I could focus it very well manually. But I am now old enough that I cannot do MF for more than one or two shots at a time.
And I still cannot stand the new thing. It just doesn't feel like a camera, although I do agree that focus is faster, no hunting anymore, and it doesn't slap as much as the old one.
Yes, the DF is less of a kludge than the old Mamiya -but low-light focus is the sole real problem of this body, just like the LCD is the one reason one can have doubts about the Phase back.
Yes, the DF is the path of least resistance; I also think that getting one almost guarantees that I'll *never* use the back outside studio setups.
Edmund
Compared to what?
Steve Hendrix
-
Spent some time with it this afternoon. Focus was actually less accurate than I thought it would be, after all the hype I'd heard. Remember I *own* a P45+, so I actually know how these things behave.
..
Edmund
Dear Edmund,
The Contax IS accurate; it just decides where it wants to focus and does it. The problem is, that may not be where YOU want to focus.
Over the years I have learned to compensate; the Contax AF wants to focus on the highest contrast high spacial frquency objects. If you have a subject and a tree, it may focus on the tree, You just need to focus and recompose.
It is really the ONLY place in my mind where the Contax is inferior to what the S2 or Hasselblad or New Phase/Mamyia bodies are (and I am not sure that the real issue is that ALL cameras, as Sean Reid says, should use a single, central AF point. Let's face it, that's what we do manually.
The counter is, fantastic lenses (see somewhere here my corner and edge shots with a 35mm that has never needed adjustment. The comments we all extremely positive. Even I was surprised at the result :-)
The WLF, Grips, lenses and yes, with 2s delay even 1/15 is rock solid.
BTW, the 35mm shot was 100% crop with the P65+! If you want the raw, email me.
So, a little give up in AF for a LOT more, and for CHEAP.... LOL
best regards
Victor
PS And if David Farcus ever gets back to me, I am considering the S2 as the BACKUP to the Contax P65+ setup. I do need the quality in a AF package with a little less fuss. I also think the Zeiss/Phase look is NOT the same as the Leica S2, but is just as good, just different; richer, less anylytical, more 'warm' and smooth. We shall see. If it doesn't blow me away, I can wait. (and ok, cost may not be a real issue for me, but I am not going to pay for a symbol; at 67 I long ago gave up the need to impress anyone except myself!
-
Compared to what?
Steve Hendrix
I guess you are talking focus? Compared to my two AFDII bodies.
Edmund
-
Thanks to some great efforting by David Farkas I was able to get 2 S2 bodies with 70, 180 lenses for a recent 4 day trip to Bologna. I took a M9 w 21 lux as backup.
The second day in Bologna they were hit with an huge snowstorm. Snow, sleet and driving rain for 3 days in a row- many of the people had never seen the city with that much snow in their lifetime. This was great because I had purchased the Leica system to use in rough conditions. Rather than having to put the MF system away at the first sign of bad weather I wanted to be able to shoot without worries (as I had with my Canon system) and take advantage of the great glass. So for 2 days in the sub 30 degree, rain, ice and snow I walked around with the S2 and M9 hanging unprotected on my shoulders. I wiped them off when I could not see thru the viewfinder and kept shooting.
you can see the images here:
B&W- http://www.thingsnotseen.com (http://www.thingsnotseen.com)
Color- http://www.thingshopedfor.com (http://www.thingshopedfor.com)
I will have a full report on the trip shortly on my Web site ( http://www.paultornaquindici.com (http://www.paultornaquindici.com) ) . Until then I would say the camera is truly elegant, easy to get to the right menu quickly, presets worked very well and made for simple easy use. Love the lenses. And best of all the ability to have that quality when shooting out in the elements is a real joy. Which was exactly what I had wanted the camera to do in the first place.
There is an image (the second- number 2 on http://www.thingsnotseen.com (http://www.thingsnotseen.com) ) that was shot handheld at 1/6 f4 at ISO 640 and it is one of my favorites.
PaulT
lovely images. Thanks for posting.