Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Leica S and diglloyd  (Read 45985 times)

peterv

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
    • facebook
Leica S and diglloyd
« on: July 29, 2015, 06:10:29 am »

I know Mr. Chambers is a thorough and knowledgeable reviewer, but as of late he seems to have an extra large ax to grind with Leica. Most of his reviews of Leica products are quite negative.

He just tested a Leica S and encountered AF problems. Incidentally, he also reported AF problems in his original S2 review. I've used my S2-P for 2,5 years now and like most other S system owners, I can confirm that AF is very, very accurate.

If he has these AF errors, assuming Mr. Chambers knows how to operate the camera, he has a faulty camera and he should not publish a review that hurts Leica. I understand he's not pleased because he feels his valuable time was wasted, but that doesn't mean he should bad-mouth a complete system like this.

I had planned to become a subscriber again, just to read his thoughts on the S system, but I guess I'll hold off for now.
Logged

dlavay

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2015, 06:45:00 am »

If you don't like what you hear, shoot the messenger. I have been following Lloyd Chambers for years. He is well versed in photographic equipment and his comments regarding the technical attributes of the items he reviews are usually quite accurate. The prospective buyer would be wise to seriously consider his opinion before making a purchase.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 06:48:14 am by dlavay »
Logged

Jager

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 207
    • E vestigio
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2015, 06:58:48 am »

I don't have a problem with Lloyd Chambers reporting failures and defects.  I subscribed to his site for a while.  I let it lapse when it became clear that he was not as knowledgeable as his writings would have us believe (e.g. his revelation that color contrast filters might cause focus shift, something black and white film shooters have known for decades), and that he allowed his personal skill shortfalls and bias (e.g. his chronic inability to accurately focus a Leica M rangefinder) to inform his 'findings.'

Gel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 240
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2015, 07:13:53 am »

We're all amateurs at differing levels of incompetence.

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2015, 07:17:48 am »

Lloyd Chambers is extremly competent at analyzing the tonality and texture of every brick in a given wall.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Gel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 240
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2015, 07:22:30 am »

For the record if anyone wants to send me $5 I'll happily rave about their chosen system for them.

Edit: That was a joke, I just got several emails from Phase asking for my Paypal details.  :D

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2015, 09:51:35 am »

Lloyd Chambers is extremly competent at analyzing the tonality and texture of every brick in a given wall.


I would agree. The guy has absolutely no imagination. If he found a bug then there was a bug.

The colors on his S pictures are wonderful. He does very nicely capture what is in front of his camera.

Edmund
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 10:09:07 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2015, 10:34:54 am »

He typically tells it like it is. I've never used a piece of equipment delivering results significantly different from those he reported about. His focus on standardized tests is relevant for a tester.

But he could have had a bad sample.

He has been very positive about the S system overall.

Cheers,
Bernard

dlavay

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2015, 09:23:32 am »

For me, the only issue regarding LLoyd's blog is the accuracy of his technical findings and how they might influence my buying decisions. The Ricoh GR proved to be stellar and if I am not mistaken he was one of the first to comment on the Sony a7R shutter vibration issue. It certainly had an impact on me; passing on this purchase and eventually pre-ordering the a7RII. I only wish he had published a review of my first wife before I walked down that isle.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 09:28:04 am by dlavay »
Logged

D Fuller

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 608
    • AirStream Pictures
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2015, 12:30:20 pm »

I only wish he had published a review of my first wife before I walked down that isle.

I just spit coffee all over my screen. LOL!
Logged
business website: www.airstream.pictures
blog: thirtynineframes.com/blog

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2015, 01:38:11 pm »

Hi,

Lloyd has issues with AF on most cameras. If you recall the original S2 review, he shot five series of images and found that two of those were OK. He reported similar results for Canon, Nikon, Pentax 645.

Lloyd prefers to use magnified live view for focusing, that is a technique that is quite accurate, mostly.

I don't think Lloyd is partial against Leica, but it seems the system doesn't work for him.

Part of the issue may also be that Lloyd works with a lot of systems, like now the 5dsR with Zeiss Otus lenses, so his references for accuracy of focus and image sharpness may be different to other users/testers.

Best regards
Erik






I know Mr. Chambers is a thorough and knowledgeable reviewer, but as of late he seems to have an extra large ax to grind with Leica. Most of his reviews of Leica products are quite negative.

He just tested a Leica S and encountered AF problems. Incidentally, he also reported AF problems in his original S2 review. I've used my S2-P for 2,5 years now and like most other S system owners, I can confirm that AF is very, very accurate.

If he has these AF errors, assuming Mr. Chambers knows how to operate the camera, he has a faulty camera and he should not publish a review that hurts Leica. I understand he's not pleased because he feels his valuable time was wasted, but that doesn't mean he should bad-mouth a complete system like this.

I had planned to become a subscriber again, just to read his thoughts on the S system, but I guess I'll hold off for now.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Bo Dez

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 112
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2015, 02:27:06 pm »

I like Lloyd. He is super thorough and gets to issues with cameras very quickly. I don't always agree on everything he writes but i do read it with great interest and respect it for honesty and thoroughness. I think he is probably one of the better reviewers for identifying issues, and not been worried to tell people what they are.


Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2015, 03:55:50 pm »

Actually those results would line up with my own experience over the years. Lloyd may be borderline obsessive, but painstaking attention to detail, and the ability to repeat the same gestures over and over again are a positive trait for a tester.

I've had a bunch of decent dSLRs that would vary from supersharp to decently in focus from shot to shot, with some inexplicably going completely OOF in a whole series.

Furthermore, after investigating the issues I also found that some lenses don't have enough servo-focus clicks around infinity, so in fact they simply cannot be set super-accurately to focus on something more than 20m or so away. This does impact landscape because they eye perceives the point of perfect focus in the print.

Edmund

Hi,

Lloyd has issues with AF on most cameras. If you recall the original S2 review, he shot five series of images and found that two of those were OK. He reported similar results for Canon, Nikon, Pentax 645.

Lloyd prefers to use magnified live view for focusing, that is a technique that is quite accurate, mostly.

I don't think Lloyd is partial against Leica, but it seems the system doesn't work for him.

Part of the issue may also be that Lloyd works with a lot of systems, like now the 5dsR with Zeiss Otus lenses, so his references for accuracy of focus and image sharpness may be different to other users/testers.

Best regards
Erik
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 04:02:22 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

MarkL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 475
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2015, 04:34:10 pm »

If he has these AF errors, assuming Mr. Chambers knows how to operate the camera, he has a faulty camera and he should not publish a review that hurts Leica.

Why not? He is a reviewer, hiding it and protecting Leica damages his credibility.

He is very opinionated and has a specific idea of what makes a good camera, when a camera comes along that then doesn't exactly meet this he seems to slam it with very emotive language. His idea of photography is also rather odd (landscapes shot wide open) but of the reviewers out there he is the most thorough and critical.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2015, 05:55:24 pm »

Hi,

Roger Ciala at LensRentals has looked into this on Canon and Nikon. He found that neither system could focus accuaretely at full aperture, in general. With the latest generation of Canon cameras and lenses he found that focus was near perfect.

My take is that phase detecting AF is not accurate enough to achieve critical sharpness at large apertures in most cases.

It is a bit like the shutter related vibrations Lloyd has detected on the A7r, lot of users went into denial mode, but the issue was very much detectable. On the other hand, the issues were not very obvious, more like having 24 instead 36 MP.

Best regards
Erik

Actually those results would line up with my own experience over the years. Lloyd may be borderline obsessive, but painstaking attention to detail, and the ability to repeat the same gestures over and over again are a positive trait for a tester.

I've had a bunch of decent dSLRs that would vary from supersharp to decently in focus from shot to shot, with some inexplicably going completely OOF in a whole series.

Furthermore, after investigating the issues I also found that some lenses don't have enough servo-focus clicks around infinity, so in fact they simply cannot be set super-accurately to focus on something more than 20m or so away. This does impact landscape because they eye perceives the point of perfect focus in the print.

Edmund

« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 06:06:41 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

dlavay

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2015, 08:43:03 pm »

This certainly does seem to be an emotional issue for many.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2015, 09:30:38 pm »

This certainly does seem to be an emotional issue for many.

It's a purely practical issue in landscape photography - if one is obsessive about one's art or hobby, buys $10K+ equipment and enlarges to large sizes, one needs to be aware that AF may not cut it, and use checks and workarounds.

I think this is first a question of design parameters and test conventions. Camera and lens designers design the camera AF path and EACH lens servo control for certain purposes. But they don't publish those specs. People like DxO will typically test a lens/AF system at a multiple of the focal distance, eg 50x which for a 50 mm will give you 2.5m. Any precision and repeatability issues at long distance won't show up on those test reports.

As a result, that portrait lens with the superb test results may never deliver at long distances, in practice.

Try the following: Wait for the evening, pick your favorite short tele eg. 85mm, walk to the side of a road, point the tele along the road at a roadsign 50m or so away, and take a few pics. You'll be surprised at what ends up being and not being in focus. The only photo course I ever took in my life was a one-hour Xrite-sponspored  walk at Photokina. The instructor said "always shoot the hell out of it because of AF". He was right.

My friend Norman Koren who runs Imatest learnt this lesson very painfully one day when he tried to take landscape images in Paris with a 5D2 and kit lens. He laughed when I warned him, he was very angry when he saw his pictures.

Frankly, I think the only focus that is GUARANTEED to work at long ranges is directly geared manual focus with an enlarged liveview. Oh wait, that is exactly what the cinema geeks, tech cam guys and CMOS dSLR owners with MF lenses are doing. At medium distance, good cameras are often pretty good. Or not.

Edmund

PS. As I wear a tinfoil hat, I think one of the reasons modern AF lenses focus so badly at infinity is that manufacturers don't want people using the crop feature to zoom, they want them to buy the longer lens where they make lotsa profit. But that's just the cynic in me speaking.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 10:17:12 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2015, 01:01:09 am »

Hi,

Most lens testers use some form of focus bracketing to find best focus.

The graphs below show the focusing accuracy of AF compared to focusing with a focusing rail.

Taken from this article: http://www.slrgear.com/articles/focus/focus.htm

Roger Ciala discusses some aspects accurate focusing, ths time on Canon. The combination of late generation cameras (5DIII, 1Dx) and late generation lenses seem to focus pretty well.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/08/autofocus-reality-part-3b-canon-cameras

Neither article says anything about the Leica S, of course, but they both offer some insight in the limited accuracy of AF-systems.

Stopping down hides a lot of focusing errors. Stopping down beyond optimum gives up quite a bit of lens sharpness, which may matter or not.

Best regards
Erik
It's a purely practical issue in landscape photography - if one is obsessive about one's art or hobby, buys $10K+ equipment and enlarges to large sizes, one needs to be aware that AF may not cut it, and use checks and workarounds.

I think this is first a question of design parameters and test conventions. Camera and lens designers design the camera AF path and EACH lens servo control for certain purposes. But they don't publish those specs. People like DxO will typically test a lens/AF system at a multiple of the focal distance, eg 50x which for a 50 mm will give you 2.5m. Any precision and repeatability issues at long distance won't show up on those test reports.

As a result, that portrait lens with the superb test results may never deliver at long distances, in practice.

Try the following: Wait for the evening, pick your favorite short tele eg. 85mm, walk to the side of a road, point the tele along the road at a roadsign 50m or so away, and take a few pics. You'll be surprised at what ends up being and not being in focus. The only photo course I ever took in my life was a one-hour Xrite-sponspored  walk at Photokina. The instructor said "always shoot the hell out of it because of AF". He was right.

My friend Norman Koren who runs Imatest learnt this lesson very painfully one day when he tried to take landscape images in Paris with a 5D2 and kit lens. He laughed when I warned him, he was very angry when he saw his pictures.

Frankly, I think the only focus that is GUARANTEED to work at long ranges is directly geared manual focus with an enlarged liveview. Oh wait, that is exactly what the cinema geeks, tech cam guys and CMOS dSLR owners with MF lenses are doing. At medium distance, good cameras are often pretty good. Or not.

Edmund

PS. As I wear a tinfoil hat, I think one of the reasons modern AF lenses focus so badly at infinity is that manufacturers don't want people using the crop feature to zoom, they want them to buy the longer lens where they make lotsa profit. But that's just the cynic in me speaking.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

landscapephoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 623
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2015, 02:34:22 am »

Try the following: Wait for the evening, pick your favorite short tele eg. 85mm, walk to the side of a road, point the tele along the road at a roadsign 50m or so away, and take a few pics. You'll be surprised at what ends up being and not being in focus.

Yes, but cameras are not equals. If I do that with my Nikon, the focus will indeed vary a little bit between takes. If I do that with my Hasselblad, the focus will be spot on all the time. And on this particular forum, we should be discussing the Hasselblad, not the Nikon.

The Nikon is, of course, much faster on moving subjects and will focus automatically on faces even if they are not at the center of the frame. The Hasselblad AF is simply unusable in such cases.
Logged

peterv

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
    • facebook
Re: Leica S and diglloyd
« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2015, 04:25:15 am »


It is a bit like the shutter related vibrations Lloyd has detected on the A7r, lot of users went into denial mode, but the issue was very much detectable. On the other hand, the issues were not very obvious, more like having 24 instead 36 MP.

Erik, that’s a good example. The thing is, he really did find an issue with the A7r that was repeatable. It’s not like he had a faulty A7r with a shuttershake problem, created FUD and gave the camera a bad name though he was the only one with that problem.

I’ve been following all the news around the S system since it was announced at PK ’08. Since then I’ve read every thread about the S system here, on GetDPI and LUF (English and German) If there would have been "a very high error rate often with huge errors” AF problem typical for the system, like the A7r shuttershake, I’d have known about it.

I don’t feel I need to defend the S system, it’s got lots of quirks like any other system out there and electronics are not particularly Leica’s forte, but AF problems - though they have been reported - have not been a structural problem with every S camera/lens. On the contrary, most S owners find AF though not the fastest, very accurate.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2015, 04:26:51 am by peterv »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Up