Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Leica S007 coming, how Sinar, Hassy & Contax are affected? ...competition?  (Read 81030 times)

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram

Hi,

This remember me when the D3X was released, people were talking about and even I did not like the pricing. But when I saw the pictures taken for the camera I was drawn to the shadows immediately , in particular in this photo:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_005b.jpg

I notice that something very special was starting, I knew that the camera was unlike any other in terms of Dynamic range and shadow recovery.

This other solidified my perception:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_008b.jpg

Nowadays the D3x dynamic range does not seems that great, but back in the day it was as eye opening experience

Michael R  preview of the 007 shows something: The colors, there is “magic” in them. The high iso is not that good, but the colors , the colors :).

I could not help but remember Edmund comment about the balance between color and dynamic range, and ask if we have one between color and high iso (sound rational that we should have one, as filters cut some light)

Best regards,


Jduncan,

 Now that you say that I might be moved to agree with you :)
 Remember the Sony Alpha 950 and the D3x. Michael bought the slow 950 because it had a very good CFA.
 Also, remember the fast monochrome M9 and the slower color M9 :)

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

I am now waiting for some more reviews to come up and I will consider pulling a "pre-order" trigger.

My most concern is about the image color on CMOS compared to S006 CCD sensor. I am quite sure at this point there wouldn't be much different in sharpness between S007, d810, a7rII, or Pentax.

I am using Sony a7rII right now but still don't like the color compared to my m-p240.

Personally when I see reviews of equipment comparison based in resolution for "normal" or artistic photography, I put the author in my "dislike list" of people... In all my 35 years involvement in photography, I found resolution as such to be the least crucial factor that would affect the quality of the image... Resolution, I have find it to be a crucial factor for painting reproduction or copy work where only multishot backs can achieve the detail needed (or the color accuracy).

As far as color is concerned, I have to agree that all DSLRs suck with respect to a good CCD MFDB, whenever I shoot landscape that includes sky with a DSLR, I find my self always ending up to use "selective color" ro achieve a faithful sky color... With a CCD back, I never had such a problem, neither with the CF-39MS I'm now hooting, or with my previous Imacon 528c, or even with my first back the Emotion 22 10 years ago... Perhaps the best color out of the DSLRs I've used (but not even close to a CCD back) is out of my DF or the D4... the D800E I also use, I try to avoid its use as much as possible if color is crucial...
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

First time I remember in recent years a major brand devaluating a high visibility product by 1/3 its intend price point even before actual availability.

Beyond the silver bullet dreams of some, frankly, it doesn't scream confidence about its qualities relative to competition...

Cheers,
Bernard

Ken R

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 849

Personally when I see reviews of equipment comparison based in resolution for "normal" or artistic photography, I put the author in my "dislike list" of people... In all my 35 years involvement in photography, I found resolution as such to be the least crucial factor that would affect the quality of the image... Resolution, I have find it to be a crucial factor for painting reproduction or copy work where only multishot backs can achieve the detail needed (or the color accuracy).

As far as color is concerned, I have to agree that all DSLRs suck with respect to a good CCD MFDB, whenever I shoot landscape that includes sky with a DSLR, I find my self always ending up to use "selective color" ro achieve a faithful sky color... With a CCD back, I never had such a problem, neither with the CF-39MS I'm now hooting, or with my previous Imacon 528c, or even with my first back the Emotion 22 10 years ago... Perhaps the best color out of the DSLRs I've used (but not even close to a CCD back) is out of my DF or the D4... the D800E I also use, I try to avoid its use as much as possible if color is crucial...

Torger let's not forget about the effect of the lens infront of the sensor on color. Basically each lens I have (Canon) renders colors and contrasts a bit differently. Some are drastically different. This is one aspect that I have not seen testing. Much more emphasis is put on edge to edge sharpness. This is one very cool thing I find with the Rodenstock HR-W lenses, they match quite closely in contrast and color.

Maybe the Leica S lenses all match quite closely (most are very recent designs from scratch).

I know most cinema lenses are sold in matched sets for a reason.

Now, Regarding the fact that Leica lowered the price of the new S significantly before it started shipping might be a combination of factors that include a devaluated euro and increased competition (Canon 5DS/R, Sony A7RII, P 645Z, PhaseOne 40mp back/body/lens bundles and Hasselblad's $15k 50c back and used camera/back bundles)
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram


Now, Regarding the fact that Leica lowered the price of the new S significantly before it started shipping might be a combination of factors that include a devaluated euro and increased competition (Canon 5DS/R, Sony A7RII, P 645Z, PhaseOne 40mp back/body/lens bundles and Hasselblad's $15k 50c back and used camera/back bundles)

Is it just remotely possible that Leica is trying to become a camera brand again, rather than just a luxury product maker? The Lumix/Leica compact range is actually pretty good value, even with the Leica surcharge added.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

Looking at Leica's too aggressive pricing policy, I do wonder what a self contained Sinarback of 36x48mm in size and 48mp that would be based on an up-sized version of the very same sensor would it be priced for.... and then I wonder about competition's future... Coming soon... I guess...  ;)
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

Hi James,

I don't disagree with some of what you write, but I have really no idea why you are bringing in Nikon in this thread.

Not having worked with an S I have no first hand opinion about its performance and have never commented about it. On the other hand you were able to form an opinion about the 810 colors by just touching the body for one minute which is truly remarkable! ;)

And you also know what lenses I own (not quite in fact but that's beside the point). You have friends working at the NSA don't you? ;)

But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver. Things work differently in your world maybe?

Now, as a potential buyer, I am very happy about the pricing. The body and a lens stilllcosting more than the small motor boat I was shooting from last weak still doesn't scream "great deal" to me though...

But I think that the fudamental difference here is that I have never felt any emotion touching a camera. I am only moved by subjects and light. I don't mean it as a SA comment, I just don't care about my body as long as it delivers. You seem to find your tool important and I do respect that.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: August 28, 2015, 01:32:40 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

mjrichardson

  • Guest

Oh come now Bernard, you are a very strong proponent of the Nikon brand, over the years you have always brought up Nikon and stitching as a viable response to almost every MF camera and to be honest I agree with you some of the time, the D810 is a superb camera but it seems strange to see you write that you don't care about the body as long as it delivers.

As an ex Nikon shooter with some lovely Zeiss glass, very similar to some of the kit you own, the best thing I can say about the S is to imagine Otus quality in every lens you own, with the ability to autofocus extremely accurately at will and with a viewfinder so large and bright that you can accurately see what you are doing manually with all available focal lengths, plus access to some excellent legacy glass with OM adapters, to me that alone was worth the entry costs and that's without mentioning the fact that the files are so incredibly rich and beautiful.

I honestly don't care what anyone else shoots with as long as it makes them happy though, it's irrelevant to what I shoot and the enjoyment I get from my kit!

Have a good day.

Mat

Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2296

But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver. Things work differently in your world maybe?

Wrong on that one, Bernard.

If you check your demand and supply curves, dropping the price results in increase in demand ( or demand increases as price falls) - in a market economy. Your scenario would apply at an art auction not in the pricing strategy of a manufacturing company. Ironically, it's also a strategy used consistently by ... Nikon!

Manoli
« Last Edit: August 28, 2015, 03:14:48 am by Manoli »
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

As a Nikon and MFshooter, I totally see BC's point about Nikon's color rendition not being the best suited to portraiture. Yes, you can make that horse dance to your tune, but it's gonna take a lot of training.

That aside, a nice review of the body from Michael. I agree with those above, the colors do look wonderful. The problem  have is that even with the revised pricing, this camera offers very little more than the Pentax (Which is about half the price), and a smaller sensor to boot. A lot of people have difficulty accepting that 44x33 is "True MF" or whatever, which makes this 135+ .

The way I see it,

- If one just wants to go CMOS MF, prefers an all in one body and does not particularly care about leaf shutter lenses, there is the Pentax
- If one wants to go CMOS MF and use their existing technical camera gear, there is the Hasselblad CFV 50c
- If one wants a cheap, view camera package with CMOS MF, there is the Credo 50 + Cambo Actus combo
- If money is no bar and one has some specific requirements (C1P compatible workflow, for one), there is Phase One

I am really struggling to see where this Leica fits in.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2015, 03:24:27 am by synn »
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

landscapephoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 623

But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver.

Part of the price reduction is due to the change in exchange rate between € and $. Probably, part of the price reduction is also due to the recession in Asia, which is a large market for this kind of equipment. I would not read too much about the quality of the camera in the price change.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/

Oh come now Bernard, you are a very strong proponent of the Nikon brand, over the years you have always brought up Nikon and stitching as a viable response to almost every MF camera and to be honest I agree with you some of the time, the D810 is a superb camera but it seems strange to see you write that you don't care about the body as long as it delivers.

As an ex Nikon shooter with some lovely Zeiss glass, very similar to some of the kit you own, the best thing I can say about the S is to imagine Otus quality in every lens you own, with the ability to autofocus extremely accurately at will and with a viewfinder so large and bright that you can accurately see what you are doing manually with all available focal lengths, plus access to some excellent legacy glass with OM adapters, to me that alone was worth the entry costs and that's without mentioning the fact that the files are so incredibly rich and beautiful.

I honestly don't care what anyone else shoots with as long as it makes them happy though, it's irrelevant to what I shoot and the enjoyment I get from my kit!

Mat,

It is the truth though, I don't care the least bit about the camera or about Nikon as a brand, but I care about my hard earned cash and find the D810 to deliver amazing value for the cash. I have promoted the value of stitching - for some applications - but it never was as much about DSLR vs MF as it was about the incoherence of trying to achieve high level of image quality - with an MF camera - and not stitch when the technique is a viable option.

I am fully aware about the excellence of the S system (certainly of the brilliant lenses) and - again - have never commented negatively about it.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: August 28, 2015, 09:07:00 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

As a Nikon and MFshooter, I totally see BC's point about Nikon's color rendition not being the best suited to portraiture. Yes, you can make that horse dance to your tune, but it's gonna take a lot of training.

That aside, a nice review of the body from Michael. I agree with those above, the colors do look wonderful. The problem  have is that even with the revised pricing, this camera offers very little more than the Pentax (Which is about half the price), and a smaller sensor to boot. A lot of people have difficulty accepting that 44x33 is "True MF" or whatever, which makes this 135+ .

The way I see it,

- If one just wants to go CMOS MF, prefers an all in one body and does not particularly care about leaf shutter lenses, there is the Pentax
- If one wants to go CMOS MF and use their existing technical camera gear, there is the Hasselblad CFV 50c
- If one wants a cheap, view camera package with CMOS MF, there is the Credo 50 + Cambo Actus combo
- If money is no bar and one has some specific requirements (C1P compatible workflow, for one), there is Phase One

I am really struggling to see where this Leica fits in.
Sensor size is not smaller than Sony's 50mp sensor... in fact it's exactly the same area... lets not forget that the Sony sensor is (slightly) less than 33x44... 
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Leica S007 has arrived: the smallest "DMF" by a modest margin
« Reply #53 on: August 28, 2015, 08:53:02 pm »

Sensor size is not smaller than Sony's 50mp sensor... in fact it's exactly the same area... lets not forget that the Sony sensor is (slightly) less than 33x44...  
At least get the simple arithmetic facts right: even the exact 42.8 x 32.8mm = 1437mmsq [CORRECTED!] of the Sony 50MP CMOS sensor is a bit bigger than Leica's 45x30mm at 1350mmsq, about 6% [CORRECTED] more.  But more to the point, when the subject of the discussion is portraits (as in Synn's post), Leica's more landscape format oriented 3:2 aspect ratio is likely to get cropped on the long edge, so the comparison will be the short dimension: 30mm vs 32.8mm, so about 10% linear, 20% area.

Still, being the second cheapest "bigger than 35mm" CMOS sensor camera after the Pentax 645Z is not bad pricing by Leica standards.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2015, 10:45:59 am by BJL »
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454

Of course 4% of area is insignificunt to consider... Personally I disagree with the term MF used for all larger than 35mm film size sensors and I would agree with you that Leica should offer a 40x30 crop mode as choice for the user to use on aplications where 4:3 is preferable than 3:2... OTOH, the same may apply for 4:3 sensors where IMO a 3:2 mode (or even better a 16:9 too) mode should be offered.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio

Personally, it has been a long time since I have ever finished an image in 3:2. Almost all of my 135 format images get cropped to 4:3? square or 16:9.
The format is just too damn long for portraits and not wide enough for landscapes.

Ironically, the world can thank Leica for coming up with it. :D
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Chris Livsey

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 807

Ironically, the world can thank Leica for coming up with it. :D

Yes but  ;D Oscar was actually just doubling the movie frame by running the frame horizontally. Now which movie frame actually:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_formats

And you think still has a mass of formats!!

Logged

peterv

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
    • facebook
Re: Leica S007 has arrived: the smallest "DMF" by a modest margin
« Reply #57 on: August 29, 2015, 06:51:47 am »

At least get the simple arithmetic facts right: even the exact 42.8 x 32.8mm = 1408mmsq of thw Sony 50MP CMOS sensor is a bit bigger than Leica's 45x30mm at 1350mmsq, about 4% more.  But more to the point, when the subject of the discussion is portraits (as in Synn's post), Leica's more landscape format oriented 3:2 aspect ratio is likely to get cropped on the long edge, so the comparison will be the short dimension: 30mm vs 32.8mm, so about 10% linear, 20% area.

Still, being the second cheapest "bigger than 35mm" CMOS sensor camera after the Pentax 645Z is not bad pricing by Leica standards.


Indeed. So why some still argue that the S is nof MF but the ~ 33x44 Hassy, Pentax and Phase camera's are, is beyond me. Anyway, just wanted to add that as far as cropping and throwing away pixels is concerned, it works both ways. If an 3:2 image is going to be displayed on a (4K and soon 8K) 16:9 monitor, one throws away less pixels than with a native 4:3 sensor.
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454


I believe that Leica choose 3:2 for three reasons...

1. Because it is traditional to them on all their cameras historically
2. Because the camera looks more familiar for people that upgrade from DSLRs
3. Because the mirror extends less and thus it allows enough space for adapters of other MF makers lenses to be used with the system...

In fact, I believe that the ability of the system to use other makers lenses has played a major role for the success of the system and that it was a brilliant pre-calculated marketing decision. I won't be surprised if they come up with more adapters for Rollei users or even Mamiya/P1 cameras that will offer complete dedication as it happens with the "C" or "H" adapter (in fact I've many times heart rumors about a Rollei adapter coming...), people that use other or older equipment and would consider having an (new or S/H) MFDB also have a Leica S as an alternative (new or S/H).

Still the wedding photographers that use Contax 645 with film will be highly attracted to this camera and save a fortune for lenses and space....
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
"medium format digital" = APS-C?
« Reply #59 on: August 29, 2015, 10:56:41 am »

Personally I disagree with the term MF used for all larger than 35mm film size sensors ...
Agreed! That name made sense for film formats that were indeed in the middle between 36x24mm ("compact format") and the 5"x4" to 10" x 8"  of sheet film "large format".

In the ILC digital world, the medium is somewhere around the 22x15m to 24x16mm of "APS-C", while 36x24mm to 54x42mm are clearly the large formats, and 1" and 4/3" are the compact formats.  (Of course if one considers all cameras, then all of the above are large formats!)

A crop mode for 4:3 (and maybe for 5:4, 1:1, 16:9) might be nice, but on a SLR, would mostly be just a minor time-saving in post-processing.  With live view on an EVF which shows the framing you will get, the in-camera aspct ratio setting is more appealing.  I like the approach of creating a JPEG in the chosen crop, but a raw file that contains the whole frame, with a flag for the indicated crop.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2015, 11:15:59 am by BJL »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Up