To All the CI folks:
A BIG thank-you for the open house last night. It was far more than what I expected. I was able to take home a card with about 30 test shots from the S-2 using the 70 and 180 APO lenses. The model was great, and some nighttime cityscapes as well.
This was the real deal. Everyone who actually wanted to shoot could do so and with their own cards! Identical images from all the cameras were up on the 30" Ezio monitor for comparison. CI is just an amazing outfit, and this from someone who has yet to save enough money to buy from them. When the time comes for my back--I know where I am going!
I am far from a digital expert on the level of CI or many of the people here, but what I generally saw was the following. I am going to leave cost OUT of this discussion until the end but, of course, it is the elephant in the room . . .
IMAGE QUALITY
The S-2 image quality was superior, there is just no other word for it. Colors were great and saturated -- reminded me of the "velvia" look, but I know this is a subjective thing that can be changed in processing. The lens sharpness was extreme on both the lenses I tested. The detail rendered seemed endless and more and more detail kept appearing even up to 800% views. Yes, even at such insane magnifications everything held together beautifully. The color rendering was wonderful. The tonal range was amazing with the ability to reveal fine textures in the uniform outer masonry of distant buildings. Contrast was top-notch with details visible from the brightest to the darkest areas of the photos. The flare control and bokeh was fantastic. out of focus points of light were beautiful, soft, and without outer rings. Too bad it was dark as we could not really test bokeh fully. In-focus points of bright light had a lovely "starburst" effect when the lens was stopped down, with the lines uniform and detail clearly visible between the lines even right next to the light point. It was the best performance of this that I have ever seen, even from my Contax 645 lenses. I did see very minor color fringing in a shot of white neon lights against the night sky, and that was only at, I am not kidding, 800% view!!. The lens performance is obviously at the very hightest level. I personally loved the look and really have no criticisms. We could see no noise at all at base ISO. I am not a high ISO weenie and so am not going to criticise noise (I always, always shoot for max quality and rarely leave base ISO). Still, what I saw from ISO 640 looked pretty good. Dynamic range was hard to judge under the conditions (model with flash, cityscapes at night) but looked top-notch in the cityscape photos in terms of detail rendered.
I am a techno-illiterate and don't know how to post the DNGs here. I am sure that the CI folks can either post or supply them to anyone interested as they took lots of shots themselves.
HANDLING
Where the S2 REALLY shined was in its handling. There is just no comparison with the typical MF interchangeable back set-up. It was compact and light, felt solid as a brick, and everything fell perfectly under my hands. It was like handling a slightly bulkier Canon (that is a GOOD thing) but without all the confusing buttons. Control handling became very intuitive with just a little learning due to its very simple design. Did I say it was very light? Even shooting the 180mm handheld, no problem at all with no fatigue after 20 minutes. Horizontal or vertical, very easy even without the vertical grip. I don't understand the gripes I have seen about the control dial, just a few minutes and it is perfectly intuitive. Menus are easy to navigate to set up the camera. The finger indents make it easy to just carry the camera around in your hand always ready to shoot. The demo camera did not have a neck strap and, honestly, did not need one. Best of all, the camera just begs "shoot with me." That is subjective but the instant you pick it up you want to (and can) just start shooting. This is a camera with no fiddling, no button punching, no pages and pages of navigation and once you have it set up how you like you just shoot away! I still find my 5DII daunting, but with the S2 I was shooting amazing 40 mp images in nothing flat and without any thought at all and getting great results in about 2 minutes. Well done, Leica.
Forgot to mention the viewfinder. The optics of the finder are the best in the business. Simple as that. Bright, contrasty, manual focus easy to nail. Very high eyepoint. Great diopter adjustment. No eye strain at all. 96% view is very good coverage. The info displayed, however, is slightly lacking. Don't see ISO or White balance in the finder Also, it does not show the level of exposure compensation. Don't understand this omission, because there is a -2 to +2 scale for manual exposure--why not for compensation? These days, my standard exposure techinque (and very many people that I know) is aperture priority for initial exposure with compensation dialed in. After some time with any camera, I have a good feel for what compensation is needed and having the scale in the finder makes adjustment instant. With the S2 you have chimp the screen. This really needs fixing as it is a pain.
The LCD screen looked pretty good through my Zacuto Z-finder (If you don't have one of these, get one!) but the test was at night so I withhold all judgment. Without an LCD loupe, almost all screens are useless outdoors (even the 5DII is no exception). I could see right away it was noticeably inferior to my 5DII screen. What's the story here, Leica? The higher res screens are el-cheapo to use for a camera of this magnitude--put one in!! Without live view the LCD is the only way to verify critical focus, depth of field, exposure subtleties and the like, and, not unimportant, to actually see the 100% view that the finder does not give you. Why not put in the best one you can??? The small LCD on top of the camera can give you ISO and basic info at a glance, but it is not really a useful thing. Here, Leica can learn a lot from canon. Why not have "data mode" on the rear screen so there is only one place you need to look to see all settings? Still, maybe this can be done and I just didn't learn how. When you take your eye away from the finder the first thing you see is the rear screen. Twisting the camera (or your neck) to look at the top panel is a pain (I never look at the top panel on my 5DII). The two screens (top and rear) are an unnecessary complication. I am not impressed with the "OLED" top screen (whatever that is) It is small and a hindrance to actual image-making.
The AF was very fast and accurate and pretty quiet compared to other MF systems. It was very quiet at the party (oops, the demo), but would be definitely noticeable in a theater--not "ultrasonic" quiet or even close. Not 35mm fast but pretty speedy. The model was on a balcony and the model lighting was dim (almost dark). The AF was very fast and locked on 70% of the time under these bad conditions--really nailing the focus point. I used the focus-on-eyes-and-recompose method and it worked very well. When I needed to manual focus, I was able to nail it even with my 52 year old eyeballs. The MF feel of the lenses was just amazing. Even with my Contax lens' wonderful heavy damping, you can still feel the motor turning as you focus. Not with the S2. Focus is silky with no roughness of any kind, ever. When focusing on any halfway-brightly lit area, the AF was perfect, every time.
Overall, the camera shot at a faster rate compared to my Contax. 1.5 fps seemed like a real number. With the handling and speed, I have to think fashion shooters would love this camera.
UNLESS, you shoot tethered. Shooting tethered was another matter--it was very slow. Images took a long time to load and display on the screen. It would be useable for product shots and deliberate, careful shooting, but not for a fast-moving shoot. Also, the camera buffer filled up and the shooting slowed WAY down after not very many shots, while the P40+ just kept going, and the Capture One tethering was almost instant in its display. The Leica tethering needs a lot of improvement, I really must say it was not very useful as implemented now. There is not any more to say, it just does not work well. Too bad, because some of the studio guys at the demo were disappointed and it might be a deal-killer for them. If you tether a lot, this is definitely NOT the camera for you (at least not until this is improved).
COMPARED TO OTHER CAMERAS
When I say the quality was "superior" I mean in an abstract sense of what is available today. It is not necessarily "superior" in a truly noticeable way to the ethereal competion. I have some test shots from a p45+ back on my Contax and the quality is pretty much as good. By the way, the Leica does NOT do long exposures (2 minutes max) just so you landscapers/night shooters know. The p45+ is still the only game in town for that. Also, the S2 quality was on a par with the p40+ that was also tested, with may be a slight edge due to lens performance, but not a decisive, game-changing difference. The P40+ had the advantage of not slowing down during shooting and great tethering. The p65+ is still the king, visibly superior resolution. I am not going to belabor the details as anyone seriously interested will do like I did and shoot their own test.
WHY THE CHOICE IS DIFFICULT
If I did not already have a medium format set-up, the Leica would be at the top of my list. The image quality + handling "package" is just the best I have ever seen even with all the niggles and complaints I (and MR) have noted. The "shootability" if this camera is just amazing. HOWEVER, the Leica is still not a complete system by far. By next year, you will have only (35mm equivalents) a 28mm wide, a 56 mm normal, a 100mm macro that ONLY goes 1/2 and not full life size, and a 150mm portrait lens. Not bad for product, portrait, fashion shooters and maybe a good strategy to launch the system with that line-up to appeal to pro users. But this is not the optimum for landscapers that's for sure (why no 1/1 macro???). There are no true wides like a 24 or 21mm equivalent, no moderate wides like a 35mm equivalent and no long teles, or zooms. The lens line-up is useless for architecture. The Leica reps said more lenses are planned, including a wide zoom, long tele, and, best of all, a 18mm equivalent t/s lens-- WOW-- but they were VERY vague about when they would come. It might be more than a year or even two years before you have a truly capable landscape/architecture system. With no tech camera option, you are totally dependent on the new lenses' arrival. If you are going to make the jump to medium format, why go to a system where you have to wait so long for useful lenses when complete systems exist already?
BUT, and this is big, for people who already have a medium format system, there is just no reason to change over. The image quality improvement will not be serious (if you are in the 40 mp range already). You do NOT get the ability to use technical or view cameras like you can with a digital back. The new phase one camera, especially, had autofocus that was almost as fast as the Leica if AF is important to you. Also, Schneider lenses are coming for that system. Similarly, I have no urgent inclination to trade my Contax Zeiss lenses for the Leicas. I can't imagine that the weight savings and ergonomics would be a decisive factor, when you consider . . . . .
Now, I WILL discuss cost. It is much cheaper to add a Phase back to your system, whatever you have, and you get the same level of image quality, a complete lens system, fast tethering that is truly useful, technical camera use for architecture, panoramic stitching, and the digital view camera lenses that are still the best wide angles in existence, etc. There is just no comparison.
I will continue saving for my p45+. I can spend just(?!?!) $15K on the back, and have a complete system of, basically, equal quality to the Leica with tech camera support and long exposures added in as a bonus.
The thought of selling all of my Contax stuff (a body and complete lens system from 21mm to 300mm equivalent) AND THEN ADDING $10k JUST TO GET A BODY AND ONE LENS, and then spending $15 K for three more lenses, and then waiting years for more lenses, and then spending more than $25K on the new lenses, JUST TO GET TO WHERE I AM RIGHT NOW, is absurd in the extreme.
Fine tools add to the pleasure of photography and I am suceptible to desiring the best tools as much as anyone. Photographic vision, however, is in the lenses and even more in your personal techniques when all is said and done. The Leica is an exquisite but limited tool. It might be a complete tool some day, but not for a long time. For now, it would serve my desire fully but my vision incompletely. I can pursue my vision much better with more and varied lenses (yes, I am a visual "omnivore"). Vision is all and in the end the tool is second for me.
If you are a wealthy studio operation, get the Leica. If you are a wealthy hobbyist, get the Leica. If you are a wealthy but serious, dedicated amateur, I would not. I have seen posts from people here and on get dpi who have actually gone through FOUR -- yes, FOUR -- different medium format systems. Do they really think their artistic or even their technical vision gets better for that? It is inconceivable. They are looking for the pleasure of the best tool and nothing wrong with that. If you are among those--get the Leica.
For me, the vision comes first, and, yes, cost does come into play. I loved shooting the S2, but . . .
Actually, for me, the choice to go with a digital back is easy after all.
Guy
