What do I want to know? Well, I guess I am sort of trying to justify for myself that jumping to the S-system is the right thing to do. I am currently using a D3 with mostly the 24-70 and i print on a 24 inch Hp Z3200ps. The results I get are quite satisfying.
However, I have become increasingly interested in how my camera reproduces the image I capture. I have added my first prime a 200mm f 2, and to my eye the images taken with this lens quite consistently have a “better look” and it also carries over to the final print. To my eye, it is just more pleasing. Now, where do I go from here?
I could add more primes to my Nikon kit and upgrade to a D4 or D4x. However, that is a serious amount of money that could bring me quite a step towards MF territory. Maybe MF is a better way to go. I know there are several options, but from what I read S2 users appear to be more consistently satisfied with the lenses. If I like “ the look” (looks good on the web, but I have yet to see a print), then Leica´s seeming commitment to consistently produce superb lenses that adhere to a “certain look” would save me a lot of time from having to trying this and that odd lens. Prehaps a S2 with the awaited zoom lens would be ideal?
However, when I look at images comparing the S2 and D3x on the links from Eric or on DigLoyd, I am amazed at how good the D3x actually is. But I have a feeling these comparings mostly show differences in resolution. I am really more interested in the overall look and “feeling” the image gives, and to compare that I guess I will have to shoot and process som images of my own and compare the results.
One thing holding me back is the performance at high ISO, so I keep lurking in the forums asking users of Nikon and S2 about their experience. From what I gather ISO 640 seems to be the current max if I want optimal results. That is a bit short of what I want. There may be some updates to improve on this, or maybe I will have to hang out for the S3? Just can´t make up my mind
Thanks again for your replies, Christopher.
Hi again Christopher.
I would be carefull with those comparisons based on a few images and dont tell the story about the "overall look and feeling" as you say.
My feeling is that with the S2 I get:
- more sharpness and microdetail,for example look into the eyes of portraits shot with the S2
- I prefer the skintones I get with the S2
- the images of the S2 look very "clear"/real/3d
- I like the rolloff from sharp to unsharp plane
- images of the S2 need near zero post processing (for my taste)
- The S2 lenses are very good even wide open (specially the 70mm S lens will beat most 50mm DSLR lenses in regards to contrast/vignetting and Bokeh)
-ISO up to 640 the S2 will beat any Canon/Nikon but I dont like ISO 1250 fro the S2. So yes, you can use the S2 handhold for many things but there are some applications in low light where you will reach the limit.
How big are those differences..hard to say and I would lie that I wouldnt have had second thoughts here and then if I should have spent so much money for the last little bit of IQ and the very few really big prints.
- Other than that I also like the simple user interface of the S2 and the big viewfinder.
On the other side the Nikon system offers a faster pace (faster AF), more foolproof exp metering, of course much more lens options (which I own but dont use
and of course smaller lenses).
I had a D3x and still have a D700 (with tele/zoom and high ISO / fast AF applications in mind) but have barely used it after getting the S2.
I have to add that I had a Hy6-Sinar75LV before I switched to the S2. And while the S2 suits better my handling needs I did like the IQ from the Sinar back and the Rollei lenses at least the same as that from the S2. So my opinion is that probably all Medium format digital systems will offer that level of IQ when using the right lenses.
by the way, I am hobby photographer not pro and do a lot of "casual" shooting.