Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Mort54 on April 17, 2009, 09:26:59 pm
-
Leica S2 lenses on a Phase/Mamiya body would certainly be drool-worthy, but I'm guessing the the S2's lens mount to sensor distance is shorter than that of the Phase/Mamiya bodies. Which would make adapting the S2 lenses impossible. Still, it's nice to dream.
-
Ah, the $64,000 question and in this case probably pretty close to the actual figure once everything is factored in. Naturally totally out of my league but still I'm interested to know why did they really build it. Does it really offer some tangible benefit or is it just a case of me too-ism? They can build it so they do build it. Even if price didn't matter and you were not swayed by the brand, does it do anything that any of a dozen other systems can't? Or is that what it does offer, price and brand. And for those for whom price is not a consideration, perhaps that is enough of a reason, knowing that mere mortals will never have one. The other side of that coin is - are there enough of those sales to keep the model viable?
-
why did they really build it. Does it really offer some tangible benefit or is it just a case of me too-ism?
I for one find this camera concept very appealing. I have been using Nikons for many years following a natural progression. However I have stoped at the D3/D700. The D3x is appealing and at half the price it is a no brainer for me. However at the current offering I am not convinced: It does not deliver medium format quality, and the difference between D3 and D3x really does not seem to be all that big (ref bythom.com). Even if i decide to spend money in the current D3x + range, I hesitate to buy a medium format system because of the bulk, weight, limited autofocus, ISO range, FPS, weather sealing, ruggidness etc.
Still, I am not going to buy the S2 when it becomes available. I generally avoid being a first mover on new products and with Leica I am definitely going to wait. Furthermore, there are rumers that Nikon is considering something similar. My Nikons have always been very, very reliable even though I don´t handle them with all the care I probably should , and to me that is the most important of all. I really hate things that "almost always work". If Nikon announces a Mx camera, I will rush to buy one.
-
The short answer is... THE LENSES!
You can see 40 lp/mm MTF higher than 70% in a 28mm equivalent (35mm format) lens (35mm Summarit) WIDE OPEN!
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/35/tabelle01.jpg)
Remember the format is much bigger than 24x36mm.
The standard 70mm is very uniform, from center to corners...
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/70/tabelle01.jpg)
The APO 120mm lens is just unbelievable, wide open!
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/120/tabelle01.jpg)
... and the same goes for the APO 180mm... 85% contrast for 40lp/mm on axis, wide open!
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/180/tabelle01.jpg)
Put those lenses on perspective...
.
-
Michael Reichmann asks for Leica lenses for Mamiya mount:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...as/s2-pre.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s2-pre.shtml)
Memo to Leica: How about making these lenses in Mamiya / Phase One mount? This will open up a huge additional market for your lenses and likely won't impact your S2 body sales in any significant way. I write this out of pure selfishness, because I'd really love to use your lenses, but like many photographers already have a camera investment (or two) that might get in the way. Anyhow, buying great new lenses is a photographers sacred duty, isn't it?
... but Joe Holmes explains shy this is undesirable for Leica:
http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html (http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html)
http://www.josephholmes.com/news-sharpmediumformat.html (http://www.josephholmes.com/news-sharpmediumformat.html)
An integrated body produced by the same manufacturer who makes the lenses is the best solution.
-
The D3x is appealing and at half the price it is a no brainer for me. However at the current offering I am not convinced: It does not deliver medium format quality, and the difference between D3 and D3x really does not seem to be all that big (ref bythom.com).
When comparing with a MF back of similar resolution, the D3x is in the very same ball park. Obviously, it cannot compete in resolution against 39MP backs when things are done perfectly on both sides... this being said, it is a lot easier to do things perfectly with the D3x thanks to a good metering, AF system, built-in leveling check and life view.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I shouldn't even post here because I really know nothing about medium format, but I guess the true question here as Bernard states is will this cam/lens combo really be 3 times better than a D3x? (Assuming a $8k price for D3x). In reality this goes back to the similar question posed by the D3x......do you want the best of the best regardless of what you have to pay? It's really the same argument against the D3x which is arguably one if not the strongest 35mm DSLR on the market without regards to it's price. It seems that the once you get towards the high end of capabilities, you are paying super premiums to eke out little gains in quality/usability/etc. Agreed with all....who is the target market for this?
Just my .02; and once again, I'm really don't even know much about MF other than what I've read at times on this site.
Cheers....
Todd in Chicago
When comparing with a MF back of similar resolution, the D3x is in the very same ball park. Obviously, it cannot compete in resolution against 39MP backs when things are done perfectly on both sides... this being said, it is a lot easier to do things perfectly with the D3x thanks to a good metering, AF system, built-in leveling check and life view.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
When comparing with a MF back of similar resolution, the D3x is in the very same ball park. Obviously, it cannot compete in resolution against 39MP backs when things are done perfectly on both sides... this being said, it is a lot easier to do things perfectly with the D3x thanks to a good metering, AF system, built-in leveling check and life view.
Cheers,
Bernard
I think the Leica will sell because it's a Leica. Whether it sells enough to keep it going is another matter, but you know it will sell to some extent and you know the lenses will be stellar.
Personally I believe the days of the $10,000 camera are over. Even at $8,000 the D3x is not selling off the shelf to professionals, lots of Doctors buy em'.
One camera dealer I frequent has sold 40 something D3x's and not one to a professional photographer, just amateurs.
Obviously it's the economy, but even if the economy was flush we are getting very close to the point of why rather than must. Anything past 20 something megapixels is not a must buy for commercial work and the difference in a dslr file and a mfdb file has more to do with the aa filter than mere megapixels. Some people love the smooth look of a canon some people hate it, but it's the look, not the numbers.
For commercial work the deal breaker will be the next round of dslrs, because either Canon or Nikon is going to get off their hands and offer a 20 something mpx camera that really does full frame video with manual controls, an articulating lcd and probably somebody is going to offer a raw codec so you can time and grade the video files further.
That camera probably won't be $8,000, it will probably be less than half that price and at that point it's game, set, match.
My bet would be on Nikon because they have no video market to protect.
The crazy thing about the Leica is there is one still camera that can compete in cache and usability and that's the HY6, other than they named it an AFI or HY6 rather than just a Rollei.
Big mistake.
B
-
Leica S2 lenses on a Phase/Mamiya body would certainly be drool-worthy, but I'm guessing the the S2's lens mount to sensor distance is shorter than that of the Phase/Mamiya bodies. Which would make adapting the S2 lenses impossible. Still, it's nice to dream.
Several reasons why Leica won't do this:
- The image circle is too small for 645.
- Flange to sensor distance is different. Probably wouldn't achieve infinity focus.
- Why would they? If Leica makes the S lenses the best MF lenses around without a single dog in the lineup, why would they give away a large competitive edge? If you want the S lenses, you get the S2. Makes sense. Does Hassy make HC lenses in Mamiya mount or Mamiya make lenses in H mount?
- The S2 product manager told me this directly when I asked him a few weeks ago.
And, like was said previously about Joseph Holmes' findings, when you have a tightly integrated solution, you have a better chance of eliminating variability and increasing precision. The S lenses have a chip in them that allows focus calibration data (including focus shift at different apertures) to be programmed into them at the factory. So, each lens, even though it is within spec is then further tweaked to eliminate front/back focus and focus shift when mounted on any S2 body. Nobody else in the MF arena seems to be going as far as Leica with a quality-centered approach.
David
-
- Why would they? If Leica makes the S lenses the best MF lenses around without a single dog in the lineup, why would they give away a large competitive edge?
David
The big question is why would you want to put Leica glass on a Phasyia?
That's like putting $20,000 worth of Alpina wheels on a Toyota Corolla. It will look better but it ain't a BMW.
The second question is does a Phase/Mamiya actually compete with a Leica?
If anybody wants to sell expensive cameras they should look and feel expensive. Leica can probably do this better than anyone.
B
-
By all accounts the lenses are going to be spectacular. I think the real question is going to be the camera body. The M8 showed that Leica was somewhat out of their element in digital, have they learned from that? How good with the LCD be, and is there Live-View? How good are the ergonomics, AF, etc?
-
Does it really offer some tangible benefit or is it just a case of me too-ism?
The article didn't really address many of the S2's relative strengths or innovations. Yes, the lenses will be absolutely spectacular across the entire lineup. But... here are some unique advantages of the top of my head:
- High quality LCD screen. Why so many MFD backs have so low-res screens is beyond me. The S2 screen is visible in bright daylight and has 460K pixels. It is the first camera LCD that I've seen that features separately controlled screen brightness and backlight brightness adjustments, as well as an auto brightness function utilizing an ambient light sensor.
- Super-fast and responsive. The S2 is as fast as a 35mm DSLR in terms of responsiveness. Instant on, very short shutter delay, fast focus, instant image review and zoom, etc. This is due to a much more advanced image processing chip, the dual-core Fujitsu Maestro.
- Faster shooting speed. While not a D3, it still shoots at 1.5 fps, which is 50-100% faster than competing MFD backs at this resolution. Again, Maestro and the 1GB image buffer help here. The camera can push through about 125MB/sec in real time. It already supports up to UDMA 6 cards at 600x write speed (96MB/sec).
- Only weather-sealed, rugged MF body. The S2 water-resistance is designed to a higher spec than a 1DsIII or D3x. To test the lens seals, the Leica QA dept put them in a dishwasher! Cameras have been submerged in buckets of water. The S2 is designed to shoot in environments where existing MF isn't.
- Only camera with user-selectable focal plane shutter and leaf shutter. Shoot up to 1/4000th to take advantage of fast f/2.5 Leica lenses wide-open in daylight (without an ND filter). Or, sync up to 1/500th (maybe faster at launch time) to use battery-powered studio strobes on location to overpower the sun. This doesn't even require a menu search or a custom function. There is a little switch on the back of the camera to instantly switch from one to the other. Mamiya showed non-functioning mock-ups of leaf shutter lenses at Photokina. Still no word on price or availability. There have been rumors about an H4 Hassy with focal plane shutter, but no confirmation. So, the S2 will be the only game in town for a while.
- No exposure time limit. The H3D has a 32 sec limit as does the new P65+. Sure, the P45+ can still do 1 hour, but so can the Leica, albeit with a lower-noise chip.
- Higher ISO capability. The S2 should have very good quality 1600 ISO at full resolution. It also features pixel binning for performance up to 3200 or 6400 ISO at 9.3MP.
- The only MF camera with offset micolenses. This proven technology counteracts the effects of sensor vignetting and corner softness on extreme wide-angles.
- It is the only system that was designed to be 100% from the start. The lenses weren't designed for film. This might sound like marketing, but it's for real. The IR cover glass over the CCD is part of the optical path and design of the lenses. Other MFD systems have two 1mm pieces of glass over the sensor, a protective filter and an IR filter. When light strikes these surfaces, it creates spherical aberrations that weren't there with film and requires software to "fix". The S2 also uses a single 1mm IR filter that is fused to the sensor eliminating the glass/air surface and corresponding aberrations.
- The S2 is the most ergonomic, easy-to-handle MF system. It is physically smaller than a D3x. Not plastic feeeling. Very rugged, yet very comfortable and a great balance without the awkward left-weightedness of current MF systems.
- Two memory card slots for mirrored card backup while shooting, or RAW on one card and JPG on the other. This is a great feature on Nikons and Canons, why not for MF yet?
- Built-in wifi tethering ability. No bulky add-ons. The wifi adapter replaces one of the metal strap lugs. Totally seamless.
- Vertical grip with instant lock/unlock. Why no vertical grip for Hassy or Mamiya yet? Mamiya showed a mock-up at Photokina, but has no further info.
- The new Leica SF58 flash gives full digital TTL capability with possibility of high-speed FP sync.
- The S2 has an HDMI output for full 1080p viewing on an external screen. Great for commercial shoot where photos can be thrown up on a huge HD LCD or Plasma for review by client/art director without slowing down the shoot or requiring computer tethering.
- Only camera I have ever seen with +6 to -6 exposure bracketing. With it set to 1/2 stops, you'd get a 25-shot HDR sequence automatically.
- Open RAW file format of DNG. Use any software that supports DNG. Lightroom, CS4, Aperture, Raw Developer, etc. Maybe C1, but we will have to see how that relationship shakes out. The S2 is squarely positioned to challenge Phase's hardware market share.
- And lastly, the lenses. The S lenses are faster overall offering roughly a stop over the competition, with the ability to use them wide-open and still getting sharp detail from edge-to-edge. None of this "just use your f/2.8 lens at f/11 and it's okay." No post processing lens corrections will be necessary, which should result in better detail and faster workflow. With the same pixel size (6um) as the P65+, but with superior optics, the S2 should produce better per-pixel sharpness than the P65+. Also, 30-90 f/3.5 is the only fast, constant-aperture zoom for MF. Equiv. to a 24-70 that is just half a stop slower than 2.8, this should be welcome for any Nikon or Canon shooter moving up the food chain.
If this list seems a bit long... it is. The S2 is a very innovative product, not a me-too. It is indeed MF at 30x45mm, just like the P30+, AptusII 6, and H3DII-31 at 33x44mm, just a different aspect ratio. Is 2:3 or 4:5 better? For me, I like 2:3. For others 4:5 is the right choice.
The bottom line here is that the S2 tries to address a lot of shortcomings in the MF landscape, whether they be optical, ergonomic, or speed related. With regards to price, I believe that Michael's numbers may be a bit high and perhaps based on Photokina rumors. Leica has repeatedly stated that the S2 will be competitively priced vs. comparable MFD systems at time of introduction. Of course Leica knew the market would change from Sept 08 to Sept 09. The competition isn't going to pull a rabbit out of the hat and come out with a new camera platform by Sept. They can't even get leaf shutter lenses or a grip to market in that time. Hassy announced their 50 and 60 MP backs for summer introduction and Phase started shipping the P65+. It was logical to assume that the only way the other MF players could be competitive was to cut prices on existing product. Leica didn't want to have mud on their face, so they are waiting out the price war and will be able to announce a price that is indeed competitive. Makes sense to me.
This is not idle speculation on my part. I've handled the S2 on three different occasions now and have spoken at great length to the product managers. The S2 will most certainly shake things up when it comes to market in Sept. I want one myself, and I've spoken to many of my customers who are feeling the same way. Some of them are already selling off their Hassy and Phase gear. Exciting times.
David
-
The article didn't really address many of the S2's relative strengths or innovations. Yes, the lenses will be absolutely spectacular across the entire lineup. But... here are some unique advantages of the top of my head:
List...
...
David
I would love to believe all that become a reality in a super realiable camera, and if it does I will buy one. However, the Leica M8 problems make me want to wait and see...
-
When comparing with a MF back of similar resolution, the D3x is in the very same ball park. Obviously, it cannot compete in resolution against 39MP backs when things are done perfectly on both sides... this being said, it is a lot easier to do things perfectly with the D3x thanks to a good metering, AF system, built-in leveling check and life view.
Cheers,
Bernard
I have read elsewise, even at lesser resolution on the MF part. The argument seems to be that the bigger sensor has an advantage. Must add that I haven´t compared actual prints myself.
-
Leica pointed to 15.000 euros as the target price for the Leica S2. The $25.000 seems to be too pesimistic.
David Farkas has explained many potential advantages of the S2, but I think the key are the lenses.
Look at the complete MTF graphs:
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system)
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 35 mm F/2.5 ASPH. CS:
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1...-35-mm-asph-cs/ (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1-2-5-35-mm-asph-cs/)
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 70 mm F/2.5 ASPH. CS:
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1...-70-mm-asph-cs/ (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1-2-5-70-mm-asph-cs/)
LEICA APO-MACRO-SUMMARIT-S 120 mm F/2.5 CS:
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/apo-macro-su...-2-5-120-mm-cs/ (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/apo-macro-summarit-s-1-2-5-120-mm-cs/)
LEICA APO-ELMAR-S 180 mm F/3.5 CS :
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/apo-elmar-s-1-3-5-180-mm-cs/ (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/apo-elmar-s-1-3-5-180-mm-cs/)
Those lenses aren't "sharp" in a common sense. They are just outstanding, even for smaller format lenses!
-
By all accounts the lenses are going to be spectacular. I think the real question is going to be the camera body. The M8 showed that Leica was somewhat out of their element in digital, have they learned from that? How good with the LCD be, and is there Live-View? How good are the ergonomics, AF, etc?
The R system digital back was developed by Imacon/Hasselblad, hardware and firmware.
The M8 was developed by Sinar/Jenoptik for Leica, hardware and (I guess) firmware.
The Leica S2 is being developed in Leica, hardware and firmware. It is the first digital camera 100% developed by Leica "in house".
Yes, I think they have learned from past failures in working with partners...
-
This is not idle speculation on my part. I've handled the S2 on three different occasions now and have spoken at great length to the product managers. The S2 will most certainly shake things up when it comes to market in Sept. I want one myself, and I've spoken to many of my customers who are feeling the same way. Some of them are already selling off their Hassy and Phase gear. Exciting times.
David
Hmmmm. This sounds like the mother of all digital cameras. No exposure time limit? How can one realistically claim that kind of thing? Anyway, if the camera performs as well as product managers claim it will, if it lives up to 70% of what you've just announced, for a price well below what Michael has announced, other manufacturers will probably fold. Somehow, given Leica's recent track record,I have my doubts. I am willing to bet we will see discounted special "safari" - or "pearl white" editions of that wonderful device will be available before any other manufacturer is severely threatened by that perfect camera...
-
As someone who uses a few Leica Lenses on my Canons for a few years now - I am really looking forward to a larger sensor camera with those fabulous optics. I have stayed away from the MF systems because of the poor selection of cameras and lenses, (my opinion). I used to shoot more than 75% of my work with MF film cameras and have truly owned them all. Contax, Mamiya (three times), Hasselblad (three times), Rollei, Fuji etc etc. and all of them were too slow and too bulky. With the latest 20MP DSLR's the quality it there in pixels but not in optics yet. I just don't understand what Canon and Nikon do to test their lenses.. Don't they see how they suck? It's been very frustrating.
So yes, I think there is a definite need for this camera and lenses for many of us who demand un-compromised images.
If the new S2 has the 'Leica R' quality optics that I am using now on my Canons, then wow - I can't wait. This of course assumes the sensor and software are also up to the task.
-
With the latest 20MP DSLR's the quality it there in pixels but not in optics yet. I just don't understand what Canon and Nikon do to test their lenses.. Don't they see how they suck? It's been very frustrating.
Yes, it very frustrating.
However I have noticed that many DSLR owners are prepared to pay for a pro body but would object to paying for Leica quality lenses at a Leica price. For example if Canon produced an L+ series which was 3 times the price of their L series and with leica APO quality, the subject on some forums wouldn't be "crappy Canon wide angles" but Canon lenses are too expensive.
Phototograhers who shoot with a Leica or MF seem to be be prepared to pay for premium quality lenses.
-
Phototograhers who shoot with a Leica or MF seem to be be prepared to pay for premium quality lenses.
But that life were always as simple as prices!
I feel that part of the problem today is that, deep down and possibly though they might be unwilling to admit it to themselves, people no longer have the slightest faith in what they are buying. Claims of excellence are made by manufacturers for products throughout their price ranges. Even a second´s thought would show that this is bullshit: excellence is a finite quality - you can´t have excellent and then better than excellent (other than in advertising). If Maker A claims his $450 lens is excellent, top of the tree, then how can he say the same for his $3000 optic and still be talking logically? He can´t, unless you are willing to load in a series of qualifiers which eventually reveals that one lens is likely to be rubbish and the other possibly passable or even very good.
It´s all down to advertising having distorted reality to the point where nothing is believable and nothing believed, neither by the advertiser, the buyer but perhaps, just perhaps, by the village idiot. Who may or may not be destitute and thus cannot really be figured into the programme as a purchaser. But he might be. You see the confusion? And the same holds true when speaking about quality - it´s all personal, expectational or otherwise dependent on hope in one or another manifestation of the girl.
High prices, in the good old days, could perhaps be considered guides to quality; today, all I´d say is that you still might get what you pay for but never what you don´t pay for, if you see what I mean. But either way, nobody believes anybody anymore and discovering an unexpected lemon in your shopping basket no longer surprises, though it might outrage. And that lack of surprise is a product of the internet, not of advertsing, because experiences are now so easily and quickly shared worldwide that bad news becomes the norm... how sad that it isn´t more good news that we have to share.
Rob C
-
Advertising is more powerful with uninformed people, mostly casual photographers. Professional photographers look for technical information, reviews, comparatives... and before they buy expensive equipment they do some qualified research...
-
Advertising is more powerful with uninformed people, mostly casual photographers. Professional photographers look for technical information, reviews, comparatives... and before they buy expensive equipment they do some qualified research...
I applaud your theory; having stated in this busines in ´60 I would love to agree with you. However, it is my experience that those days of certainty (assumed) have long vanished. At least when I was starting out there was the chance of working with somebody who knew more about it than I did; later, that seems to have been changed to a situation where people leave photo-school, college or whatever other hall of learning with about as much real knowledge of the nuts and bolts of the thing as the local postman has. Possibly even less.
Nobody has a studio, nobody owns anything and everything is rented as and when. Great. Just what´s required to create confidence in a set of tools! Considering that I never borrowed nor ever lent equipment, it´s not surprising to me that there are problems for those that do.
Worse, it used to be about mechanical cameras, manual lenses and well-built Dursts. Today´s scene encompasses so much other peripheral paraphernalia that, should something go awry, it becomes very difficult to apportion blame to any distinct part of the messy equation. Is it the lens, is it the sensor, is it the camera, the software? No, frankly, I think it is a culmination of problems caused by the relentless pursuit for answers to questions that nobody was asking.
Believe me, in all my pre-digital lfe I never heard of a fellow pro who had to return a professional-quality lens for replacement because the new one he´d just bought was crap. Today, it seems almost de rigueur. For myself, the worst that happened was a new Nikkor 300mm that had a focussing ring that felt a bit too slack.
And you know what? Photographs today are not one whit better than they were fifty years ago. Different yes, better no.
And then there is the magic of a name as in Leica. All I know first-hand of the marque is that my last employment was with a guy who did BBC TV stills in Glasgow. He had an extensive array of stuff and for set continuity pics he used an M3 with a 21mm because it was the best wide-angle he had, better than anything for his F3. I sometimes printed from the negs and they did have a different look to them compared with Nikon - tonality looked more MF, somehow. Yet, I know another guy who has had several M and R Leicas and has not a lot of praise for either. So, yes, who do you ask for that great advice?
Other than that, the sun´s shining and lunch is being digested.
Rob C
-
Well, I am biased by my own circunstances. I don't pay much attention to advertising. I look to real information. I am not a professional, but, if I would be one, cost will be added to real performance (relative to the output my clients pay for) in order to make a decision. On the other hand, it is mostly irrelevant what brand to buy for many applications. Medium format versus 24x36mm format is a relevant decision, but your client's needs gives you an answer. If Nikon or Canon, is not so determinant.
-
Medium format versus 24x36mm format is a relevant decision, but your client's needs gives you an answer.
They should post this as a header to the MF forum....