Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: peegeenyc on February 20, 2010, 09:24:00 am
-
I was fortunate enough to have an S2 over the Presidents day holiday, to try against my usual combo of P65+ with Phase DF camera.
usage was mainly for street work - very candid, at which this camera excels. Different needs require different tools, so: YMMV
basically I was VERY impressed with the body and lens combination. Build Quality and Optical Quality was probably the highest I have ever seen in a camera, only rivaled maybe by the Contax at its best - like the RTS3. Super solid, great switches and handling.
I'll try to keep this manageable, so here are some quick pros and cons, compared to Phase:
Note that I do not work tethered. Ever. so no test of that.
PRO:
- Fast efficient AF. its noticeably better than Phase's new DF. Not up to Canon/Nikon standards of course, but the best MF out there.
- Lens - truly excellent. the only MF camera I have come across that can work wide open without any sacrifice. Yes they all claim that, but only this one truly delivers.
- Speed: very little shutter lag, easily the best MF out there for that. very good frame rate.
- Cards: I used 32 and 64Gb cards (G-Monster) and had no problems with either. formatted fast, worked perfectly. 32Gb = 400+ images, 64Gb = 800+
- Battery life: very good. about 1/3 used after 800 shots
- Reliability: excellent. no hiccups/ hangs/ freezes whatsoever. My Phase DF still freezes occasionally in fast use, requiring a battery out reset.
- I did not hit the buffer once on 3 days of shooting.
- Wow factor: I had 2 people stop me in the street when they saw it in use. nobody does that with a Phase, despite it being the more $ camera.
- Unwow factor: Tape this thing up, it looks like any dSLR, and there's lots of those about these days. great stealth camera for its size.
- Quiet - relatively speaking of course. On a typical city street you cannot hear it above the traffic. You can a Phamiya.
CONS:
- Price: $27,500 with standard lens. ouch. Leica pitched it too high. should be 10-20% less. and a 2 year guarantee should be the minimum at this price.
- File size: its 'only' 37.5Mp, and this is 2010. Phase has had 60Mp out there for 15 months, Canon and Nikon are coming with 30Mp very soon, so it should have been a physically bigger chip in there, at about 45-48Mp. What made them decide to use a sensor so small/ between 35 and MF?
- Moire - lots of it in clothing in sunshine - probably because of lens quality resolving their fabric textures, and the lack of Moire filtering, duh.
- Lenses - too big and heavy for what they are. Need to bring out a compact version of the 70mm at least. A lens that is heavier/ bigger than it needs to be is not good design. I am also a little disappointed they are not faster like f2.0 or 2.2 for the standard. though, as stated above, f2.5 is great and usable.
- Lack of C1 official support yet.
- large DNG files. 70+Mb bogs things down. slows down transfer time, in camera and out. Such files are too big for this size sensor, and when a 60Mp Phase file is under 50Mb, why is this Leica 37Mp file 75Mb size?
- continuous tracking AF does not work. cannot predict focus for anything. Photographing a car or pedestrian moving at a constant speed - nope. Mind you - Canon stumbled at this recently with their 1D3 and 1Ds3, so why should Leica be able to do it first time out.
- Needs more lens options. especially something to go between the 70mm and 35mm primes. thats a big gap.
Summary:
I was totally impressed with it. Yes, there's a few wrinkles. but the naysayers are wrong - its a great functioning camera, which fills a place that no other manufacturer has got close to yet. Maybe a ZD mark 2 by Mamiya/Phase would get close, but there are no indications of that coming - Phase?
We should celebrate this different MF form factor - that is to be welcomed. Thank you Leica for thinking outside the box.
The end results are really great, and likely to get better as C1 support and firmware updates come down the pipe.
If Leica discount the US street price on this once the early adopters, who will pay full list are out of the way, or release a "kit" option with lens and body combined as a deal, then they will have a great future for it.
Never thought I'd say this, as I'm not a red dot fan-boy, but:
Congratulations Leica.
-
Thanks a lot!
I'm not a potential buyer, because of the cost, but it's nice to see invention from Leica.
Best regards
Erik
I was fortunate enough to have an S2 over the Presidents day holiday, to try against my usual combo of P65+ with Phase DF camera.
usage was mainly for street work - very candid, at which this camera excels. Different needs require different tools, so: YMMV
basically I was VERY impressed with the body and lens combination. Build Quality and Optical Quality was probably the highest I have ever seen in a camera, only rivaled maybe by the Contax at its best - like the RTS3. Super solid, great switches and handling.
I'll try to keep this manageable, so here are some quick pros and cons, compared to Phase:
Note that I do not work tethered. Ever. so no test of that.
PRO:
- Fast efficient AF. its noticeably better than Phase's new DF. Not up to Canon/Nikon standards of course, but the best MF out there.
- Lens - truly excellent. the only MF camera I have come across that can work wide open without any sacrifice. Yes they all claim that, but only this one truly delivers.
- Speed: very little shutter lag, easily the best MF out there for that. very good frame rate.
- Cards: I used 32 and 64Gb cards (G-Monster) and had no problems with either. formatted fast, worked perfectly. 32Gb = 400+ images, 64Gb = 800+
- Battery life: very good. about 1/3 used after 800 shots
- Reliability: excellent. no hiccups/ hangs/ freezes whatsoever. My Phase DF still freezes occasionally in fast use, requiring a battery out reset.
- I did not hit the buffer once on 3 days of shooting.
- Wow factor: I had 2 people stop me in the street when they saw it in use. nobody does that with a Phase, despite it being the more $ camera.
- Unwow factor: Tape this thing up, it looks like any dSLR, and there's lots of those about these days. great stealth camera for its size.
- Quiet - relatively speaking of course. On a typical city street you cannot hear it above the traffic. You can a Phamiya.
CONS:
- Price: $27,500 with standard lens. ouch. Leica pitched it too high. should be 10-20% less. and a 2 year guarantee should be the minimum at this price.
- File size: its 'only' 37.5Mp, and this is 2010. Phase has had 60Mp out there for 15 months, Canon and Nikon are coming with 30Mp very soon, so it should have been a physically bigger chip in there, at about 45-48Mp. What made them decide to use a sensor so small/ between 35 and MF?
- Moire - lots of it in clothing in sunshine - probably because of lens quality resolving their fabric textures, and the lack of Moire filtering, duh.
- Lenses - too big and heavy for what they are. Need to bring out a compact version of the 70mm at least. A lens that is heavier/ bigger than it needs to be is not good design. I am also a little disappointed they are not faster like f2.0 or 2.2 for the standard. though, as stated above, f2.5 is great and usable.
- Lack of C1 official support yet.
- large DNG files. 70+Mb bogs things down. slows down transfer time, in camera and out. Such files are too big for this size sensor, and when a 60Mp Phase file is under 50Mb, why is this Leica 37Mp file 75Mb size?
- continuous tracking AF does not work. cannot predict focus for anything. Photographing a car or pedestrian moving at a constant speed - nope. Mind you - Canon stumbled at this recently with their 1D3 and 1Ds3, so why should Leica be able to do it first time out.
- Needs more lens options. especially something to go between the 70mm and 35mm primes. thats a big gap.
Summary:
I was totally impressed with it. Yes, there's a few wrinkles. but the naysayers are wrong - its a great functioning camera, which fills a place that no other manufacturer has got close to yet. Maybe a ZD mark 2 by Mamiya/Phase would get close, but there are no indications of that coming - Phase?
We should celebrate this different MF form factor - that is to be welcomed. Thank you Leica for thinking outside the box.
The end results are really great, and likely to get better as C1 support and firmware updates come down the pipe.
If Leica discount the US street price on this once the early adopters, who will pay full list are out of the way, or release a "kit" option with lens and body combined as a deal, then they will have a great future for it.
Never thought I'd say this, as I'm not a red dot fan-boy, but:
Congratulations Leica.
-
Thanks, peegee, for concise, well-written post.
-
- Price: $27,500 with standard lens. ouch. Leica pitched it too high. should be 10-20% less. and a 2 year guarantee should be the minimum at this price.
If Leica discount the US street price on this... or release a "kit" option with lens and body combined as a deal, then they will have a great future for it.
Yes, and its cheaper in Europe now. Leica locked the US price when the Dollar:Euro rate was at an historic high, and are now beached by that. The Euro has dropped back from 1.5 to 1.35 to the dollar, so you can now get the body + standard lens at $3000+ less in Europe. and thats at official list price, before the discounts that are coming. Consequently Leica need to adjust the US price down by 15% at least. A "kit" offer seems a good idea.
If I was a US dealer I'd be pretty mad at the business I'm going to loose. If I was Leica I'd be very worried about stalling in the biggest market in the world.
-
I was fortunate enough to have an S2 over the Presidents day holiday, to try against my usual combo of P65+ with Phase DF camera.
usage was mainly for street work - very candid, at which this camera excels. Different needs require different tools, so: YMMV
basically I was VERY impressed with the body and lens combination. Build Quality and Optical Quality was probably the highest I have ever seen in a camera, only rivaled maybe by the Contax at its best - like the RTS3. Super solid, great switches and handling.
I'll try to keep this manageable, so here are some quick pros and cons, compared to Phase:
Note that I do not work tethered. Ever. so no test of that.
PRO:
- Fast efficient AF. its noticeably better than Phase's new DF. Not up to Canon/Nikon standards of course, but the best MF out there.
- Lens - truly excellent. the only MF camera I have come across that can work wide open without any sacrifice. Yes they all claim that, but only this one truly delivers.
- Speed: very little shutter lag, easily the best MF out there for that. very good frame rate.
- Cards: I used 32 and 64Gb cards (G-Monster) and had no problems with either. formatted fast, worked perfectly. 32Gb = 400+ images, 64Gb = 800+
- Battery life: very good. about 1/3 used after 800 shots
- Reliability: excellent. no hiccups/ hangs/ freezes whatsoever. My Phase DF still freezes occasionally in fast use, requiring a battery out reset.
- I did not hit the buffer once on 3 days of shooting.
- Wow factor: I had 2 people stop me in the street when they saw it in use. nobody does that with a Phase, despite it being the more $ camera.
- Unwow factor: Tape this thing up, it looks like any dSLR, and there's lots of those about these days. great stealth camera for its size.
- Quiet - relatively speaking of course. On a typical city street you cannot hear it above the traffic. You can a Phamiya.
CONS:
- Price: $27,500 with standard lens. ouch. Leica pitched it too high. should be 10-20% less. and a 2 year guarantee should be the minimum at this price.
- File size: its 'only' 37.5Mp, and this is 2010. Phase has had 60Mp out there for 15 months, Canon and Nikon are coming with 30Mp very soon, so it should have been a physically bigger chip in there, at about 45-48Mp. What made them decide to use a sensor so small/ between 35 and MF?
- Moire - lots of it in clothing in sunshine - probably because of lens quality resolving their fabric textures, and the lack of Moire filtering, duh.
- Lenses - too big and heavy for what they are. Need to bring out a compact version of the 70mm at least. A lens that is heavier/ bigger than it needs to be is not good design. I am also a little disappointed they are not faster like f2.0 or 2.2 for the standard. though, as stated above, f2.5 is great and usable.
- Lack of C1 official support yet.
- large DNG files. 70+Mb bogs things down. slows down transfer time, in camera and out. Such files are too big for this size sensor, and when a 60Mp Phase file is under 50Mb, why is this Leica 37Mp file 75Mb size?
- continuous tracking AF does not work. cannot predict focus for anything. Photographing a car or pedestrian moving at a constant speed - nope. Mind you - Canon stumbled at this recently with their 1D3 and 1Ds3, so why should Leica be able to do it first time out.
- Needs more lens options. especially something to go between the 70mm and 35mm primes. thats a big gap.
Summary:
I was totally impressed with it. Yes, there's a few wrinkles. but the naysayers are wrong - its a great functioning camera, which fills a place that no other manufacturer has got close to yet. Maybe a ZD mark 2 by Mamiya/Phase would get close, but there are no indications of that coming - Phase?
We should celebrate this different MF form factor - that is to be welcomed. Thank you Leica for thinking outside the box.
The end results are really great, and likely to get better as C1 support and firmware updates come down the pipe.
If Leica discount the US street price on this once the early adopters, who will pay full list are out of the way, or release a "kit" option with lens and body combined as a deal, then they will have a great future for it.
Never thought I'd say this, as I'm not a red dot fan-boy, but:
Congratulations Leica.
Thanks Peegee for this field infos.
Well, it certainly has some very good points, first as you mentionned a brave intent from Leica to put a different system on the market, BUT some of the cons are serious though.
1) the camera is overpriced AND will be soon obsolete (37MP); future models Canon-Nikon and maybe Sony and maybe the more than certain now Pentax 645D will put the S2 in a very delicate situation.
2) The lens range is too limited for the moment, but it will change for sure.
3) The huge DNG files combined with the slow transfer rate is a major problem. When you have client or art-director pressure watching behind your shoulders on computer screen, not talking about the sensation of frustration from the owner. This is not tolerable at this price level.
This could be fixed with firmware? Certainly they will do something very soon because this could sink the boat if they don't.
4)As you mentionned, in a time of crisis, a 1 year guarantee sounds "a little" stingy, for a 20000 euros body that is not apparently matured yet...
and that, gives a kind of bad taste in terms of image.
Price including taxes is 21900 body only for the S2-P with 70 2.5 3590 = more than 25000 euros, if you want the 70 2.5 CS price is 4650.
I hope they fix the problems and they succeed.
Cheers,
Fred.
-
Thanks for the review. What I'm really waiting for is a service report. Lot's of people will argue whether Leica intended the camera for wealthy enthusiasts or for pros but service will tell us the answer.
Here's a little leica personal story, perhaps those who bought M8's have their own:
I sent off my DMR/R8 and a lens in mid Jan to Leica NJ this year for its 2nd trip to service in 3 years. No word from them until I received a letter in the mail about 3wks later with an estimate for the R8 repair and a 2nd letter came a day later with a quote for the DMR. Leica still expects its customers to communicate via regular post and intended for me to sign and return by mail the repair authorization. I called and was able to reach someone that allowed me to do this over the phone and I asked if there would be a 3rd letter coming with a quote for the CLA on the lens. What lens? After about 5 minutes she came back and said that the lens had been send to Solms, Germany and that in another 3-4 weeks I would get a quote from them. After the repairs are authorized they expect 4-6wks to complete these. Well the R8 transport mechanism was repaired 2 years back for similar thing and it took a total of 5months for the whole process. I hope it doesn't take that long this time but its going to be easily 3 months. How's that for service? The S2 is supposed to have a faster service - but has anyone tested it?
-
Jack and I reviewed it back in November http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243) and leica is sending it out again for our next workshop. I agree with most of your points but I did not find the Leica glass better wide open than even my 80mmD. Not planning on any formal testing but more for folks to try it out but I may do a couple things with it and maybe some more wide open stuff. My one issue is there has not been much change since November with firmware, tethering, large DNG's and more lenses etc etc. which does make me worry for there sake. It's a interesting camera for MF but it still carry's some issues that are a concern and will it make it in the real world. Right now Hassy,Phase and now Leaf all have or are coming out with 40 mpx sensors. I own the P40+ which i do like a lot and it's to early to tell if the S2 will make it in the Pro market. But two lenses right now is a major road block, so that has to improve a great deal before I think many Pro's get to serious about it. Time will tell and any new system coming to market takes time for sure. BTW nice writeup and conclusions
-
Likewise our lens tests of the 70mm and 180mm Leica lenses showed very good performance wide open. However, the latest prime lenses from Phase One (the D series and Schneider lenses) are very good wide open as well so the potential for improvement is not what it might have been 2-3 years ago.
Downloadable DNGs available here: http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/leica/ (http://www.captureintegration.com/tests/leica/)
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Jack and I reviewed it back in November http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243 (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12243) and leica is sending it out again for our next workshop. I agree with most of your points but I did not find the Leica glass better wide open than even my 80mmD. Not planning on any formal testing but more for folks to try it out but I may do a couple things with it and maybe some more wide open stuff. My one issue is there has not been much change since November with firmware, tethering, large DNG's and more lenses etc etc. which does make me worry for there sake. It's a interesting camera for MF but it still carry's some issues that are a concern and will it make it in the real world. Right now Hassy,Phase and now Leaf all have or are coming out with 40 mpx sensors. I own the P40+ which i do like a lot and it's to early to tell if the S2 will make it in the Pro market. But two lenses right now is a major road block, so that has to improve a great deal before I think many Pro's get to serious about it. Time will tell and any new system coming to market takes time for sure. BTW nice writeup and conclusions
Guy,
I saw the review in .getdpi and something caught my attention in the first pictures: we can appreciate very well the scale side by side. The Phase does not seems bad at all as far as portability-handling is concerned. I point that because it is one of the S2 claim. What is your impression in this field comparing the 2 cameras?
Thanks,
Fred.
-
I was totally impressed with it. Yes, there's a few wrinkles. but the naysayers are wrong - its a great functioning camera, which fills a place that no other manufacturer has got close to yet. Maybe a ZD mark 2 by Mamiya/Phase would get close, but there are no indications of that coming - Phase?
The naysayers are not wrong, your cons are why the S2 is not a viable option for working professionals. This camera was not intended to be a pro's (i.e. need to shoot for money) camera. This is a camera for hobbyists.
The S2, while of course a very nice camera, does not solve the MFD vs. 35mm disparity from a usability standpoint or price standpoint. It closes the gap on some and widens it on others.
-
Guy,
I saw the review in .getdpi and something caught my attention in the first pictures: we can appreciate very well the scale side by side. The Phase does not seems bad at all as far as portability-handling is concerned. I point that because it is one of the S2 claim. What is your impression in this field comparing the 2 cameras?
Thanks,
Fred.
Kind of interesting really the weight overall is about the same . Phase being heavier body/back but lighter and smaller lenses. S2 being lighter more 35 style but lenses are bulky and heavy. The other one interesting thing is balance and how you like a setup. Personally I like the heavier body lighter lens cause i can fit the Phase in the palm of my left hand and focus manually better and still get a good grip on the right hand. The S2 the bottom of the grip was pretty wide so for smaller hands harder on pinky and ring finger to hold on plus the lens becomes more front heavy so more pressure on the right hand. Now obviously some will like it either way for sure and you should really handle one and see what balance feels better. I know many make the 35mm style claim far better but I do not even though a Phase, Hassy seems bulkier because of the back itself. I kind of like it as strange as it seems. Now the S2 LCD is far better for sure but I also do not like a 3:2 format over a 4:3 format. I thought that would be easy to revert back but I did not and I shot 35mm for decades. I guess you could argue either way and no one would really win that argument and I think for many folks like myself i am more feel person when it comes to the mechanics. So you really need to hold one and work with it a couple hours. Excellent question BTW because i think the 35mm style of body is nice but even so could be better. To me the biggest asset in any of the bodies is a hand strap, I'm pretty big on that one and actually use a Hassy hand strap on my Phase body. Mix and match. LOL
-
The naysayers are not wrong, your cons are why the S2 is not a viable option for working professionals. This camera was not intended to be a pro's (i.e. need to shoot for money) camera. This is a camera for hobbyists.
They need to make it $20k MSRP, $15k - $18,5k street, with the 70mm., fix the tethering problems, get them in rental and show some real pro service with loaners, make it a two year base warranty, and then you will get some traction on Blad and Phase, and Canon. That may not be possible, but that is the market.
Truth be told, the H4d-40 looks awesome, has a good, available, complete lens line, and may be a big improvement on the H3 line. From what I've seen the 1600 iso performance is very good, and its much cheaper than the S2. I haven't checked on the Mamiya DF and the P40+, but I'm sure you can get it way cheaper than the S2, and the lens line is finally nearing completion with the Schneider lenses and the huge number of cheap and high quality Mamiya lenses.
To me the issue is tehthering, price and iso, not necessarily in that order. If a camera fails on any of these specs its a deal breaker. Perhaps travel shooters might be all over this camera, but what is that market like? Are they screaming for a $65k system, when film and a Pentax 67 does the trick?
-
They need to make it $20k MSRP, $15k - $18,5k street,...........
I'd think a lot less than 20, but I think the only real valid question on a camera like the S-2 is . . . "are you gonna buy it?"
We saw this with the HY6/AFI where blogger, reviewer, pee rrr urrr, all raved on about the system but in the end not a lot of people bought them, in the end since not a lot of people bought them, not a lot of promised stuff came out for the camera.
I think the second question to ask about a new system, even a proven new system is can you afford to make a mistake? Dropping $6,500 on a Pentax and selling it for half price would not be fun but nothing near like buying a Leica S2 and the two available lenses and then selling those off.
I think an issue of specialty cameras is what do you use for backup, at least in the professional world, because you gotta have backups for everything. Do you buy two S-2's, Pee 65's or do you buy a medium format camera and throw a 5d2 into the bag? Most people throw a 5d2 in the bag and after a while realize on those days they use both cameras, nobody looking at the monitor seems to notice a difference.
I know a lot of photographers with more than one dslr even the $7,000 a body 35mm systems, but few with two complete medium format systems and not to hyjack this thread but that is where the Pentax looks attractive in that you can own two.
But even looking at the pentax, I have to think would I spend the money on that, given I now own two digital backs and more than 2 complete contax systems that I seem to use less and less. In fact I think about selling them but the used market keeps retracting and since they are paid for I kind of figure why not just keep them for those days I want or need a non aa filtered camera?
I'm not debating "ultimate image quality" here because that goes nowhere or just goes round and round, but the real question on any camera is are you gonna buy it and if you do write that check will it make you a better photographer and/or more profit?
The camera that made me the most profit and a better photographer was the 1ds1, because it shot like film with few issues and allowed me to work in a way film didn't. Next was the Aptus 22 and p31+ because back in the digital frenzy days, it kept the full service rental companies out of my business and now the third most profitable camera I use is the 5d2 because it allows decent quality video at true bargain priced buy in.
IMO
BC
-
I'd think a lot less than 20, but I think the only real valid question on a camera like the S-2 is . . . "are you gonna buy it?"
We saw this with the HY6/AFI where blogger, reviewer, pee rrr urrr, all raved on about the system but in the end not a lot of people bought them, in the end since not a lot of people bought them, not a lot of promised stuff came out for the camera.
I think the second question to ask about a new system, even a proven new system is can you afford to make a mistake? Dropping $6,500 on a Pentax and selling it for half price would not be fun but nothing near like buying a Leica S2 and the two available lenses and then selling those off.
I think an issue of specialty cameras is what do you use for backup, at least in the professional world, because you gotta have backups for everything. Do you buy two S-2's, Pee 65's or do you buy a medium format camera and throw a 5d2 into the bag? Most people throw a 5d2 in the bag and after a while realize on those days they use both cameras, nobody looking at the monitor seems to notice a difference.
I know a lot of photographers with more than one dslr even the $7,000 a body 35mm systems, but few with two complete medium format systems and not to hyjack this thread but that is where the Pentax looks attractive in that you can own two.
But even looking at the pentax, I have to think would I spend the money on that, given I now own two digital backs and more than 2 complete contax systems that I seem to use less and less. In fact I think about selling them but the used market keeps retracting and since they are paid for I kind of figure why not just keep them for those days I want or need a non aa filtered camera?
I'm not debating "ultimate image quality" here because that goes nowhere or just goes round and round, but the real question on any camera is are you gonna buy it and if you do write that check will it make you a better photographer and/or more profit?
The camera that made me the most profit and a better photographer was the 1ds1, because it shot like film with few issues and allowed me to work in a way film didn't. Next was the Aptus 22 and p31+ because back in the digital frenzy days, it kept the full service rental companies out of my business and now the third most profitable camera I use is the 5d2 because it allows decent quality video at true bargain priced buy in.
IMO
BC
I aint buying it. I have an Aptus that hasn't had the batteries charged in a while that I shoot on an RZ. I really like this set up for static portraits with strobes, in fact I think its one of the best systems out there (cheap, high quality), but no one, and I mean no paying commercial client, has me shoot like that anymore.
Now that we are gaining some perspective on photographic styles from the first decade, there was a lot of strobe, contrasty, hard lighting that really became possible with digital (clean shadows) and cost effective extensive retouching tools. I was looking at something I shot in 2005 with the D2x and 60mm Micro, hard hard light side light key, I think from a Magnum with the 10 degree grid on it, a little fill to open the shadows from an Octa set way back and at the lowest output from the Pro6, all really dark and contrasty stuff. The original files are razor sharp, and the models skin looks like an ordinance firing range in the desert. We could of course retouch that out, but the sharpness and contrast, smoothness, saturation of these new tools made everything look artificial, which in 2005-2006 was awesome. Now its cheesy. No client wants that look anymore, at least not mine. The non-AA filter cameras, even the M8, are often too sharp for me. Its tungsten, wide open, soft and dreamy with a bit of realism or grit that they want, in conjunction with a motion shoot.
So no, I won't be buying an S2. I think the next purchase is a pair of ds3's, maybe a ds4, depending on how they implement the video.
-
About Leica's service: Me too I was waiting a long time for my m8 to get fixed in Solms. a couple of weeks ago I called them to ask whether there was any way to speed thing up. they told me about express repairs which are quite costly and then they told me about their professional service, which you can join if you show that you make a living out of photography and if you let them know, that your whole closet is full of Leica gear. I sent my application away a month ago. I called them two weeks ago, they told me I am in, but haven't received their paperwork yet.
they say as a member of professional services you can get your gear repaired in two days. my M9 need calibration, but I won't wait two months for that...
-
I sent off my DMR/R8 and a lens in mid Jan to Leica NJ this year for its 2nd trip to service in 3 years. No word from them until I received a letter in the mail about 3wks later with an estimate for the R8 repair and a 2nd letter came a day later with a quote for the DMR. Leica still expects its customers to communicate via regular post and intended for me to sign and return by mail the repair authorization. I called and was able to reach someone that allowed me to do this over the phone and I asked if there would be a 3rd letter coming with a quote for the CLA on the lens. What lens? After about 5 minutes she came back and said that the lens had been send to Solms, Germany and that in another 3-4 weeks I would get a quote from them. After the repairs are authorized they expect 4-6wks to complete these. Well the R8 transport mechanism was repaired 2 years back for similar thing and it took a total of 5months for the whole process. I hope it doesn't take that long this time but its going to be easily 3 months. How's that for service? The S2 is supposed to have a faster service - but has anyone tested it?
These two repair stories are mindblowing. To me, it just illustrates the fact that Leica needs to be categorized as some kind of boutique specialty camera, in a whole other category from one that services customers that make their living from using their products. Months to get something back? Amazing.
I'm sure, for some kind of non-tethering travel/safari camera, when it's working properly, it's a fine camera, (if there were more than two lenses available for it).
This is a camera for a person who would never bother asking the price. And if it went down, he'd just flip his AMEX on the counter again, buy a second one, and wait for the first one to be repaired.
This is not a camera system for Mere Mortals.
-
If the Pentax is really delivered and is really $6500 and is really 40MP and is really anything other than a bug-eyed dog without a mother then the fun will be seeing the reaction of the other MFD players.
Yup. If it happens, and its a big if, and it really is as good as, say, an H3 31, a bunch of questions come to mind. First and formost, what drives the Phase/Leaf/Blad prices, if Pentax can get it on for $6500?
The Pentax doesn't have to be as good as a H4d40, it just needs to be on par with the P30+ to change the whole industry.
-
it comes down to the same issue though...everyone who needs to shoot DMF already owned a back or rented them...there are some other people on the fence...not quite dentists maybe....who might finally jump on a 6500 DMF....but then again: i saw a demo hy6/sinar back kit (more then 30000 new) with full warranty from a very reputable dealer for about 10000.....and i honestly don't think the pentax will be as nice as that one...
i agree with the opinion that the dmf backs are too sharp.....when i started looking at leica lenses for the canons i quickly found out that the latest apos did not give me the look i was hoping for....even with my older/lower end R lenses i turn sharpen off when i process my 5DII files....a little local sharpen in post is much better....i shot an actor with my 90 not too long ago....wide open...beautiful tones and the lashes are tack sharp without ever looking digital or brittle.....
my first leaf back had a look like that....the phase backs were always (almost too) crisp....shooting withe RZ lenses actually helped a bit...smoother tones...
-
it comes down to the same issue though...everyone who needs to shoot DMF already owned a back or rented them...snip_______
i agree with the opinion that the dmf backs are too sharp.....when i started looking at leica lenses for the canons i quickly found out that the latest apos did not give me the look i was hoping for....even with my older/lower end R lenses i turn sharpen off
A friend sent me this link. (I hope it doesn't mind me posting it).
http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/ (http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/)
I like most of this work and even see some commercial applications to it, but when you look at it and think about cameras, what camera would you chose for this style/styles?
Probably about anything that shot film, but film is in my past, at least on the days I make money so what "digital" camera would one of these photographers on this blog chose and would "ultimate image quality" be part of this equation?
Personally I think I'd use my first 1ds1, or maybe a Leica M8 with the sliders moved over to very soft, but then I think heck why not just get one of those pink panasonic cameras.
It shoots stills and video, you can put a pl mount on it and laugh all you want about a pink camera, but what Life Guard is gonna bust you at Will Rogers Beach shooting with a pink camera?
I almost went over to Samy's and bought one today but ran out of time. Yea Pink, the NO PERMIT NEEDED camera.
I really think this stuff is just getting back to where film cameras were a long time ago, where the cameras have hit a plateau, (at least with still capture).
Sure you could change things by changing film, though today photoshop is the digital film, a 23" monitor is the canvas.
Still looking at this blog the thing that really strikes me is . . . it ain't the camera.
BC
-
A friend sent me this link. (I hope it doesn't mind me posting it).
http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/ (http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/)
I like most of this work and even see some commercial applications to it, but when you look at it and think about cameras, what camera would you chose for this style/styles?
Probably about anything that shot film, but film is in my past, at least on the days I make money so what "digital" camera would one of these photographers on this blog chose and would "ultimate image quality" be part of this equation?
Personally I think I'd use my first 1ds1, or maybe a Leica M8 with the sliders moved over to very soft, but then I think heck why not just get one of those pink panasonic cameras.
It shoots stills and video, you can put a pl mount on it and laugh all you want about a pink camera, but what Life Guard is gonna bust you at Will Rogers Beach shooting with a pink camera?
I almost went over to Samy's and bought one today but ran out of time. Yea Pink, the NO PERMIT NEEDED camera.
I really think this stuff is just getting back to where film cameras were a long time ago, where the cameras have hit a plateau, (at least with still capture).
Sure you could change things by changing film, though today photoshop is the digital film, a 23" monitor is the canvas.
Still looking at this blog the thing that really strikes me is . . . it ain't the camera.
BC
i shot a project ( a long time ago) on 35mm....got the contacts....edited, made some prints, wasn't happy, made some more, still wasn't right, kept going back to looking at the contacts on the lightbox through the loupe....until it hit me....got a copystand, shot the frames i wanted on the contacts with a macro on slide film, played with the exposure and color filters a bit and got the perfect look....scratches and that weird glow that comes from the film being in the contact sleeves......
another time i went to a mag and happened to have with me some terrible letter size inkjet prints (this is in the 90s, so the quality was funky) of a finished story shot with a 680 on color neg film...the "real files" had beautiful tones, tons of detail.....the art director loved the story but he also loved the way he saw it for the first time....when he got the beautiful, rich prints he gave me a call and we decided on a middle ground...they ended up working from slightly better and larger inkjet prints.....
what is important is how it looks in the end......
watched this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9wkCLkVWcI) yesterday...the full helmut&june documentary on youtube.....a guy and a camera....i love how he keeps shooting on automatic.....i also want his printer btw.....
-
Great blog, an aggregator of great photography.
I would shoot film for this look. In fact, I do shoot film for this look. I've tried so many things, so many digital cameras, software trying to copy a specific camera/lens/film set up, and its rarely ever happened. Which leads, once again, to something you and/or your doppelganger have asked for for years, and that's real styles labeled PORTRA 400NC, and PORTRA 400NC, -1, and E100g, etc. that actually look like Portra shot a stop over. I find it easier, on a low volume production, to shoot film. Send it to Duggal with a rush and have your C41 back in an hour, an hour and a half with contacts. Make selects with teh client, have the selects drum scanned or a print made, and BOOM! Done. This works when there are maybe 10 images to be selected. Any more, and well, its 1995 all over again but with a 2010 schedule.
Let us know how the pink cam works for you. I would seriously be interested.
T
A friend sent me this link. (I hope it doesn't mind me posting it).
http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/ (http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/)
I like most of this work and even see some commercial applications to it, but when you look at it and think about cameras, what camera would you chose for this style/styles?
Probably about anything that shot film, but film is in my past, at least on the days I make money so what "digital" camera would one of these photographers on this blog chose and would "ultimate image quality" be part of this equation?
Personally I think I'd use my first 1ds1, or maybe a Leica M8 with the sliders moved over to very soft, but then I think heck why not just get one of those pink panasonic cameras.
It shoots stills and video, you can put a pl mount on it and laugh all you want about a pink camera, but what Life Guard is gonna bust you at Will Rogers Beach shooting with a pink camera?
I almost went over to Samy's and bought one today but ran out of time. Yea Pink, the NO PERMIT NEEDED camera.
I really think this stuff is just getting back to where film cameras were a long time ago, where the cameras have hit a plateau, (at least with still capture).
Sure you could change things by changing film, though today photoshop is the digital film, a 23" monitor is the canvas.
Still looking at this blog the thing that really strikes me is . . . it ain't the camera.
BC
-
watched this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9wkCLkVWcI) yesterday...the full helmut&june documentary on youtube.....a guy and a camera....i love how he keeps shooting on automatic.....i also want his printer btw.....
If you really want to be overwhelmed with ASA 400 film grain, check out the Archives at that site. Make a strong pot of coffee, put on an old Janis Joplin record, and let the past wash over you.
http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/archives/ (http://feaverishphotography.com/blog/archives/)
It occurs to me though, that we've come to a junction in the road, and the people guys are clearly being separated from the landscape guys. The landscape guys want "resolution"; the people guys want "feeling". It's time for us to leave now. TMark, Schefz, LargeCooter -- hit the road. Leave these guys in peace.
I thought it was interesting that the most striking image in that Print Exchange here was John's image that looked like it was shot with a tilt shift lens, or something wacky. Blurred to no end. By far the most compelling. Yet it was probably 35, with a funky lens, handheld, wide open. But some guys want to count the rocks on that mountaintop from 300 meters away; it's a free country. But it seems a shame to come here, and talk to manufacturers about our needs and desires, when megapixels seem to the the only item on the menu. Very frustrating, but it seems to be the case. There just ain't no more blood in that turnip; it's time to abandon MF and wait for the next Nikon/Canon/Pinkie.
-
Hi,
Sorry if I'm a little heavy, but I think (again, as it has been said a lot here), that The "MF-against-35mm" or micro-four-third or whatever is a sterile debate.
In film age, MF and LF where CO-existing with the smaller formats and nobody was questioning or complaining, they were just shooting.
I do not see what is the problem to own at the same time a large format 8x10 and also a pink miniaturized camera?
Yesterday, I realized that the Pentax 6x7 and 645 are still on sale new, and ask the dealer...yes they sell these because these are great tools. If some photographers are willing to buy these camera new in 2010 is because they feel it is the tool they need, and there is nothing to critize about that.
If a photographer feels that he needs or wants Hasselblad it might be for other reason than strictly pixel counting. Why would I try to convince him that he is foolish, that he should save his money and better buy a cheap pink Panasonic or yellow Pentax KX because it is not the camera but the photographer? (sounds like Ken Rockwell...)
That does not make sense. Why do you wear these expensive shoes and not these cheap ones? if it is all about walking...
In fact, there is a very personal sensation, call it ergonomic, animal, organic, that is PERSONAL TO EACH individual being.
I tend to like as Guy Mancuso pointed before in this thread, heavier bodies and lighter lenses. Others will hate it.
Ones feel confortable with a system or another, or you just already had the gear, you're use to it, it became a "second nature".
But again and again and again, targeting Medium Format owners because it is overpriced, unnecesary or whatever are the reasons. Dividing, separating, with uncertain arguments: you are on the "right" side or in the "wrong" one...Who the duck are they to tell long life professional photographers how stupid they are with their MFD ?!?
Of course that this is not first the Camera but the photographer! That is not the car but the driver. An average photographer like me won't do better with a Phase than with a compactcam...but if I want the Phase because I can afford it, because I feel "home" with its ergonomic and feeling, or it fits my client need standard, then who has something to say about that?
This is not because Panasonic or Olympus have released a Micro-format that everybody should just jump and lighten our bags and stayed at 12MP because sensors have supposed to reach maturity. I do not want MFT, neither I need to lighten my bag, my choice is going LF, MFD, FF, and Micro...if I could buy all of these different tools I would do it just right now and use them according to my needs that are changing and diverses...so as the tools. I even shoot with my mobile phone cam, but in the process to buy a large format 8x10, and when and if I have the money, an all MFD system as well. I do not critize anybody because ones buys a Micro-four-third camera, (although I do think that it is a dead end format that will disapear, but that is a personal evaluation), it is fine, it is right, you enjoy it? you want it? go for it!! The same with MFD. You enjoy your Hasselblad? Go for it and thanks we have that choice.
I do not know how MFD photographers still handle this kind of discrimination, they must be very patient...or maybe
They master enough they photography to take that with a wised smile
Now, hope that the Pentax at 6500, 40MP will be true.
Fred.
-
It occurs to me though, that we've come to a junction in the road...
Obviously you love guides and pithy polarizing simplifications.
So little self-confidence?
-
Let me add a different take on this. First some folks are specialized in there work and with that some things obviously will be much harder to work with . Obviously your sports shooter taking a MF to a event maybe the death of him even though it can get done just not the best tool for the job. Myself I went MF for several reasons obviously yes bigger files but it was a need from clients or lets say a embarrassment on my part. Providing a M8 Canon or Nikon file to a client than they turn around and make wall prints the size of 18 wheelers just buried those files terrible. Or the art director taking a small snip of a frame and blowing it up double truck. Sure you can maybe get away with it but it bugged me to death and when I switched my clients after telling them bigger files are coming they let me know they where needed. Now they never said anything until after I mentioned it because they liked my work but they where not getting enough file to work with. Now I may do there advertising and when working with corporate clients you still have to do there BS work as well like a event, ceremony , awards dinner or whatever. So you have to do both or you won't get the good work. I do all kinds of different work so diversity is important, I would not call myself a landscape shooter but I certainly am on my workshops and actually enjoy it and do nice work with it. But my issue is a need for two systems and I refuse to do that, call me hard headed call me crazy but I ain't stupid either. I picked a back that I actually can do both or many things. The P40+ with sensor binning is actually a need for me . One second I can shoot 10 mpx very clean and plenty of file on some things than switch to full res. On many others. I actually have two different setups in one back and I really like this. The Sensor Plus stuff is also very clean right up to 1600 ISO and I mean clean even if I had to uprez up it still is very good. Now will it handle all types of 35mm type jobs. No it will not it is faster more responsive to work with but it's still not a Canon but it is good enough for the type of work I apply it too.
I think that really is the trick here , It seems some folks want the MF to fly like a Canon or at least close. It has gotten better but still not there. I think I can go 1.2 seconds on full res and 1.8 FPS on sensor plus which is maybe one of the fastest out there although I think the new leaf 40 maybe faster. Regardless things seem to be speeding up as the technology grows admittedly it is a slow road and I do see some frustration from some shooters and totally understand there dilemma's. Also the call for more speed and options from the OEM's is certainly a valid complaint. All of them can improve for sure and frankly the new DF is what it should have been all along. The AFD and AFDII suck. The AFDIII was better but still had shutter lag and drove me nut's. The DF is much better as the new HD4 maybe a much better cam as well, yes both slow to get here and that is the nature of MF and even the new S2 the hope for something different was put forth. But again it's really not correct right now with buffer and very large files that can't get pushed through the buffer and tethering issues and lenses that seem to be on some freight boat on Mars. No Pro is going to buy that system yet given 2 lenses and still some fundamental firmware and hardware issues not solved yet. Than we look at Canon and Nikon with tons of people and tons of money to invest in the latest technology and we wonder why not so much in MF. Now to me they are just boring systems to shoot, now you can call me crazy but I just get no joy from them and honestly how much have they improved from the 1ds which i STILL think was there best cam out there except for noise which became the holy grail for these OEM's to overcome and they ruined it. Now i am talking the look of the file the 1ds had it and it's replacements sucked. Today I don't now have not shot them recently or care too and maybe they have improved. Last 35mm DLSR i had was the D300 which was okay. But I just don't enjoy shooting them anymore, I actually like the challenge of shooting MF it makes me think better. Now I chose to buy MF and i can rent any 35mm within about a 15 minute drive any time of the day so why own it when i don't have to. Now i do have 2 GF1's one of them is IR dedicated but they are just fun to play with. Actually I just got the IR the other day and here is a test shot which I think this should be interesting to goof off with for some nice B&W stuff I'm planning to do . Anyway gear is gear and I honestly try not to think about it much anymore. I just want to shoot you pick your poison and go with it
This is the GF1 IR cam that I just got . Kind of interesting look
-
The naysayers are not wrong, your cons are why the S2 is not a viable option for working professionals. This camera was not intended to be a pro's (i.e. need to shoot for money) camera. This is a camera for hobbyists.
says who - you from your perspective?
Lots of photographers shot film with RB67 Mamiya, yes - that was a camera for professionals. so we should ALL have used that, right?
but wait, so was a Rolleiflex TLR. which had a fixed lens on it. that was for professional too.
oh, and so was a Canon 1 series, that was for professionals too.
oh and so was a Koni-Omega 6x7 rangefinder, with just 4 lenses. that was for professionals too.
wait, and Hassleblad...
I know it may seem unbelievable, but there are other photographers in the world who dont have exactly the same needs as you do.
Crazy world eh? I know, I can't believe it either, but it is true.
-
Everybody here seems to agree that the 5DII is the perfect backup for digital MF. Most here seem to own one.
Edmund
-
This is the GF1 IR cam that I just got .
Did you get a pink one?
I asked the dxo lab people to test the pink vs. the black bodies but haven't heard back.
I think pink will shoot better because it's in between red and black.
Think about it.
BC
-
Hi,
The pink bodies have a color gamut optimized for pink. The black bodies are optimized for monochrome.
Best regards
Erik
Did you get a pink one?
I asked the dxo lab people to test the pink vs. the black bodies but haven't heard back.
I think pink will shoot better because it's in between red and black.
Think about it.
BC
-
I think pink will shoot better because it's in between red and black.
You mean Red and White...does that change things?
-
Did you get a pink one?
I asked the dxo lab people to test the pink vs. the black bodies but haven't heard back.
I think pink will shoot better because it's in between red and black.
Think about it.
BC
Tried really hard to get a Pink . Said to have better DXO, better noise, better speed no AA filter. Oh wait they take that out anyway and above all else it shows up white in IR. Cool plus I can tell which one is IR or not. Not happy and had to settle for black.
-
You mean Red and White...does that change things?
Your right but they don't make a white one, so that means I'd have to buy an olympus and to do that I've got to start comparing, all those charts, all those blue channels, crap, I'm still working out the shadow noise patterns on the 1ds2's which is kind of hard cause I sold em.
I might just make my own pink medium format camera. I was at the auto body shop the other day and they said they'd paint it for $200 though they don't mask off the lens. I thought that might be a new look, pink photographs.
BC
-
. Now the S2 LCD is far better for sure but I also do not like a 3:2 format over a 4:3 format. I thought that would be easy to revert back but I did not and I shot 35mm for decades.
Guy,
I have seen comments like this from several people, but I suspect it is a pro position. Also I wonder if age is a factor, since many of us either did 35mm or go back to 620 prints!
From and aesthetic POV 3:2 is clearly supperior (1.5) if you at least give a 'nod' to the golden ration (1.61). At 1.33 the 4/3 seems almost square but not quite. Is it better for Catlogs? Portrait? (yes, 8x10 seems more popular than 8x12)
In print, I wonder is there a column ratio that 4/3 is closer to than 3/2?
Otherwise, I guess the preference for 4/3 I can see making a difference if portrait is a large component of work, as the golden ratio does not seem to apply.
just wondering...
Victor
-
Price including taxes is 21900 body only for the S2-P with 70 2.5 3590 = more than 25000 euros, if you want the 70 2.5 CS price is 4650.
yes, but pro photographers get that tax back, so its ex-tax prices we should look at.
the S2 body + standard is significantly cheaper in Europe than it is in US at moment.
ps: can we keep this on topic people - it is a thread about the Leica S2. if you want to discuss pink Panasonic cameras, then start a new thread on that, please.
-
It's actually called Cherry Blossom but hey Pink is Pink.
I think a rebate program for US buyers maybe a great idea. How to implement that is another story but certainly something can be done or a credit for another lens. Hope my friends at Leica still love me after that one. LOL
Seriously though I think it's a nice idea to kick back the extra costs due to our crappy dollar. I know some would argue that and I understand. Folks in Australia pay a fortune for gear
-
Your right but they don't make a white one, so that means I'd have to buy an olympus and to do that I've got to start comparing, all those charts, all those blue channels, crap, I'm still working out the shadow noise patterns on the 1ds2's which is kind of hard cause I sold em.
I might just make my own pink medium format camera. I was at the auto body shop the other day and they said they'd paint it for $200 though they don't mask off the lens. I thought that might be a new look, pink photographs.
BC
fashion shooters!
I can just see the next reality show.."project photo district" I can't decide if bc will play the tim gunn or michael kors..I think tim, then they could have michael thompson be the other michael, with inez, steven maisel doing some guest judging..or get annie, she may need the cash.