Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Theodoros on August 02, 2015, 06:44:39 pm
-
I believe the (now undeniable) delay of the new CMos Leica S, is because Leica wants to make sure that image quality will surpass all of competition performance and given the reasonable pricing (if compared to competition) it will cause even more headaches... I also expect the new sensor to replace the existing ones on the Sinarbacks (at a larger size) and even expect Sinar to reintroduce self contained backs based on it... Maybe a new MF platform that will take the Sinarbacks on and will "bridge" the two systems makes more sense than ever now, or maybe a resurrection of an older platform makes even more sense.
It seems that the (fully dedicated) adapters for Hasselblad H or Contax 645 lenses on Leica S may probably be a pre-calculated move that allows people to bridge Sinarbacks with Leica S by keeping their existing lens systems. As it looks, it won't surprise me if C645 will be resurrected in the near future, or if Leica invests on Hasselblad... I think either would be preferred than starting a new platform...
One thing is for sure, if Leica passes the new sensor on to Sinarbacks (which it will surely do) and introduces a new MF 645 platform, a photographer will be able to stay within the system no matter how advanced he would like to be, since he will be offered all his DSLR system does, all his MF studio camera does and all his view camera does, yet sharing the minimum of lenses or digital sensors and be at the edge of technology at the same time... I wouldn't sleep well, if I was the competition these days...
-
I believe the (now undeniable) delay of the new CMos Leica S, is because Leica wants to make sure that image quality will surpass all of competition performance and given the reasonable pricing (if compared to competition) it will cause even more headache
If Leica believe in low prices now that average German wages are lower than Japan's, I for one will applaud them :)
Edmund
-
I believe the (now undeniable) delay of the new CMos Leica S, is because Leica wants to make sure that image quality will surpass all of competition performance and given the reasonable pricing (if compared to competition) it will cause even more headaches...
For anyone with real world engineering knowledge, it seems very unlikely that a 3 months delay is the result of a change of engineering targets (in this case the potential image quality of the sensor).
It is a lot more likely to be related to an inability of the produced parts to meet the initial engineering targets.
This doesn't mean that the 007 will not be excellent, but I would very surprised if this delay was the result of an increased ambition at Leica in terms of targeted image quality. Not impossible, but highly unlikely.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi Bernard,
I would say I agree with what you say. Just to add, the CMOSIS based sensor is a device very different from the Kodak sensor used in the older cameras. With live view and video recording there may be issues with cooling. Another cause of delay may be that SG may be slow in producing the sensor devices.
On the other hand, the basic design used in the M(240) is intended to handle lenses with large beam angles and that could benefit technical cameras. Would Leica plan to introduce some new technology with Sinar, I would be expecting them to show a road map.
At this stage, I would say that Leica is selling to enthusiasts, but their marketing is really not very good. Without a road map, no planning is possible.
Another observation is that with Leica we have to little and to late. That doesn't mean it cannot make excellent pictures and the camera itself may be quite compelling.
Best regards
Erik
For anyone with real world engineering knowledge, it seems very unlikely that a 3 months delay is the result of a change of engineering targets (in this case the potential image quality of the sensor).
It is a lot more likely to be related to an inability of the produced parts to meet the initial engineering targets.
This doesn't mean that the 007 will not be excellent, but I would very surprised if this delay was the result of an increased ambition at Leica in terms of targeted image quality. Not impossible, but highly unlikely.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
If Leica believe in low prices now that average German wages are lower than Japan's, I for one will applaud them :)
Edmund
None can call Leica S prices as being "low"... Still, they are better than direct competition if one takes into account that the system includes the camera and that no additional DSLR system to retain portability is required.
-
For anyone with real world engineering knowledge, it seems very unlikely that a 3 months delay is the result of a change of engineering targets (in this case the potential image quality of the sensor).
It is a lot more likely to be related to an inability of the produced parts to meet the initial engineering targets.
This doesn't mean that the 007 will not be excellent, but I would very surprised if this delay was the result of an increased ambition at Leica in terms of targeted image quality. Not impossible, but highly unlikely.
Cheers,
Bernard
Since most of the (mechanical) engineering parts are common with previous S models and the major change is the sensor and its processor, it seems to me that the delay is more related with maximizing sensor performance as such.
-
Hi Bernard,
I would say I agree with what you say. Just to add, the CMOSIS based sensor is a device very different from the Kodak sensor used in the older cameras. With live view and video recording there may be issues with cooling. Another cause of delay may be that SG may be slow in producing the sensor devices.
On the other hand, the basic design used in the M(240) is intended to handle lenses with large beam angles and that could benefit technical cameras. Would Leica plan to introduce some new technology with Sinar, I would be expecting them to show a road map.
At this stage, I would say that Leica is selling to enthusiasts, but their marketing is really not very good. Without a road map, no planning is possible.
Another observation is that with Leica we have to little and to late. That doesn't mean it cannot make excellent pictures and the camera itself may be quite compelling.
Best regards
Erik
Actually the fact that same pixel count as in M-240 is used doesn't mean that the new sensor is "based on the M-240", it seems to me that Leica favors 6 micron pixel sizes as they insist to use it on all their S models up to now. Of course "previous knowledge" is always taken into account when new designs appear in the market, but it is more likely that the new sensor will be the base for a future M-240 sensor replacement than the opposite happening. Lets not forget that Sinar also uses 6 micron pixel pitch on their current eXact and 86H backs... Certainly, using one only basic design as a base to create a whole series of different size sensors will be an extra benefit (cost effective too) for Leica/Sinar and that, may provide an additional advantage with respect to competition.
-
Considering the cost of devrlopment of these sensors, odds are that the still capability of the 007 is very close to the of the M240 with most investements having been focused on the video part.
I would be very surprised if the delay were not due to some issue with video, probably on the software side.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Considering the cost of devrlopment of these sensors, odds are that the still capability of the 007 is very close to the of the M240 with most investements having been focused on the video part.
I would be very surprised if the delay were not due to some issue with video, probably on the software side.
Cheers,
Bernard
3 months late on a tech product is minimal - a single turnaround on an Asic revision would explain that.
In any case the fire-sale on the existing S stock will doubtless make for a larger user base on what is recognized as a good but overpriced system.
Edmund
-
Considering the cost of devrlopment of these sensors, odds are that the still capability of the 007 is very close to the of the M240 with most investements having been focused on the video part.
I would be very surprised if the delay were not due to some issue with video, probably on the software side.
Cheers,
Bernard
Oh, I believe you'll be very surprised indeed! My Opinion is that cost developments are related to the expected sales and the project success, with this product Leica is very ambitious and many will be surprised with the market sales of it... To start with, there is the huge market of the better wedding photographers that will invest on the camera, then there is some other wedding photographers buying it just to fool people as being among the better wedding pros... This will be very easy for Leica to achieve, because C645 is what wedding pros are using with film along side their DSLRs... With Leica they will cover their investment only by selling their DSLR system (which will become useless) and use their Leica instead with their C645 lenses.
Video ability OTOH, is very important with wedding photographers, but it is very important for Leica too as to have a camera that will support their pro cinema lenses. I guess, it all has to do on how one looks at a certain camera platform system... If he looks at it as an expensive DSLR for dentists to use on a Safari instead of killing Lions in Zimbabwe, then they may be right... but if one approaches a system with respect to the solutions provided, or the integration of it with respect to other equipment he is using (or plans to invest on) then it's different... I guess, if one buys a DF & IQ180 "to shoot wonderful landscapes" that's one way on looking at things, but if one needs to use as little as possible with the best possible results accompanied by optimum solutions, then the POV (and benefit from costs related) changes dramatically....
-
I'm pretty sure the delay is the result of chemtrails.
-
It seems like it won't be "2nd quarter of 2015" either....
-
Oh, I believe you'll be very surprised indeed! My Opinion is that cost developments are related to the expected sales and the project success, with this product Leica is very ambitious and many will be surprised with the market sales of it... To start with, there is the huge market of the better wedding photographers that will invest on the camera, then there is some other wedding photographers buying it just to fool people as being among the better wedding pros... This will be very easy for Leica to achieve, because C645 is what wedding pros are using with film along side their DSLRs... With Leica they will cover their investment only by selling their DSLR system (which will become useless) and use their Leica instead with their C645 lenses.
Just out of curiosity:
Why do better wedding photographers need a camera like a Leica S007? There clients are no photo-professionals at all. And even if they wanted very large prints, they wouldn't see the difference.
-
Adrian,
Why do better wedding photographers need a camera like a Leica S007? There clients are no photo-professionals at all. And even if they wanted very large prints, they wouldn't see the difference.
Reply #52 (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=99055.msg812332#msg812332)
-
Just out of curiosity:
Why do better wedding photographers need a camera like a Leica S007? There clients are no photo-professionals at all. And even if they wanted very large prints, they wouldn't see the difference.
They don't "need" one... they'll get one for several reasons! Here is a few:
1. Most of them use a Contax 645 with film for a part of their work and they'll be able to share the lenses which will shrink the equipment they have to carry a lot since using Leica S007 with a "C" adapter will be (almost) like having another C645 body but with DSLR feeling and an MFDB on it...
2. They'll be able to finance the body by only selling their DSLR systems...
3. They'll be able to have video ability using the very same lenses.
4. For prestige reasons... for many customers "if he has a Leica, he is even better than the better ones"... that, (if correctly marketed) can both expand the annual number of customers but make them able to rise (further) prises and justify that rise... Add to it, that they'll do less film shooting.
Most of all though it is the equipment shrinkage... Believe it or not, having only one bag with a 35, 80, 140 & possibly the 45-90 Vario, or the 45, or the 55 and be able to just add another (digital) body in the bag, which is quite compact too... is a real blessing for them! Particularly if it allows them to do all Digital, low light and video shooting with only four lenses!
-
While some of this would be great, my long tortured skeptical eyes can't see it happening. I would love to be wrong of corse and I would die to see a Contax 645 reemerge for the modern age.
I think this will happen:
Leica S will stay at a paltry 37.5MP and take an extra 6 months.
Sinar will continue to do not much.
Contax 645 will sadly stay the way of the dodo.
Sony users will say how much better their a7r is to anything else.
Hasselblad users will think about selling up for the Phase.
Phase Owners will still complain but not much will change in the next decade.
We will all have to cobble together favourite lenses with not so favourite bodies, at great expense, and end up with convoluted and compromised systems that are annoying to use.
We will all be broke, except for Sony users.
Everyone else who is not a photographer will say - "I can't see the difference"
-
While some of this would be great, my long tortured skeptical eyes can't see it happening. I would love to be wrong of corse and I would die to see a Contax 645 reemerge for the modern age.
I think this will happen:
Leica S will stay at a paltry 37.5MP and take an extra 6 months.
Sinar will continue to do not much.
Contax 645 will sadly stay the way of the dodo.
Sony users will say how much better their a7r is to anything else.
Hasselblad users will think about selling up for the Phase.
Phase Owners will still complain but not much will change in the next decade.
We will all have to cobble together favourite lenses with not so favourite bodies, at great expense, and end up with convoluted and compromised systems that are annoying to use.
We will all be broke, except for Sony users.
Everyone else who is not a photographer will say - "I can't see the difference"
;D ;D ;D
OK... but there are still three things that don't make sense with your future vision...
1.Will Leica continue to pay for Dalsa sensors as to use on Sinarbacks while they will have their own of the same resolution?
2. How Leica will expand Sinarback sales if they don't have a platform to use them on? ...they didn't buy Sinar to loose money, ...did they?
3. How does Hasselblad survives if Leica won't buy the camera platform and use Sinar to make the backs?
IMO, (other than wedding photographers) Sinar made the "C" adapter only to achieve a better price when buying Hasselblad... only to have an alternative choice... but legs do break when planning and thus PLAN B sometimes become PLAN A... Especially if rights of Contax don't involve Kyocera anymore after the 31th of this December....
-
Sinar will continue to do not much.
Sinar's marketing email yesterday spoke of "major investments" in R&D, with a new Sinarback and a new camera on the way.
http://sinarphotographyag.cmail1.com/t/r-e-fydhkdt-aududikkk-r/
Kumar
-
Very curious to see their new view camera and back.
I have been playing with one of their arTec cameras the last days and this is a really well thought out and nicely built camera.
-
The Leica CEO has recently replied, on line, to set of questions from members of the rangefinder forum.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=150625&page=1
I wouldn't rush over, it's the usual many words little content and probably qualifies as a TL DNR (Toolong, did not read).
Some choice extracts though:
"Please understand that we can’t talk about future product roadmap plans in public. "
Really? So how come Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Pentax do so?
http://donsphoto.com/blog/2015/02/so...-lens-roadmap/
http://donsphoto.com/blog/2015/02/pe...-lens-roadmap/
http://donsphoto.com/blog/2015/02/ol...-lens-roadmap/
http://donsphoto.com/blog/2015/02/fu...-lens-roadmap/
" Others may “produce” products, Leica is “manufacturing”. "
"Retail is an experience and a major part in the consumer journey only Leica can provide consumers with."
::)
-
"Please understand that we can’t talk about future product roadmap plans in public. "
Really? So how come Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Pentax do so?
For established systems like the M a roadmap is not so essential but for S and T users a roadmap would considerably boost confidence in those systems.
It is pretty mind-boggling that Leica does not get this...
-
Everyone else who is not a photographer will say - "I can't see the difference"
Everyone else will say - you have a real good cellphone ...
Edmund
-
Although the interview posted (thanks Chris) is mainly about the M series of cameras, one may conclude that the chairman of Leica is very clear on the quality of sensors that Leica will bring out... It is very clear to me that Leica is working on a new generation of CMos sensors, based on their usual 6 micron pixel pitch, that will be of world class quality.... They surely take their time in releasing them though... it is now a whole year after S007 was announced, surely not good for Leica's reputation not to keep up with the time tables that they announce.
-
Since most of the (mechanical) engineering parts are common with previous S models and the major change is the sensor and its processor, it seems to me that the delay is more related with maximizing sensor performance as such.
Or minimizing faukts ;D
-
They don't "need" one... they'll get one for several reasons! Here is a few:
1. Most of them use a Contax 645 with film for a part of their work and they'll be able to share the lenses which will shrink the equipment they have to carry a lot since using Leica S007 with a "C" adapter will be (almost) like having another C645 body but with DSLR feeling and an MFDB on it...
2. They'll be able to finance the body by only selling their DSLR systems...
3. They'll be able to have video ability using the very same lenses.
4. For prestige reasons... for many customers "if he has a Leica, he is even better than the better ones"... that, (if correctly marketed) can both expand the annual number of customers but make them able to rise (further) prises and justify that rise... Add to it, that they'll do less film shooting.
Most of all though it is the equipment shrinkage... Believe it or not, having only one bag with a 35, 80, 140 & possibly the 45-90 Vario, or the 45, or the 55 and be able to just add another (digital) body in the bag, which is quite compact too... is a real blessing for them! Particularly if it allows them to do all Digital, low light and video shooting with only four lenses!
Hi Theodoros,
I totally agree with your post in its 100% accurate entirety. Below are some additional thoughts to build on your comments.
1. Your statistical observation of the equipment usage of an entire occupational cross section is almost correct: I would actually say that ALL better wedding photographers use contax 645s with film! It's funny sometimes seeing poser wedding photographers trying to pretend to be "better" by using digital backs on Contax 645s; I mean, sheesh who are they kidding? Fortunately, I've heard that there is a wedding photography client advocate group that is trying to get a law passed such that a photog must pass a strict candidacy portfolio examination (by existing "better" wedding photographers) before they're allowed to even buy a Contax 645 body. This will help cut down on fakers.
2. I think I might have misunderstood you on this point. As I expanded upon in point 1, actually ALL better wedding photographers use Contax 645 film. They don't have DSLR systems! How would they finance the new Leica? There's no DSLR system to sell.
3. This will be a HUGE benefit to the better wedding photographers. As you and I know by now, they ALL use Contax 645 film; currently they have to shoot footage using specially modified Contax bodies running 70mm film stock. For those of you who've never shot wedding videos (after telecine of course) using 70mm, let me tell you, lugging all those magazines is tough. But now that they can shoot video using the same lenses, they're free to focus on capturing and editing actuality into a motion product that has the polish of narrative: a skill every still wedding photographer already has! I mean, can you imagine if every stills shooters didn't already know how to put together compelling motion? You'd probably need some other person to capture footage! What would they call those people, wedding videographers??? How absurd!
4. I absolutely agree with this point. Most (I would say almost ALL) people I know, and I might extend that to say most people on earth, (and I might even extend that to say all people who have ever lived), don't even bother to look at any image NOT taken with a Leica camera. I mean, why would you? It'd be like rubbing diarrhea in your eye! There's a catchy phrase I like to use to educate prospective wedding photography clients with: "If their camera brand doesn't start with L, you'll probably look like hell." I might be mistaken, but I don't think any bride wants to look like hell on their special day!
Any professional knows (they know because Hasselblad/Phase/Leica marketing-whether overt or covert-all say so) that you ALWAYS have to out gun the customer! As a professional photographer who also captures high quality motion footage at the exact same time, can you afford to answer "no" when the customer asks if your equipment costs at least $20k? Think of the shame when they slam the door in your face! Think of the disgrace when they tell all their family and friends! ("There was this guy, he almost conned us into having him shoot our wedding with some cheap camera!")
I've heard that the latest technique the BEST better wedding photographers use is to actually tape a dozen or so thousand dollar bills on the outside of their camera. Not only does this show customers that they are the BEST wedding photographers, but apparently the currency improves the image quality in a "not objectively quantifiable, but definitely subjectively noticeable way as long as it's not in a double blind test". Something about the security stripe in the bills actually being some kind of resonator circuit?
BUT WAIT:
IF THEY USE LEICA, THEN THEY WON'T BE BETTER WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHERS ANYMORE, SINCE BETTER WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHERS ONLY USE CONTAX 645 FILM!!!
Luckily there's no paradox here: once they start using Leica, they will be the BEST wedding photographers.
Q.
E.
D.
-
"If their camera brand doesn't start with L, you'll probably look like hell." I might be mistaken, but I don't think any bride wants to look like hell on their special day!
Linhof it is then. no wait Lomo?
-
Brilliant!
Next time I go out photographing people I'll try the taping money to my camera trick. Seems a sure fire way to better pictures and respect.
Hi Theodoros,
I totally agree with your post in its 100% accurate entirety. Below are some additional thoughts to build on your comments.
1. Your statistical observation of the equipment usage of an entire occupational cross section is almost correct: I would actually say that ALL better wedding photographers use contax 645s with film! It's funny sometimes seeing poser wedding photographers trying to pretend to be "better" by using digital backs on Contax 645s; I mean, sheesh who are they kidding? Fortunately, I've heard that there is a wedding photography client advocate group that is trying to get a law passed such that a photog must pass a strict candidacy portfolio examination (by existing "better" wedding photographers) before they're allowed to even buy a Contax 645 body. This will help cut down on fakers.
2. I think I might have misunderstood you on this point. As I expanded upon in point 1, actually ALL better wedding photographers use Contax 645 film. They don't have DSLR systems! How would they finance the new Leica? There's no DSLR system to sell.
3. This will be a HUGE benefit to the better wedding photographers. As you and I know by now, they ALL use Contax 645 film; currently they have to shoot footage using specially modified Contax bodies running 70mm film stock. For those of you who've never shot wedding videos (after telecine of course) using 70mm, let me tell you, lugging all those magazines is tough. But now that they can shoot video using the same lenses, they're free to focus on capturing and editing actuality into a motion product that has the polish of narrative: a skill every still wedding photographer already has! I mean, can you imagine if every stills shooters didn't already know how to put together compelling motion? You'd probably need some other person to capture footage! What would they call those people, wedding videographers??? How absurd!
4. I absolutely agree with this point. Most (I would say almost ALL) people I know, and I might extend that to say most people on earth, (and I might even extend that to say all people who have ever lived), don't even bother to look at any image NOT taken with a Leica camera. I mean, why would you? It'd be like rubbing diarrhea in your eye! There's a catchy phrase I like to use to educate prospective wedding photography clients with: "If their camera brand doesn't start with L, you'll probably look like hell." I might be mistaken, but I don't think any bride wants to look like hell on their special day!
Any professional knows (they know because Hasselblad/Phase/Leica marketing-whether overt or covert-all say so) that you ALWAYS have to out gun the customer! As a professional photographer who also captures high quality motion footage at the exact same time, can you afford to answer "no" when the customer asks if your equipment costs at least $20k? Think of the shame when they slam the door in your face! Think of the disgrace when they tell all their family and friends! ("There was this guy, he almost conned us into having him shoot our wedding with some cheap camera!")
I've heard that the latest technique the BEST better wedding photographers use is to actually tape a dozen or so thousand dollar bills on the outside of their camera. Not only does this show customers that they are the BEST wedding photographers, but apparently the currency improves the image quality in a "not objectively quantifiable, but definitely subjectively noticeable way as long as it's not in a double blind test". Something about the security stripe in the bills actually being some kind of resonator circuit?
BUT WAIT:
IF THEY USE LEICA, THEN THEY WON'T BE BETTER WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHERS ANYMORE, SINCE BETTER WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHERS ONLY USE CONTAX 645 FILM!!!
Luckily there's no paradox here: once they start using Leica, they will be the BEST wedding photographers.
Q.
E.
D.
-
They surely take their time in releasing them though... it is now a whole year after S007 was announced, surely not good for Leica's reputation not to keep up with the time tables that they announce.
Probably the best sales they ever had thanks to pricing and they don't want to break this trend :)
Edmund
-
The Leica S 007 is now shipping, they've slashed the price by $8000 and the Dynamic Range has been bumped to a record 15 Stops, and high ISO has been bumped up too.
I think this is enough for me to jump in now.
-
Where did you get this info?
The Leica S 007 is now shipping, they've slashed the price by $8000 and the Dynamic Range has been bumped to a record 15 Stops, and high ISO has been bumped up too.
I think this is enough for me to jump in now.
-
Where did you get this info?
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/08/leica-s-typ-007-starts-shipping-with-lower-price-of-16900/
-
Thanks for the link.
The new pricing changes a lot in my plans. The S007 became almost affordable. Four Sironars CMV will pay for a half of the camera.
What is the price in Europe?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Great news! Thanks for sharing!
-
My review (https://luminous-landscape.com/leica-s007-first-impressions-review/) is now online here.
Michael
-
I really like what I see... I guess when there is full support for the development of the digital negs, the results should surpass the respective Sony sensor... Especially DR performance looks really impressive despite the fact that there was no software to develop the files properly.
-
My review (https://luminous-landscape.com/leica-s007-first-impressions-review/) is now online here.
Michael
One thing to ask Michael... As far as I know, Leica S (all models) are supplied with LR as standard, but in your review you mention that current LR doesn't (yet) support S(007)... I find it strange if they decided to release the camera and supply software with it that ...doesn't support it! Is it possible that things have changed as of today? Is it possible that the LR supplied with the camera does support the S007? ...How can it be otherwise?
-
My review (https://luminous-landscape.com/leica-s007-first-impressions-review/) is now online here.
Michael
Hi,
This remember me when the D3X was released, people were talking about and even I did not like the pricing. But when I saw the pictures taken for the camera I was drawn to the shadows immediately , in particular in this photo:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_005b.jpg
I notice that something very special was starting, I knew that the camera was unlike any other in terms of Dynamic range and shadow recovery.
This other solidified my perception:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_008b.jpg
Nowadays the D3x dynamic range does not seems that great, but back in the day it was as eye opening experience
Michael R preview of the 007 shows something: The colors, there is “magic” in them. The high iso is not that good, but the colors , the colors :).
I could not help but remember Edmund comment about the balance between color and dynamic range, and ask if we have one between color and high iso (sound rational that we should have one, as filters cut some light)
Best regards,
-
Hi,
There is no conflict between high DR and colour. DR is mostly about clean readout and high FWC (Full Well Capacity), nothing to do colour rendition.
One of our frequent contributors, Anders Torger, has developed a camera profiling tool called "DCamProf" and learned an awful lot about camera profiling. My take on his writing is that sensor CFA-s are of second order significance. Profiles matter most. That said a low noise image amy make it possible to take more liberties in profile making. But, liberties in profile making may end up as artefacts.
Best regards
Erik
Hi,
This remember me when the D3X was released, people were talking about and even I did not like the pricing. But when I saw the pictures taken for the camera I was drawn to the shadows immediately , in particular in this photo:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_005b.jpg
I notice that something very special was starting, I knew that the camera was unlike any other in terms of Dynamic range and shadow recovery.
This other solidified my perception:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_008b.jpg
Nowadays the D3x dynamic range does not seems that great, but back in the day it was as eye opening experience
Michael R preview of the 007 shows something: The colors, there is “magic” in them. The high iso is not that good, but the colors , the colors :).
I could not help but remember Edmund comment about the balance between color and dynamic range, and ask if we have one between color and high iso (sound rational that we should have one, as filters cut some light)
Best regards,
-
Hi,
This remember me when the D3X was released, people were talking about and even I did not like the pricing. But when I saw the pictures taken for the camera I was drawn to the shadows immediately , in particular in this photo:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_005b.jpg
I notice that something very special was starting, I knew that the camera was unlike any other in terms of Dynamic range and shadow recovery.
This other solidified my perception:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_008b.jpg
Nowadays the D3x dynamic range does not seems that great, but back in the day it was as eye opening experience
Michael R preview of the 007 shows something: The colors, there is “magic” in them. The high iso is not that good, but the colors , the colors :).
I could not help but remember Edmund comment about the balance between color and dynamic range, and ask if we have one between color and high iso (sound rational that we should have one, as filters cut some light)
Best regards,
Ι did notice something special on these files too... But lets wait for proper file processing first... After all Leica now has teamed up with Sinar and Sinar, is undeniably the company that has worked more than anybody else on accurate color. As far as DR is concerned, it is MO that there two aspects of DR one may consider... One is the "out of the camera" DR which I don't think is that much important, the other is the DR you are left with after processing the file for proper mid-range contrast... and although "proper processing" may be a personal matter for many, I do sense something special on the images that Michael posted... I do think that there is some more "filmish" presentation than the usual digital files till now... But lets wait for the dedicated software first...
-
I am now waiting for some more reviews to come up and I will consider pulling a "pre-order" trigger.
My most concern is about the image color on CMOS compared to S006 CCD sensor. I am quite sure at this point there wouldn't be much different in sharpness between S007, d810, a7rII, or Pentax.
I am using Sony a7rII right now but still don't like the color compared to my m-p240.
-
Hi,
This remember me when the D3X was released, people were talking about and even I did not like the pricing. But when I saw the pictures taken for the camera I was drawn to the shadows immediately , in particular in this photo:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_005b.jpg
I notice that something very special was starting, I knew that the camera was unlike any other in terms of Dynamic range and shadow recovery.
This other solidified my perception:
http://static.nikonusa.com/D3X_gallery/images/pic_008b.jpg
Nowadays the D3x dynamic range does not seems that great, but back in the day it was as eye opening experience
Michael R preview of the 007 shows something: The colors, there is “magic” in them. The high iso is not that good, but the colors , the colors :).
I could not help but remember Edmund comment about the balance between color and dynamic range, and ask if we have one between color and high iso (sound rational that we should have one, as filters cut some light)
Best regards,
Jduncan,
Now that you say that I might be moved to agree with you :)
Remember the Sony Alpha 950 and the D3x. Michael bought the slow 950 because it had a very good CFA.
Also, remember the fast monochrome M9 and the slower color M9 :)
Edmund
-
I am now waiting for some more reviews to come up and I will consider pulling a "pre-order" trigger.
My most concern is about the image color on CMOS compared to S006 CCD sensor. I am quite sure at this point there wouldn't be much different in sharpness between S007, d810, a7rII, or Pentax.
I am using Sony a7rII right now but still don't like the color compared to my m-p240.
Personally when I see reviews of equipment comparison based in resolution for "normal" or artistic photography, I put the author in my "dislike list" of people... In all my 35 years involvement in photography, I found resolution as such to be the least crucial factor that would affect the quality of the image... Resolution, I have find it to be a crucial factor for painting reproduction or copy work where only multishot backs can achieve the detail needed (or the color accuracy).
As far as color is concerned, I have to agree that all DSLRs suck with respect to a good CCD MFDB, whenever I shoot landscape that includes sky with a DSLR, I find my self always ending up to use "selective color" ro achieve a faithful sky color... With a CCD back, I never had such a problem, neither with the CF-39MS I'm now hooting, or with my previous Imacon 528c, or even with my first back the Emotion 22 10 years ago... Perhaps the best color out of the DSLRs I've used (but not even close to a CCD back) is out of my DF or the D4... the D800E I also use, I try to avoid its use as much as possible if color is crucial...
-
First time I remember in recent years a major brand devaluating a high visibility product by 1/3 its intend price point even before actual availability.
Beyond the silver bullet dreams of some, frankly, it doesn't scream confidence about its qualities relative to competition...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Personally when I see reviews of equipment comparison based in resolution for "normal" or artistic photography, I put the author in my "dislike list" of people... In all my 35 years involvement in photography, I found resolution as such to be the least crucial factor that would affect the quality of the image... Resolution, I have find it to be a crucial factor for painting reproduction or copy work where only multishot backs can achieve the detail needed (or the color accuracy).
As far as color is concerned, I have to agree that all DSLRs suck with respect to a good CCD MFDB, whenever I shoot landscape that includes sky with a DSLR, I find my self always ending up to use "selective color" ro achieve a faithful sky color... With a CCD back, I never had such a problem, neither with the CF-39MS I'm now hooting, or with my previous Imacon 528c, or even with my first back the Emotion 22 10 years ago... Perhaps the best color out of the DSLRs I've used (but not even close to a CCD back) is out of my DF or the D4... the D800E I also use, I try to avoid its use as much as possible if color is crucial...
Torger let's not forget about the effect of the lens infront of the sensor on color. Basically each lens I have (Canon) renders colors and contrasts a bit differently. Some are drastically different. This is one aspect that I have not seen testing. Much more emphasis is put on edge to edge sharpness. This is one very cool thing I find with the Rodenstock HR-W lenses, they match quite closely in contrast and color.
Maybe the Leica S lenses all match quite closely (most are very recent designs from scratch).
I know most cinema lenses are sold in matched sets for a reason.
Now, Regarding the fact that Leica lowered the price of the new S significantly before it started shipping might be a combination of factors that include a devaluated euro and increased competition (Canon 5DS/R, Sony A7RII, P 645Z, PhaseOne 40mp back/body/lens bundles and Hasselblad's $15k 50c back and used camera/back bundles)
-
Now, Regarding the fact that Leica lowered the price of the new S significantly before it started shipping might be a combination of factors that include a devaluated euro and increased competition (Canon 5DS/R, Sony A7RII, P 645Z, PhaseOne 40mp back/body/lens bundles and Hasselblad's $15k 50c back and used camera/back bundles)
Is it just remotely possible that Leica is trying to become a camera brand again, rather than just a luxury product maker? The Lumix/Leica compact range is actually pretty good value, even with the Leica surcharge added.
Edmund
-
Looking at Leica's too aggressive pricing policy, I do wonder what a self contained Sinarback of 36x48mm in size and 48mp that would be based on an up-sized version of the very same sensor would it be priced for.... and then I wonder about competition's future... Coming soon... I guess... ;)
-
Hi James,
I don't disagree with some of what you write, but I have really no idea why you are bringing in Nikon in this thread.
Not having worked with an S I have no first hand opinion about its performance and have never commented about it. On the other hand you were able to form an opinion about the 810 colors by just touching the body for one minute which is truly remarkable! ;)
And you also know what lenses I own (not quite in fact but that's beside the point). You have friends working at the NSA don't you? ;)
But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver. Things work differently in your world maybe?
Now, as a potential buyer, I am very happy about the pricing. The body and a lens stilllcosting more than the small motor boat I was shooting from last weak still doesn't scream "great deal" to me though...
But I think that the fudamental difference here is that I have never felt any emotion touching a camera. I am only moved by subjects and light. I don't mean it as a SA comment, I just don't care about my body as long as it delivers. You seem to find your tool important and I do respect that.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Oh come now Bernard, you are a very strong proponent of the Nikon brand, over the years you have always brought up Nikon and stitching as a viable response to almost every MF camera and to be honest I agree with you some of the time, the D810 is a superb camera but it seems strange to see you write that you don't care about the body as long as it delivers.
As an ex Nikon shooter with some lovely Zeiss glass, very similar to some of the kit you own, the best thing I can say about the S is to imagine Otus quality in every lens you own, with the ability to autofocus extremely accurately at will and with a viewfinder so large and bright that you can accurately see what you are doing manually with all available focal lengths, plus access to some excellent legacy glass with OM adapters, to me that alone was worth the entry costs and that's without mentioning the fact that the files are so incredibly rich and beautiful.
I honestly don't care what anyone else shoots with as long as it makes them happy though, it's irrelevant to what I shoot and the enjoyment I get from my kit!
Have a good day.
Mat
-
But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver. Things work differently in your world maybe?
Wrong on that one, Bernard.
If you check your demand and supply curves, dropping the price results in increase in demand ( or demand increases as price falls) - in a market economy. Your scenario would apply at an art auction not in the pricing strategy of a manufacturing company. Ironically, it's also a strategy used consistently by ... Nikon!
Manoli
-
As a Nikon and MFshooter, I totally see BC's point about Nikon's color rendition not being the best suited to portraiture. Yes, you can make that horse dance to your tune, but it's gonna take a lot of training.
That aside, a nice review of the body from Michael. I agree with those above, the colors do look wonderful. The problem have is that even with the revised pricing, this camera offers very little more than the Pentax (Which is about half the price), and a smaller sensor to boot. A lot of people have difficulty accepting that 44x33 is "True MF" or whatever, which makes this 135+ .
The way I see it,
- If one just wants to go CMOS MF, prefers an all in one body and does not particularly care about leaf shutter lenses, there is the Pentax
- If one wants to go CMOS MF and use their existing technical camera gear, there is the Hasselblad CFV 50c
- If one wants a cheap, view camera package with CMOS MF, there is the Credo 50 + Cambo Actus combo
- If money is no bar and one has some specific requirements (C1P compatible workflow, for one), there is Phase One
I am really struggling to see where this Leica fits in.
-
But in my view Leica de facto did comment about the 007's performance because I am sure you agree that pricing your offering lower can only mean that the value isn't as high as the one you were expecting to deliver.
Part of the price reduction is due to the change in exchange rate between € and $. Probably, part of the price reduction is also due to the recession in Asia, which is a large market for this kind of equipment. I would not read too much about the quality of the camera in the price change.
-
Oh come now Bernard, you are a very strong proponent of the Nikon brand, over the years you have always brought up Nikon and stitching as a viable response to almost every MF camera and to be honest I agree with you some of the time, the D810 is a superb camera but it seems strange to see you write that you don't care about the body as long as it delivers.
As an ex Nikon shooter with some lovely Zeiss glass, very similar to some of the kit you own, the best thing I can say about the S is to imagine Otus quality in every lens you own, with the ability to autofocus extremely accurately at will and with a viewfinder so large and bright that you can accurately see what you are doing manually with all available focal lengths, plus access to some excellent legacy glass with OM adapters, to me that alone was worth the entry costs and that's without mentioning the fact that the files are so incredibly rich and beautiful.
I honestly don't care what anyone else shoots with as long as it makes them happy though, it's irrelevant to what I shoot and the enjoyment I get from my kit!
Mat,
It is the truth though, I don't care the least bit about the camera or about Nikon as a brand, but I care about my hard earned cash and find the D810 to deliver amazing value for the cash. I have promoted the value of stitching - for some applications - but it never was as much about DSLR vs MF as it was about the incoherence of trying to achieve high level of image quality - with an MF camera - and not stitch when the technique is a viable option.
I am fully aware about the excellence of the S system (certainly of the brilliant lenses) and - again - have never commented negatively about it.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
As a Nikon and MFshooter, I totally see BC's point about Nikon's color rendition not being the best suited to portraiture. Yes, you can make that horse dance to your tune, but it's gonna take a lot of training.
That aside, a nice review of the body from Michael. I agree with those above, the colors do look wonderful. The problem have is that even with the revised pricing, this camera offers very little more than the Pentax (Which is about half the price), and a smaller sensor to boot. A lot of people have difficulty accepting that 44x33 is "True MF" or whatever, which makes this 135+ .
The way I see it,
- If one just wants to go CMOS MF, prefers an all in one body and does not particularly care about leaf shutter lenses, there is the Pentax
- If one wants to go CMOS MF and use their existing technical camera gear, there is the Hasselblad CFV 50c
- If one wants a cheap, view camera package with CMOS MF, there is the Credo 50 + Cambo Actus combo
- If money is no bar and one has some specific requirements (C1P compatible workflow, for one), there is Phase One
I am really struggling to see where this Leica fits in.
Sensor size is not smaller than Sony's 50mp sensor... in fact it's exactly the same area... lets not forget that the Sony sensor is (slightly) less than 33x44...
-
Sensor size is not smaller than Sony's 50mp sensor... in fact it's exactly the same area... lets not forget that the Sony sensor is (slightly) less than 33x44...
At least get the simple arithmetic facts right: even the exact 42.8 x 32.8mm = 1437mmsq [CORRECTED!] of the Sony 50MP CMOS sensor is a bit bigger than Leica's 45x30mm at 1350mmsq, about 6% [CORRECTED] more. But more to the point, when the subject of the discussion is portraits (as in Synn's post), Leica's more landscape format oriented 3:2 aspect ratio is likely to get cropped on the long edge, so the comparison will be the short dimension: 30mm vs 32.8mm, so about 10% linear, 20% area.
Still, being the second cheapest "bigger than 35mm" CMOS sensor camera after the Pentax 645Z is not bad pricing by Leica standards.
-
Of course 4% of area is insignificunt to consider... Personally I disagree with the term MF used for all larger than 35mm film size sensors and I would agree with you that Leica should offer a 40x30 crop mode as choice for the user to use on aplications where 4:3 is preferable than 3:2... OTOH, the same may apply for 4:3 sensors where IMO a 3:2 mode (or even better a 16:9 too) mode should be offered.
-
Personally, it has been a long time since I have ever finished an image in 3:2. Almost all of my 135 format images get cropped to 4:3? square or 16:9.
The format is just too damn long for portraits and not wide enough for landscapes.
Ironically, the world can thank Leica for coming up with it. :D
-
Ironically, the world can thank Leica for coming up with it. :D
Yes but ;D Oscar was actually just doubling the movie frame by running the frame horizontally. Now which movie frame actually:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_formats
And you think still has a mass of formats!!
-
At least get the simple arithmetic facts right: even the exact 42.8 x 32.8mm = 1408mmsq of thw Sony 50MP CMOS sensor is a bit bigger than Leica's 45x30mm at 1350mmsq, about 4% more. But more to the point, when the subject of the discussion is portraits (as in Synn's post), Leica's more landscape format oriented 3:2 aspect ratio is likely to get cropped on the long edge, so the comparison will be the short dimension: 30mm vs 32.8mm, so about 10% linear, 20% area.
Still, being the second cheapest "bigger than 35mm" CMOS sensor camera after the Pentax 645Z is not bad pricing by Leica standards.
Indeed. So why some still argue that the S is nof MF but the ~ 33x44 Hassy, Pentax and Phase camera's are, is beyond me. Anyway, just wanted to add that as far as cropping and throwing away pixels is concerned, it works both ways. If an 3:2 image is going to be displayed on a (4K and soon 8K) 16:9 monitor, one throws away less pixels than with a native 4:3 sensor.
-
I believe that Leica choose 3:2 for three reasons...
1. Because it is traditional to them on all their cameras historically
2. Because the camera looks more familiar for people that upgrade from DSLRs
3. Because the mirror extends less and thus it allows enough space for adapters of other MF makers lenses to be used with the system...
In fact, I believe that the ability of the system to use other makers lenses has played a major role for the success of the system and that it was a brilliant pre-calculated marketing decision. I won't be surprised if they come up with more adapters for Rollei users or even Mamiya/P1 cameras that will offer complete dedication as it happens with the "C" or "H" adapter (in fact I've many times heart rumors about a Rollei adapter coming...), people that use other or older equipment and would consider having an (new or S/H) MFDB also have a Leica S as an alternative (new or S/H).
Still the wedding photographers that use Contax 645 with film will be highly attracted to this camera and save a fortune for lenses and space....
-
Personally I disagree with the term MF used for all larger than 35mm film size sensors ...
Agreed! That name made sense for film formats that were indeed in the middle between 36x24mm ("compact format") and the 5"x4" to 10" x 8" of sheet film "large format".
In the ILC digital world, the medium is somewhere around the 22x15m to 24x16mm of "APS-C", while 36x24mm to 54x42mm are clearly the large formats, and 1" and 4/3" are the compact formats. (Of course if one considers all cameras, then all of the above are large formats!)
A crop mode for 4:3 (and maybe for 5:4, 1:1, 16:9) might be nice, but on a SLR, would mostly be just a minor time-saving in post-processing. With live view on an EVF which shows the framing you will get, the in-camera aspct ratio setting is more appealing. I like the approach of creating a JPEG in the chosen crop, but a raw file that contains the whole frame, with a flag for the indicated crop.
-
Personally, it has been a long time since I have ever finished an image in 3:2. Almost all of my 135 format images get cropped to 4:3? square or 16:9.
The format is just too damn long for portraits and not wide enough for landscapes.
Ironically, the world can thank Leica for coming up with it. :D
Indeed, it is such a pity that Phase One were not around in 1930. They would have been able to show everybody else how it should be done.
European typerwriter paper and magazine page formats are much longer, traditionally, than US ones. It's a big issue with computers because a screen which will perfectly well display a US page format at 100% will clip or scale the european pages, driving anyone who does page layout crazy.
I am tired of people who want to demonstrate that format X or Y is "better". I have my preferences, but they won't and shouldn't always match everyone else's.
Edmund
-
Indeed, it is such a pity that Phase One were not around in 1930.
A shame indeed. The world could have witnessed your off topic, verbal diarrhea against P1 before color TV was invented! Perhaps in the form of flyers? I heard they were quite the rage back then.
I am tired of people who want to demonstrate that format X or Y is "better". I have my preferences, but they won't and shouldn't always match everyone else's.
No one here tried to demonstrate that any format was better. I for one, started my post with the word PERSONALLY, which indicates that it is a very personal OPINION. I also do not recollect asking anyone to follow my lead.
Crawl back under your bridge, Edmund.
-
Can someone point me to the process for ignoring a certain member's posts? I want to save myself some time and temper.
Edmund
-
Can someone point me to the process for ignoring a certain member's posts? I want to save myself some time and temper.
Profile>Personal Message Options> Ignorelist
Works for posts as well as PM's
M
-
Can someone point me to the process for ignoring a certain member's posts? I want to save myself some time and temper.
Edmund
Not posting in a forum meant for equipment you don't have or plan to have saves even more time and temper!
-
Overall, I am impressed with what Leica has done here. Their use of the CMOSIS chip was a risk but the risk seems to have paid off.
The images shown by Michael are impressive. In the past, the price point Lecia was enough to keep me away from the S2, however at the entry point of 16K for the body, it's definitely a good alternative. The glass has a legendary reputation and is not anymore expensive that what Phase One now asks for the newer Schneider glass (35mm SK and 40-80 SK). It's CMOS, (which I prefer) and has the 3:2 or 2:3 (I have seen it shown both ways) layout of 35mm camera, which I also find I am drawn to as that is what I learned on for 30 or so years.
I also agree with Michael that Pentax has the best implementation of the Sony 50Mp CMOS, at least over Phase One. Pentax has much more high ISO reach and even at base iso seem to have a slightly cleaner file, (in the shadows).
Alternatives just keep getting better.
Paul
-
Can someone point me to the process for ignoring a certain member's posts? I want to save myself some time and temper.
Edmund
Please don't, the exchanges between you and synn are why I visit this forum, it's great material for my book.
-
Please don't, the exchanges between you and synn are why I visit this forum, it's great material for my book.
They surely are great laugh... as long as they don't happen in every single thread, do not ruin threads and have some sense that offers something... Otherwise one may as well turn on the TV and watch the loony tunes...
-
Please don't, the exchanges between you and synn are why I visit this forum, it's great material for my book.
Done. Ah, passive-aggression feels wonderful. Write *that* in your book, and open a new chapter :)
Edmund
-
Profile>Personal Message Options> Ignorelist
Works for posts as well as PM's
M
Thank you!
Edmund
-
Overall, I am impressed with what Leica has done here. Their use of the CMOSIS chip was a risk but the risk seems to have paid off.
Paul
I personally don't see any risk in a pre calculated move... It's rather a pre-designed move that because of Sony's sensor quality will be appreciated less than Leica ever aimed... IMO, Leica decided to use their own sensors on all their products with the CMos "M"... After that, it was a development path that hasn't ended yet... IMO, Leica is after to succeed "the best sensor in the best mechanical engineering" for their marketing to be undeniable and they won't let the path unless they will succeed that people will think of this as being "common sense" either if they are possible customers or not... Also, Leica doesn't what to only relate the "Red Dot" with premium quality... they aim all their products, including brands that will be implemented in the group during the near future to be uder the same culture...
So... in the near future, MF Sinarbacks that will challenge directly any competitor are to be expected, an MF platform to house these same backs "in factory" is expected to be added into the group and may even invest to control a sensor maker company...
-
I personally don't see any risk in a pre calculated move... It's rather a pre-designed move that because of Sony's sensor quality will be appreciated less than Leica ever aimed... IMO, Leica decided to use their own sensors on all their products with the CMos "M"... After that, it was a development path that hasn't ended yet... IMO, Leica is after to succeed "the best sensor in the best mechanical engineering" for their marketing to be undeniable and they won't let the path unless they will succeed that people will think of this as being "common sense" either if they are possible customers or not... Also, Leica doesn't what to only relate the "Red Dot" with premium quality... they aim all their products, including brands that will be implemented in the group during the near future to be uder the same culture...
So... in the near future, MF Sinarbacks that will challenge directly any competitor are to be expected, an MF platform to house these same backs "in factory" is expected to be added into the group and may even invest to control a sensor maker company...
Back in film days one could put Kodachrome, or high-speed Ilford film in a camera. Now the choices are made once for all, a year or two ahead of when the camera comes to market - and if a company makes a "bad bet", all the owners of its lens system will pay for it for several years.
I think Leica realize they are very close to getting pushed out, and are turning the S into a value proposition to increase their user base. Not that I am going to complain :)
Edmund
-
I guess Leica wishes they had as many buttons as a Pentax and a flip up screen like Sony after Mr MR's review...
-
What about the incisive and helpful Amateur Photographer review?
"...on first impressions it looks like a very capable piece of kit."
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/dslrs/leica-s-typ-007-review-hands-first-look#y6Bs8sDv45fkuWDw.99
-
Another short "review"... This time there is a comparison with the S006 which the photographer also uses. http://www.jupitersnake.com/review/leica-s-typ-007-s-007/
-
The Leica S007 galleries from dpr are here (http://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1031129607/leica-s-type-007-real-world-sample-gallery). Unfortunately, I cannot see much wrong there.
Edmund
-
Another review (with lots of images as well) of the new Leica by Jono Slack:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2015/09/leica-s-test/
For people who don't know Jono Slack, he is very well respected in the Leica world, tests/reviews pretty much every Leica camera but this was the first time that he reviewed a Leica S.
-
The Leica S007 galleries from dpr are here (http://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/1031129607/leica-s-type-007-real-world-sample-gallery). Unfortunately, I cannot see much wrong there.
Very nice files for sure and very pleasant look overall.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Unfortunately, I cannot see much wrong there.
A quote of Blagojevician incisiveness! ;D
(I think the portrait of the red haired kid is way too saturated, but the RAWs are great to play with.)
--Matt
-
Looked at the images (not raws), I think the default look seems to be quite warmed up, perhaps a bit too much, and perhaps too high saturation, especially in the skin tone range. It's hard knowing when not having been at the scene myself though, it can be an effect of the light too. Or the junk screen I'm sitting at now :-).
If there's a problem it's just a profile issue though, make your own if you don't like it.
-
A quote of Blagojevician incisiveness! ;D
(I think the portrait of the red haired kid is way too saturated, but the RAWs are great to play with.)
--Matt
The colors look a bit off, but fixable. The greenery looks very nice, reflexions off water too. I cannot find anything seriously bad to say about these pictures, try as I may. But I'm sure we will find some issues in due course :)
Edmund
-
I think the S is probably the first real contender for an all rounder Pro camera. Which is ironic coming from such a niche company like Leica.
-
As I said before, it is quite obvious that Leica was after a very special sensor for this product... A sensor that would be the base for all the group's products and that would be able to successfully compare with the best sensors that competition products would possibly offer, I believe the delay had to do with maximizing the performance of the sensor and of the new processor they are using for it... Fingers crossed, when there will be a fully dedicated software to develop the files, the results should be jaw dropping to the extend that there will be a new reference for high end photography. In a few months, when Sinar will release the new backs based on the very same sensor and perhaps release a new version of their software to support these backs (obviously S007 too), the group (Leica/Sinar) should seriously challenge any alternative marketing choice aimed to any different photographic task.
-
I think the S is probably the first real contender for an all rounder Pro camera. Which is ironic coming from such a niche company like Leica.
It's really amazing how Leica managed to create a completely new body and lens range and turn it into a contender. Also, the Leica is a nice *camera*, not a kludgy box with a screen and a lens; it could do with a few more Contax-style dials, though.
Edmund
-
I think the DPR files leave a lot to be desired: shutter speed too slow for good sharpness, underexposed, poorly processed in LR, some f11 files that don't illustrate the S lenses drawing potential.
But the young boy portrait is nice, underexposed by 0.3 to 0.5ev but nice, with a very good sharpness on the eyes.
Better processed in LR and using the embedded camera profile instead of the Adobe one it already gives a beautiful output.
High iso does look great (1600) and good (3200) too.
Finally a CMOS sensor that can rival surpass a CCD one, maybe :)
-
My firm opinion after shooting both CCDs and CMOS since 2005 is that it is simply BS, sorry...
Best regards
Erik
I think the DPR files leave a lot to be desired: shutter speed too slow for good sharpness, underexposed, poorly processed in LR, some f11 files that don't illustrate the S lenses drawing potential.
But the young boy portrait is nice, underexposed by 0.3 to 0.5ev but nice, with a very good sharpness on the eyes.
Better processed in LR and using the embedded camera profile instead of the Adobe one it already gives a beautiful output.
High iso does look great (1600) and good (3200) too.
Finally a CMOS sensor that can rival surpass a CCD one, maybe :)
-
The Leica S, to me is certainly the most exciting camera at the moment. I'm also excited what happens with Sinar.
If the S was 60MP I'd more inclined to jump in. Or if there was a 70mm Summilux-S that shared aesthetic characteristics of the Noctilux (being equiv to f1.1 in 135 FF) I would jump in right now. I need medium format but I also need and want the aesthetic characteristics of my M Noctilux and Summilux lenses and while the current Summicron and Summarit designs are close they are not quite the same. That said, the 100 Summicron is a very exciting lens. Either way the S system is suddenly shaping up to be a great contender and I'm really interested to see what they come up with lenses.
Or I would also really consider a new Contax 645 Design and 60-80MP full frame 645 Back with fast Modern Zeiss Lenses with leaf shutters. The rationale of this being the aesthetics of Zeiss lenses on the larger sensor.
-
I should have written "a CMOS vs CCD camera system instead of sensor" as I have no idea which role the sensor technology plays in the more natural and pleasing look of the CCD based cameras.
Made enough tests with my modest eyes but also with professional eyes to have this firm opinion.
The S007 could maybe soon demonstrate that this so called (cold...) 'CCD look' only comes from the camera maker choices in the technical specifications they want to reach and profiling rather than in the technology they are using.
-
My firm opinion after shooting both CCDs and CMOS since 2005 is that it is simply BS, sorry...
I'm not fundamentally going to disagree with you, Erik - you, Bart and a few others have explained the science part of it plus David Farkas ran a 'test' (http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/03/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-3/) where no one could reliably differentiate between a CCD (M9) and a CMOS (M240) with any consistency. There were a few isolated cases, though - more the exception than the rule.
Nevertheless, I 'm still amazed at the skin tones and texture from my M8 and non-ASPH vintage Summicrons, even today, when compared to anything I've managed to achieve with CMOS.
M
-
Got to a calibrated screen and started to look at some samples. I like the skin tones in this review:
http://www.jupitersnake.com/review/leica-s-typ-007-s-007/
but I suspect they may be adjusted, as the same review says the JPEGs are not so good.
The DP review image gallery is, well, quite dreadful if I dare to use such strong words. What's up with the over-saturation? Haven't tried the raws.
Then I've looked at this:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2015/09/leica-s-test/
the images look quite edited, but the same overall color look as in DP review is there, too warm, too saturated.
So sure I think you can get good colors out of this camera, like from any modern camera if you have some post-processing skill, but the default look seems pretty bad to me. But I guess I don't have the same refined taste as Leica users :-)
Some cameras get a lot attention on the net, others not so much. What about the H5D-50c for example? Without any personal experience of that particular Hasselblad model (my own is H4D-50) I dare to say that the default look out of Phocus is a ton better than what I've seen here from Leica S.
-
Got to a calibrated screen and started to look at some samples. I like the skin tones in this review:
http://www.jupitersnake.com/review/leica-s-typ-007-s-007/
but I suspect they may be adjusted, as the same review says the JPEGs are not so good.
The DP review image gallery is, well, quite dreadful if I dare to use such strong words. What's up with the over-saturation? Haven't tried the raws.
Then I've looked at this:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2015/09/leica-s-test/
the images look quite edited, but the same overall color look as in DP review is there, too warm, too saturated.
So sure I think you can get good colors out of this camera, like from any modern camera if you have some post-processing skill, but the default look seems pretty bad to me. But I guess I don't have the same refined taste as Leica users :-)
Some cameras get a lot attention on the net, others not so much. What about the H5D-50c for example? Without any personal experience of that particular Hasselblad model (my own is H4D-50) I dare to say that the default look out of Phocus is a ton better than what I've seen here from Leica S.
It's too early to come to conclusions like that... I use a CF-39MS back for single shot, which is quite similar when developed with phocus (for single shot) as your H4-50 and I do agree that color accuracy is quite good out of the box (if ETTR), but here we are talking about files that are processed without dedicated software yet... Files from CMOS sensors are expected to be a bit oversaturated (as past experience says), but this is about the easiest to correct when developing, the point is if one would have to work excessively to achieve the looks he wants or not... and this is too early to be judged yet. Never the less, Sinar has the tradition of offering the most accurate color "out of the box" (even for single shot files) to customers and its difficult to believe that Leica has ignored this past experience...
-
This is the boy picture from DPR (underexposed and sat :10 / vib:10)
(http://img1.imagilive.com/0915/0134293000-2.jpg)
The raw file now processed a bit more exposed and sat + vib set to 0.
Other white balance, embedded profile instead of Adobe profile. Classic contrast, etc.
(http://img1.imagilive.com/0915/L1006736-VA.jpg)
A crop from the latter:
(http://img1.imagilive.com/0915/L1006736-4c.jpg)
-
I choose the most demanding file for DR out of the DPR files... What I post is no where near the maximum of DR one can achieve (which is really impressive), it is rather my idea of how the final image should look... (http://file:///.file/id=6571367.50754194)
-
I choose the most demanding file for DR out of the DPR files... What I post is no where near the maximum of DR one can achieve (which is really impressive), it is rather my idea of how the final image should look... (http://file:///.file/id=6571367.50754194)
With all due respect, I don't see anything impressive here.
The same scene shot in bright sun-light would probably have at least 2 stops more DR in it, and even that can easily be brought to the same level of detail/noise in the trunk with a modern DSLR without burning any highlight.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Some cameras get a lot attention on the net, others not so much. What about the H5D-50c for example?
Unrealistic pricing might have something to do with it...
-
Unrealistic pricing might have something to do with it...
The main problem with that camera is not really the camera itself but the price. It is a huge deterrent (to a lot of people) for purchasing (or even looking into them) that and other Medium Format Digital Camera Systems. Most actual owners/users of MFD systems are quite happy, after purchasing and using the system for a while.
I for one am one of them. Right now there are a LOT of lower priced alternatives in MFD. For those who want something different than the typical DSLRs it is really worth looking into them.
CMOS has really energized MFD in general.
-
More on the S007:
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/09/leica-s-typ-007-review/
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/09/my-photographic-adventure-through-iceland-with-the-leica-s-typ007/
-
The images seem to be very saturated as the other review.
-
The face texture on the boy looks red, saturated, but good, no texture loss, no serious burnout.
The Iceland pictures look too HDR'y and oversaturated, but that can easily be fixed by some clipping/desaturation.
The way the lenses draw looks sharp and smooth.
We need more imagery, but what is being shown now looks as if it has no serious faults - to me. I think Leica has now just about sussed electronic still imaging.
Edmund
-
I can't stop thinking how perfect the Contax 645 series of lenses looks on the S-007 for DSLR use... The 45-90 Vario Sonnar has a perfect AOV of what a 36-72mm would present on a DSLR (the traditional standard zoom lens)... the 140mm f2.8 is the analog of 112mm - perfect for long portraiture, while the 80mm AOV at 64mm 35mm respective is perfect for close portraiture... The superb 120APO micro would give 96mm respective AOV and the 210 at 167mm respective AOV of a 35mm camera is just right for telephoto, while the 35mm a great 28mm WA of which the 24mm Leica lens sounds a perfect supplement to those that want to go wider... The 45mm/2.8 shows the same AOV as a 36mm on a DSLR.
Clearly, Contax 645 users would need no DSLR system along their existing MF if they would invest on a Leica S-007... In reality they could have a new MFDB and get rid of their DSLRs completely thus funding their new MFDB, but would considerably shrink the bulk of equipment they have to carry while boosting quality at the same time...
-
Hmmm the DPR samples are not that impressive but thankfully Jono's files are much better. Had to giggle when at the end of his review he judges the 007 as true MF quality after earlier professing to not having ever shot MF. Someone give Jono an 80mp phase or Leaf back to test please and see if he writes the same thing. I can imagine that if was used to the M240 and went to 007 suddenly had twice the number of pixels and it would indeed seem impressive but to deem it MF quality with no basis to go from seems a bit of a leap.
The thing that struck me about the 007 samples, particularly those on DPR, is that the color is not really believable. The color of the boy's lips, the red in the inflatable pool, that kind of stuff. So I'm in agreement with Edmund. Oddly these colors that seem off remind me of my Leica DMR, which I really enjoyed but never thought of after I moved to my Rollei 6008/Phase. Surely its just a profile thing and they'll have this all sorted?
-
Hmmm the DPR samples are not that impressive but thankfully Jono's files are much better. Had to giggle when at the end of his review he judges the 007 as true MF quality after earlier professing to not having ever shot MF. Someone give Jono an 80mp phase or Leaf back to test please and see if he writes the same thing. I can imagine that if was used to the M240 and went to 007 suddenly had twice the number of pixels and it would indeed seem impressive but to deem it MF quality with no basis to go from seems a bit of a leap.
Hi Eric, I understand what you're saying, but not having worked with MF before, doesn't mean one cannot recognize 'the look', I know Jono to have a good eye. We're all aware of the fact that 30x45mm is not the same as 'true MF' with 56x56mm. Still, I find that with my S I've got more than enough separation if I want it. In fact, the sensor size of the S is big enough for me and I think the so-called 'Leica Pro Format' is just the right size when it comes to separation versus DOF and 3D look (S lenses!) in general.
The thing that struck me about the 007 samples, particularly those on DPR, is that the color is not really believable. The color of the boy's lips, the red in the inflatable pool, that kind of stuff. So I'm in agreement with Edmund. Oddly these colors that seem off remind me of my Leica DMR, which I really enjoyed but never thought of after I moved to my Rollei 6008/Phase. Surely its just a profile thing and they'll have this all sorted?
The profiles for this camera are not yet in place in ACR/LR. The colors remind me a bit of the first M240 examples I’ve seen on the net, but that’s understandable given the same sensor family. When I try the Embedded Profile on the DPR-samples, they look much more saturated than the Adobe Profile. I feel quite sure the photos can be made to look any which way the photographer likes, very rich files.
-
Since (more or less) we all agree that these first samples look a bit over saturated, I have to remind you, that all CMos files (despite if it is DSLR or Sony's 44X33 sensor) files that have been posted as examples, look oversaturated if compared to an MF CCD file... Never the less, the color looks pretty accurate to me, but only oversaturated... (which shouldn't be a time consuming problem when processing the RAW files to correct). I believe that when dedicated software will be available, things will look much better, but I also expect that there is more research on the subjet that will be presented in the near future. MO is that there will be a new version of Sinar software coming soon, that will have profiles for the S007 too...
-
The David Farkas review is really impressive and has some very nice pictures. I think everyone agrees that the current profile needs some ironing out, mostly saturation, but you can still see where it is going.
http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/09/leica-s-typ-007-review/
There are a couple pictures there that I did a double take for high ISO, I thought it must have been a typo. Incredible. It sounds like they've really got the electronics and operation speed sussed too.
-
Hi,
So you make your own profiles? What is your expeience about that?
Best regards
Erik
-
Farka's samples from the new Leica S look very nice. Overall the camera looks like a superb overall package.
That said having seen files from it and owned the 645D and now the IQ160 I can say that the larger sensor looks , well, more like medium format, obviously because it is although I mostly used 6x7 back in the day and MFD is still well below that. I loved the look of 6x7, specially when using the 90mm wide open (f2.8) and the 165mm. To get close to that look I would need f2 lenses with the IQ160.
Regarding film vs digital I find that with film (specially when using chrome films) I needed to light softer and use more fill to soften things up and control the contrast. With digital (specially DSLRs) I am constantly doing the opposite, adding quite a bit of negative fill and controlling spill as much as possible. Some Color Neg. films were more like digital but still required a bit of contrast control but handled mixed light much better.
With the IQ160 and CaptureOne I can get a film like (kinda like type of Color Neg film) look pretty much out of the box. It has more "texture" and more punch than the typical DSLR + Adobe Lightroom lightroom look which has gotten flatter and flatter with every update it seems.
The FUji (x-T10, X-T1 et. al.) film profiles are really cool (in camera or with LR), a bit exaggerated at times but nice. Olympus (OM-D's) also have a nice look out of the box, specially the original E-M5.
Obviously most people here can take just about any file from any camera and make it look in many many different ways.
In short I think the Leica S system (both the CCD and CMOS iterations) is excellent, specially when you take into consideration the S Lenses and the factory adapters (AF with Contax and Hasselblad H lenses). If I did not want a larger sensor and more MP I would so buy into that system. Love it.
-
Farka's samples from the new Leica S look very nice. Overall the camera looks like a superb overall package.
That said having seen files from it and owned the 645D and now the IQ160 I can say that the larger sensor looks , well, more like medium format, obviously because it is although I mostly used 6x7 back in the day and MFD is still well below that. I loved the look of 6x7, specially when using the 90mm wide open (f2.8) and the 165mm. To get close to that look I would need f2 lenses with the IQ160.
Regarding film vs digital I find that with film (specially when using chrome films) I needed to light softer and use more fill to soften things up and control the contrast. With digital (specially DSLRs) I am constantly doing the opposite, adding quite a bit of negative fill and controlling spill as much as possible. Some Color Neg. films were more like digital but still required a bit of contrast control but handled mixed light much better.
With the IQ160 and CaptureOne I can get a film like (kinda like type of Color Neg film) look pretty much out of the box. It has more "texture" and more punch than the typical DSLR + Adobe Lightroom lightroom look which has gotten flatter and flatter with every update it seems.
The FUji (x-T10, X-T1 et. al.) film profiles are really cool (in camera or with LR), a bit exaggerated at times but nice. Olympus (OM-D's) also have a nice look out of the box, specially the original E-M5.
Obviously most people here can take just about any file from any camera and make it look in many many different ways.
In short I think the Leica S system (both the CCD and CMOS iterations) is excellent, specially when you take into consideration the S Lenses and the factory adapters (AF with Contax and Hasselblad H lenses). If I did not want a larger sensor and more MP I would so buy into that system. Love it.
Ken that is pretty much my summation too. For me the sweet spot is the IQ160. The sheer resolution and image quality is gob smacking, though I haven't gelled with any of the platforms I've been using, although I haven't tried the Phase One XF yet.
For me the Leica S, while it loses a little in sensor size characteristics, IQ and extra depth and resolution, it gains in size, handling, high iso, speed of operation; shooting and tethering and also lenses. The lenses are exciting and superb. The thought of more Summicrons and even potentially a 70 Summilux (that is like a Noctilux) is really quite alluring for what I need and do.
-
Hi,
So you make your own profiles? What is your expeience about that?
Best regards
Erik
Now... I feel this is really a provocative question... Being a man myself that has spend many years to create MY absolute profiles due to occupation (art reproduction - mainly paintings and hagiography), I believe only a troll could ask a PHOTO-grapher a similar question... I also use my own profiles (different than art repro) for all the rest of my photography... what is your experience to think that you can ask somebody about his experience? After all, how your pictures compare with the one that you dare challenge?
-
Now... I feel this is really a provocative question... Being a man myself that has spend many years to create MY absolute profiles due to occupation (art reproduction - mainly paintings and hagiography), I believe only a troll could ask a PHOTO-grapher a similar question... I also use my own profiles (different than art repro) for all the rest of my photography... what is your experience to think that you can ask somebody about his experience? After all, how your pictures compare with the one that you dare challenge?
Theodoros,
Don't get uselessly upset. Ask him what has been his experience with programming systems. After all it only takes a few hours to read through a language manual :)
Erik, profiles are only as good as the perception and taste of the person who makes them.
Edmund
-
Theodoros,
Don't get uselessly upset. Ask him what has been his experience with programming systems. After all it only takes a few hours to read through a language manual :)
Erik, profiles are only as good as the perception and taste of the person who makes them.
Edmund
So... who is the person that makes them? Is Erik a photo-grapher or not? ...I ask this because most of the time, he posts (to be polite) not interesting pictures... and some feathers too...
EDIT: He also has some "interesting" ideas about how photography may be improoved... (it always ends up with "if industry advances resolution by using smaller pixels and increase resolution) and he also posts on all threads, no matter the thread and he "runs to support" trolls (like Petrus) whenever one exposes them into public... (like I did on another thread)...
PS: Not to be mistaken... I'm sure that Erik's behaviour is not "normal" and I'm sure his posts through the years have damage LuLa's reputation... (not that I think of you any better)
-
Hi my question was directed to BC, who said that he uses his own profiles and he elaborated on the issue. Thanks for that.
I would think that the profiling is a significant part of tonal reproduction. Anders Torger developed a new profiling tool called DCamProf and he has a long and elaborate thread about the tweaks involved. Just to say, Anders Torger does not think that sensor CFAs have the significance attributed to them. On the other hand, developing a look is quite elaborate.
So, I think it is adequate to elaborate on colour profiling, methods used and so on in any discussions regarding sensor colour reproduction.
A good example of that is that several poster like 'Synn' and 'Paul2660’ noted that using Phase One IQ250 colour profile on Nikon D800 images gave better reproduction than the C1 profiles provided by Capture One for the Nikon.
Best regards
Erik
Theodoros,
Don't get uselessly upset. Ask him what has been his experience with programming systems. After all it only takes a few hours to read through a language manual :)
Erik, profiles are only as good as the perception and taste of the person who makes them.
Edmund
-
PS: Not to be mistaken... I'm sure that Erik's behaviour is not "normal" and I'm sure his posts through the years have damage LuLa's reputation... (not that I think of you any better)
Theodoros,
Your job, our hobby :)
Edmund
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=78&v=JT9I1fPmMJg
-
It was brought to my attention on this and other forums that many were seeing overly saturated images in my review and field report. Turns out my web publishing software had been updated to use a resizing software library that was dropping the ICC profile for the resized inline images in the article. This didn't affect my full size images brought up when clicking on the inline ones, but seems most people never clicked for larger views. This was especially problematic on high gamut monitors. I pulled up the review on an NEC SpectraView at work and some of the colors were downright nuclear.
I changed over to a different graphics engine on my website and regenerated all of the medium images. They now have the correct ICC profile embedded. If you felt upon first viewing that the images were wonky due to camera color or LR profiles, please have another look.
Thanks!
-
It was brought to my attention on this and other forums that many were seeing overly saturated images in my review and field report. Turns out my web publishing software had been updated to use a resizing software library that was dropping the ICC profile for the resized inline images in the article. This didn't affect my full size images brought up when clicking on the inline ones, but seems most people never clicked for larger views. This was especially problematic on high gamut monitors. I pulled up the review on an NEC SpectraView at work and some of the colors were downright nuclear.
I changed over to a different graphics engine on my website and regenerated all of the medium images. They now have the correct ICC profile embedded. If you felt upon first viewing that the images were wonky due to camera color or LR profiles, please have another look.
Thanks!
Hi... I'm really curious on how Contax 645 lenses perform on an S... Is there a review on the matter?
-
(http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/sunset_strip.jpg)
This isn't my forum, it's Michael's and his group.
I'm just a guest.
But I bet the last thing he wants is to turn into into a place for dp review type of comments and lately we're getting there.
I understand if you don't like something or someone it's sometimes not easy to ignore, but it's the best way to handle it. (not that I've always done it).
You know I think the value of a site like this is you have a mixture of people. Some are pros, to some it's their hobby, one recently is moving from enthusiast to professional.
I find this interesting and honestly I post because it makes me think.
When someone mentions profiles, I kind of go, oh yea I know my profiles, it's my eyes, my brain what I plan to see on a screen.
When someone posts about changing careers it takes me back and keeps my thoughts fresh.
I get where Theodoros is coming from because when you make your living at something you love you usually take things seriously.
I understand Erik cause he digs the numbers, loves the tech, though probably relies too heavily on it.
Rob C I get cause he's accomplished a lot in his career and doesn't feel like he needs to explain himself. In the new world where sharing restaurant tables is considered normal, most people won't understand Rob, but to do this for a living for most of your life is almost impossible so I think people could learn from him.
Edmund I truly understand cause he's the little freckled face kid that likes to throw fireworks into the camp fire and he keeps it interesting, though someday he's going to blow his hand off.
One thing I dislike about the interweb (and there is a long list of what I dislike about the web) is people would never speak to each other in the same words and tone in person that they do online.
IMO
BC
+1
I post only occasionally here on LuLa. But I read the forums everyday. As a newbie to the world of MFD, I've spent an inordinate amount of time in this section the last three or four months, voraciously learning everything I could. Some folks - like James, here - invariably grace us with posts which are thoughtful and measured and full of a I've-been-there-and-this-is-what-I-saw wisdom. Take it if you like. No worries if you don't.
Others, a few, seem indignant that someone might make a choice different than they. Then they make the forum bleed for it. No question the tenor of the forum has become more polarized of late. Even as it has sometimes devolved into discussing mindless technical minutiae or esoteric theory. Alas.
I've learned something from pretty much every member here at one time or another. My grateful thanks for that.
I'll continue to look forward to those contributions. Especially those discussions that are able to touch on the physical and technical manifestations of this craft, without losing sight of the fact that there is ultimately an art behind it.
Without the art there ain't much...
-
(http://russellrutherford.com/rockers_2_leica_contax.jpg)
The leica contax adapter is built with leica quality. Locks, stable and works.
The image above is with a 55mm contax and focuses faster than the contax 645, is way too sharp, but then again ultra sharpness doesn't concern me. The difference between leica and contax lenses are the roll off, not the sharpness.
Leica lenses roll off smooth, contax zeiss a quick roll off in tone, Leica smooth, almost old schneider smooth, but sharp when you need it.
I picked up some purple ca on this image, kind of liked it, though could have fixed it in processing. Understand i have the first S2 with a ccd that I love and I pushed the hell out of this image mixing tungsten and daylight, so no color is meant to be technically perfect, because to me technically perfect is boring.
Still, your contax lenses will be fine, but at the end of the day, save your cash cause your gonna buy some leica glass (even though you don't need it) because . . . well it's leica glass and leica glass like leica cameras are way cool.
IMO
BC
I don't have sharpness as my main concern either (as long as there is enough of it), without having ever tried a Leica S, I see an opportunity to get rid of my Nikon DSLRs altogether, thus considerably restricting the equipment I have to carry, I don't plan to stop using my Contax system either, since the main use of the two backs I now use on it is in multishot mode (a feature I can't have with the Leica), so I would like your (or other that can contribute) advise on the following planning I have in my mind:
I now use my CF-39MS back for MF in single shot and I do find the quality to be fine but with higher ISO (which sometimes I need) so I keep two FF Nikons as well... Recently, I got the JAS adapter to use my C645 lenses on the Nikons and got rid of all my Nikon glass but the 17-35/2.8 (to have for wide angles), the old 35-70/2.8 (which was cheap to sell and nice walk around lens) and the 85/2.8 micro PC which I need for product photography, I also have a five lens (from 65 to 210) FUJI GX-680 system on which I have an extremely accurately made MF back adapter plate which directly takes Contax mount backs on it and thus, I'm able to use both my backs on the Fuji (in multishot mode too) for whenever I need movements. What I want to do, is to restrict the equipment further, yet not to reduce the functionality I now have with my system.
My thinking is that it would be pointless to look for a CCD Leica S, as it won't add anything that I can't do with my CF-39MS back on Contax (is that so?) but will only reduce the bulk, but the S-007 does give me the higher ISO quality I now use the Nikons for... OTH, I also have a concern because I will also have to replace the Nikkor 85PC which is much of the use I do on my DSLRs, with a (very expensive) respective Leica lens (the 120?)... and of course add the 24mm Leica to go wider...
Here is my questions then...
1. Am I right to think that the Contax 45mm will perform great on the Leica because of the crop factor that will improve its performance on the edges of the frame?
2. Am I right to think that the (problematic) close focusing distance of the Contax 140 won't be an issue on the Leica because one will have to add distance between him and the subject?
3. Am I right to think that the Contax 35 will have much reduced distortion?
4. Am I right to think that the 80mm will also have improved performance at wider apertures because of the crop frame?
5. Am I right to think that the 45-90 vario will be great if used wide open?
P.S. Mind you that my Contax system is huge (four bodies, all glass & the mutar 1.4x but the 350 lens, all screens, 13 & 26mm extension rings, all finders and right angle attachment too)
-
BC, before you buy the Canon, be sure to check out the video capabilities of the new S. The HD from the full sensor may be interesting for your line of work.
https://vimeo.com/137225658
-
BC, before you buy the Canon, be sure to check out the video capabilities of the new S. The HD from the full sensor may be interesting for your line of work.
https://vimeo.com/137225658
Serious videographers won't consider Leica S or other large format for their video... The reason is not with IQ or the capabilities of the system... It is purely with image format and the way they are used to control the DOF of the scene... For professional video work there is only one format to work with... S35! You see, if one works for many years and has finally set his brains in a certain path that has become the standard from the film days, he needs to spent considerable amount of time which is not profitable only to learn to work with another format at the same level... then, he has to spend a lot of money to completely alter all the associated equipment he is using... Not very wise at all...
EDIT: It would be a good experimental approach for people that would consider the camera for stills and thus already have it, but replacing the format with another is not an easy thing to do...
-
Serious videographers won't consider Leica S or other large format for their video...
Of course not, this option of the S was not made for run and gun and/or as you call them, 'serious videographers'. But BC, for whom this message was posted, might see artistic possibillities for the quiet unique look of the large sensor in 1080P.
For professional video work there is only one format to work with... S35!
Coming from the moving image world, I’d make a distinction between as you call them 'serious videographers' and people who do 'professional video’. S35 is for very serious work only, because of the relatively large sensor size.
You see, if one works for many years and has finally set his brains in a certain path that has become the standard from the film days, he needs to spent considerable amount of time which is not profitable only to learn to work with another format at the same level... then, he has to spend a lot of money to completely alter all the associated equipment he is using... Not very wise at all...
During the nineties, I've worked extensively with 16mm film and the ENG cameras of that period. That's why I still like to use the nice Nikon 1 system for my personal video. I'm used to the flat look of the 13,2 x 8,8mm sensor, and I don't have to worry about DOF so much.
-
Hi BC,
My quote may be a bit out of context, but a great way to describe the present state of the art. Many options that deliver great results…
Professional or not is another thing. Cameras don't make images, photographers do.
Systems may have benefits, but cameras are still tools. Some tools are better in some situations than others.
Once the stuff we are using is good enough, we have plenty of choice and stuff used to be good enough for quite some time.
Just to mention, I have been shooting in french places of faith a lot recently with, my Sony A7rII. I have a Canon 24/3.5 TSE with a Metabones adapter that is sort of not very reliable. At one place I couldn't use a tripod. So, T&S is great but using high ISO, image stabilisation, HDR and software corrections may be a better alternative than pressing the T&S in hand held service.
New technology gives us options.
I have shot with things from 6 MP DSLRs to 39 MP MFD and now 42 MP Sony. On the Sony the judgement is still out, even if I would say so far quite good. But, what I have found is that I have made a lot of my best pictures with a 12 MP APS-C camera.
Subject and execution is sort of more important than the technology used.
Best regards
Erik
…With digital it's a formatless world. …
-
With digital it's a formatless world. I get a kick out of the FF vs. almost medium format arguments, because in a years time I shoot stills and motion imagery with sensors that are 4:3 medium format, FF 35, aps C, micro 43, Super 35 (with three REDS) and whatever size the Leica S2 is.
i'm kind of past thinking about it, in other words I never think "ok a 35mm in super 35 is really a 50mm is FF, or 75 mm on the S2.
Now it seems the Leica 007 is not a top end motion camera like a RED or Arri, but I don't think that was the plan. I think the idea of this camera is to be a still camera that allows a lifestyle or wedding/event photographer to shoot some footage with one kit, because if your primarily a still photographer, especially in advertising imagery, about every project someone is gonna ask if you can shoot a "little" video. Now little video to me means free, (and free isn't a great business plan), but keeping a client happy is.
So video from an 007 is a smart idea.
What I do think about in still and motion is will the camera do what I need, be reliable, have a heafty codec, or still file that allows a professional workflow.
The only reason I mentioned the C300 is we travel a lot between studios. I keep REDs in two cities, but always have Canons with us for stills and some motion. As a camera I love the Canon 70D for motion (not stills) because for quick lifestyle and fast moving setups, it autofocuses so well it's insanely good.
The problem with the 70D is it has a weak 8 bit file that is very difficult to grade. If the C300 would focus like that cheapo 70D it would be useful, but I have these thoughts about new cameras and usually walk away because there is no free lunch.
Now I might buy a Sony A7SII for the stabilization and low light and throw a medium zoom on it, though I have to admit that my style doesn't really work with Sonys, so . . .
I have the 4k Scarlet set up right now with a Canon mount so it's not that big of a deal to use it and best of all it's paid for.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/red_camera_puts_beans_on_the_table.jpg)
IMO BC
Hello BC,
I think it is sad that RED can't use their full APS-H format as read out, instead of cropping. In the same time, I found someone in UK who play a bit with Medium format lenses on custom cameras, maybe you know him ?
http://www.richardgaleoptics.uk/forbes70-large-format/
As usual it is a pleasure to read you :)
EDIT: Have you tried the Canon XC10 ?
-
I think it is sad that RED can't use their full APS-H format as read out, instead of cropping.
Huey's, I'm not sure where this idea comes from, but it's not true. Epics can record the full sensor at 90+ fps. Even the Scarlet can record the full 6K sensor, albeit only at 12fps. But a Scarlet can record the full sensor to an external recorder if you want to do that.
-
Pardon me if I get it wrong. RED is kind of complicated to understand since they have a lot of different hardware and different sensors. They even have MF sensors ... and communication is not that fluid around this. There is different scarlet cameras (4 different models and 3 different sensors...) and different epic cameras (4 different models with 4 different sensors). I'm sure there is more as the date of today... Hard to understand the whole picture.
-
What's funny though is all the places we go I've never seen anyone but me shooting with an S Leica, though I see REDs all the time, literally.
I was in Covent Garden Friday buying hard drives (I think I'm always buying hard drives) and rounded the corner there was an Epic on sticks with a small crew just shooting away.
Two days earlier I came out of a restaurant in Shoreditch and saw a RED mounted on dolly being rolled out of a truck.
I've noticed the change as well, but (at least in southern Italy) RED cameras are so rare I've never seen one in the wild. I have seen plenty of BM Cinema Cameras used for national TV series (one of those was filmed in part right around my block). Up to a couple years ago really small productions used to be done on Canon 5Ds or 7Ds, but all these new cameras at affordable prices have really changed the landscape.
-
Hulyss I'm not saying you, though it's interesting that RED and Leica are the two brands that forum folk love to hate.
Arri guys usually really, really hate RED and RED can be a complicated company to navigate but in my use their cameras have overall been excellent and they changed the way the professional industry viewed cinema cameras, much like Leica changed still photography eons ago.
Prior to RED, few if any actually owned a full bore 35mm film camera and cinema digital cameras were stratospheric in price.
For some reason Leica is always talked about as the hedge fund guy or dentist's camera. I never saw it that way given the history of Leica, but anything can be turned into a toy, depending on the user.
What's funny about both the Leica S007 and the REDs is they are not the cheapest of the segment, but surely not the most expensive. Price out an Epic vs. an Arri, or a Leica cmos vs. a Phase One Cmos and the difference in price is very noticeable, though nobody complains about Arri and nobody calls Phase One a luxury bobble.
I have to admit, the scarlet is the third cinema camera I go to. (Maybe that's why I didn't buy an Epic).
I love my R1's and the Scarlet is just something I use, maybe that's why I haven't smoothed it out, because right now it's kind of like shooting with a belt sander.
(in fact we bought the fan kit for the Scarlet and I've yet to install it).
The form factor of Leica S is obviously the opposite as it's so elegant and everything feels so right, but both companies seem to make cameras people just love or just hate, with few in between.
What's funny though is all the places we go I've never seen anyone but me shooting with an S Leica, though I see REDs all the time, literally.
I was in Covent Garden Friday buying hard drives (I think I'm always buying hard drives) and rounded the corner there was an Epic on sticks with a small crew just shooting away.
Two days earlier I came out of a restaurant in Shoreditch and saw a RED mounted on dolly being rolled out of a truck.
IMO
BC
Most haters of Leica and PhaseOne hate on the cost/price. Not the actual cameras/systems. A lot of the haters have basically no use/ownership experiences with those products (specially the more recent ones). Most cite that there are lower cost options that are "better", at least for them. Also the typical haters work by themselves and basically have zero professional, client supervised, photography work experience. A lot of the design / features of the PhaseOne (and even the Leica) are centered to make that type of work more reliable and better. I mean, the LEMO connectors on the Leica are significantly better than any connector on a DSLR. The same can be said of the PhaseOne tethering performance with C1pro and CapturePilot.
-
J,
I don't think RED prices are bad. If you get paid international campaign rates, then RED is probably the least of your expense points. The real issue is whether the rest of the world -apart from some elite guys like you- gets paid enough so they can afford these prices.
I've seen this situation before, in the 60s and 70s - the Germans made excellent cameras but most people in Europe and the US simply couldn't afford them. The Japanese manufacturers saw the demand, adopted a long term view, and took over the market. And actually, their products were quite usable. If Canon and Sony try to keep the pro market around $10K somebody is going to take it away from them.
Edmund
Hulyss I'm not saying you, though it's interesting that RED and Leica are the two brands that forum folk love to hate.
Arri guys usually really, really hate RED and RED can be a complicated company to navigate but in my use their cameras have overall been excellent and they changed the way the professional industry viewed cinema cameras, much like Leica changed still photography eons ago.
Prior to RED, few if any actually owned a full bore 35mm film camera and cinema digital cameras were stratospheric in price.
For some reason Leica is always talked about as the hedge fund guy or dentist's camera. I never saw it that way given the history of Leica, but anything can be turned into a toy, depending on the user.
What's funny about both the Leica S007 and the REDs is they are not the cheapest of the segment, but surely not the most expensive. Price out an Epic vs. an Arri, or a Leica cmos vs. a Phase One Cmos and the difference in price is very noticeable, though nobody complains about Arri and nobody calls Phase One a luxury bobble.
I have to admit, the scarlet is the third cinema camera I go to. (Maybe that's why I didn't buy an Epic).
I love my R1's and the Scarlet is just something I use, maybe that's why I haven't smoothed it out, because right now it's kind of like shooting with a belt sander.
(in fact we bought the fan kit for the Scarlet and I've yet to install it).
The form factor of Leica S is obviously the opposite as it's so elegant and everything feels so right, but both companies seem to make cameras people just love or just hate, with few in between.
What's funny though is all the places we go I've never seen anyone but me shooting with an S Leica, though I see REDs all the time, literally.
I was in Covent Garden Friday buying hard drives (I think I'm always buying hard drives) and rounded the corner there was an Epic on sticks with a small crew just shooting away.
Two days earlier I came out of a restaurant in Shoreditch and saw a RED mounted on dolly being rolled out of a truck.
IMO
BC
-
Pardon me if I get it wrong. RED is kind of complicated to understand since they have a lot of different hardware and different sensors. They even have MF sensors ... and communication is not that fluid around this. There is different scarlet cameras (4 different models and 3 different sensors...) and different epic cameras (4 different models with 4 different sensors). I'm sure there is more as the date of today... Hard to understand the whole picture.
Just to clarify a bit, have been only three sensors over the entire life of RED cameras: the original Mysterium from about 2008. That was replaced by the Mysterium-X (commonly called MX) in 2011 or so, and the current, Dragon sensor was introduced in late 2013. Dragon and MX are both currently sold by RED. Oh yes, there are also Monochrome versions of both current sensors sold only in Epic bodies, so i guess that does qualify as four different sensors.
I'm only aware of two models of Scarlet--MX and Dragon. Epic has more, but the body differences are mostly about weight--Carbon fiber for gimbal use and the like. And there is a new Weapon camera model that uses the Dragon sensor. Some time around the end of the year it will be available with an 8K version of the Dragon sensor that is larger than 35mm full frame in one dimension, but I don't think it comes near to qualifying as medium format.
I'm sure Red's lineup is confusing if you're not paying attention to it, but I don't see why anybody who's not actively in the market for a digital cinema camera would be paying attention to it. Honestly, though, I don't really see how it's any more confusing than Phase One/Leaf's line of backs, for example. Right now digital back.com lists 7 Leaf backs and 10 Phase backs, plus cameras and accessories and referbs -- all stuff you'd expect, really.
But I'll grant you that if you try to figure any of that out via Reduser.com, communicaton is not that clear.
-
Hating only means something to the hater and usually stems from naivety, jealously or ignorance. Once you realise that you just switch off to it, because it really is not worthy of attention.
-
Hulyss I'm not saying you, though it's interesting that RED and Leica are the two brands that forum folk love to hate.
I never really seen that much hate toward RED and the only Leica hate I've seen was toward M users not S users. Personally I absolutely love RED products and would like being able to buy a Scarlet, one day, but the big sensor one for stills, also. What I find very cool from RED is the Scarlet because it lower a bit the price to enter the house. Before scarlet, for an Indy producer wanting to own his own material, RED was just a dream.
Any one here know anything about RICOH being "close" to RED ?? Just a rumour I want to confirm or destroy.