Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Nemo on December 25, 2008, 07:39:16 am
-
MTF graphs for the first 4 Leica S2 lenses !!!!
LEICA Camera AG - Das Leica S-System (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system)
I think they are impressive, specially considering the format size...
_________________________________
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 35 MM F/2.5 ASPH. CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/35/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/35/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 70 MM F/2.5 ASPH. CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/70/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/70/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA APO-MACRO-SUMMARIT-S 120 MM F/2.5 CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/120/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/120/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA APO-ELMAR-S 180 MM F/3.5 CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/180/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/180/tabelle02.jpg)
.
-
MTF graphs for the first 4 Leica S2 lenses !!!!
I think they are impressive, specially considering the format size...
Yes.
Do we have comfirmed prices for these wonsers? It seels pretty obvious to me that near perfect lenses can be made when money is not really part of the equation.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The last issue of the LFI (Leica Fotografie Magazine) presents the first review of a Leica S2 (a pre-production model).
The price of the lenses isn't discussed, but the 70mm is said to be as complex as the 28mm Summicron-M, but adding autofocus, electronic aperture and water-proofing. The Summicron is €3000 so the 70mm lens will be... how much?
-
Yes.
Do we have comfirmed prices for these wonsers? It seels pretty obvious to me that near perfect lenses can be made when money is not really part of the equation.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yes they are impressive if they are for 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm. I could not find any description of the curves, so I guess the normal 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm applies.
Erik
MTF graphs for the first 4 Leica S2 lenses !!!!
LEICA Camera AG - Das Leica S-System (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system)
I think they are impressive, specially considering the format size...
_________________________________
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 35 MM F/2.5 ASPH. CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/35/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/35/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA SUMMARIT-S 70 MM F/2.5 ASPH. CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/70/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/70/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA APO-MACRO-SUMMARIT-S 120 MM F/2.5 CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/120/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/120/tabelle02.jpg)
_________________________________
LEICA APO-ELMAR-S 180 MM F/3.5 CS
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/180/tabelle01.jpg)
(http://www.s.leica-camera.com/assets/Uploads/System/Objektive/FirstPackage/180/tabelle02.jpg)
.
-
Yes they are impressive if they are for 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm. I could not find any description of the curves, so I guess the normal 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm applies.
Erik
I can't believe a 35mm wide-angle lens for a larger-than-35mm format could have an MTF of 80% at 40lp/mm. Those curves would have to represent resolutions 10, 20 & 30 lp/mm at most.
-
I can't believe a 35mm wide-angle lens for a larger-than-35mm format could have an MTF of 80% at 40lp/mm. Those curves would have to represent resolutions 10, 20 & 30 lp/mm at most.
You are talking about perhaphs the best set of lenses ever made, so why not ? ^^
-
Leica R & M lenses are measured at 5, 10, 20, 40 lp/mm, I suspect they are the same. Zeiss/Hassy lenses are also 10,20 40 lp/mm, so...
As for the eventual prices... ;>
-
You are talking about perhaphs the best set of lenses ever made, so why not ? ^^
Two reasons basically. Those graphs are so much better than the most expensive 35mm format lenses I've ever seen; and top quality lenses are almost always at least slightly better when they are designed for optimum performance across a smaller image circle for use with a smaller format, such as the Zuiko lenses for the 4/3rds format.
These new Leica lenses project a larger image circle than 35mm format lenses, so it would be a great achievement if they had an MTF response which was merely on a par with, for example, the Leica Summicron-M 50mm F2.
That the MTF response for the larger format wide-angle 35mm lens is actually better than the response for the Summicron-M 50/F2, just seems a bit far-fetched and incredible to me.
However, if the above MTF graphs really are accurately representative of real lenses at 40 lp/mm, then that's just amazing.
Below is the Photodo MTF chart for the Summicron 50/2, which has one of the highest rating for any 50mm lens.
[attachment=10534:Summicro..._50mm_F2.jpg]
-
Hi,
I checked a Zeiss paper on MTF and they seem to put the diffraction limit at ca. 85% at f/5.6, so 80% should be possible to achieve. I start to think those curves can be for real. Calculated MTF for lenses is probably higher then measured one on real samples.
Erik
I can't believe a 35mm wide-angle lens for a larger-than-35mm format could have an MTF of 80% at 40lp/mm. Those curves would have to represent resolutions 10, 20 & 30 lp/mm at most.
-
Two reasons basically. Those graphs are so much better than the most expensive 35mm format lenses I've ever seen; and top quality lenses are almost always at least slightly better when they are designed for optimum performance across a smaller image circle for use with a smaller format, such as the Zuiko lenses for the 4/3rds format.
These new Leica lenses project a larger image circle than 35mm format lenses, so it would be a great achievement if they had an MTF response which was merely on a par with, for example, the Leica Summicron-M 50mm F2.
[attachment=10534:Summicro..._50mm_F2.jpg]
Again, we are talking about lenses that are probably going to be 3 to 10 times more expensive than their 35 mm equivalents and are not that bright.
I am 100% sure that Nikon and Canon could produce a near perfect 50 mm f2 for 2.000 US$. Now,would you buy one?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
I checked a Zeiss paper on MTF and they seem to put the diffraction limit at ca. 85% at f/5.6, so 80% should be possible to achieve. I start to think those curves can be for real. Calculated MTF for lenses is probably higher then measured one on real samples.
Erik
the turnover of leica went down more than 40% this year, so sure they need some attention. if they survive and bring the s2 to the market i`m convinced the s2 becomes the unbeatable "dentists dream camera" ;-)
-
I am 100% sure that Nikon and Canon could produce a near perfect 50 mm f2 for 2.000 US$. Now,would you buy one?
a 35mm f/2 yes
-
Hi,
Actually, no.
For one thing zooms are IMHO more useful than single focals. It's not always that easy to move a step forward or back. The other issue is that a "perfect" lens would only achieve it's maximum performance in a very narrow aperture range. Finally the sharpening steps in the digital process can hide or emphase weeknesses.
In the end the qustion how useful a lens is for the needs at hand. I would pay 2000 USD for a 24-70/2.8 or a 70-200/2.8 but probably not for a single focal, especially as I normally use f/8, which I see as an acceptable compromise between factors like depth of field, precision of focus, lens aberrations and diffraction.
In the final outcome the question is about utility. The problem with the Leica lenses may be that they need sensors with very small pixel pitch for best utilisation and such sensors are noisy. With Rodenstock HR Digitars and their likes we have more flexibility as we can put them on cameras with shifts and tilts. A digital back with "Digital" lenses is just an investment that can be utilized far more flexibly than just another DSLR, even if that DSLR is the best ever built with the best lenses ever made.
Some people will buy the new Leica and it's lenses and I'm perfectly sure those owners will be happy.
Anyway, I'm still fascinated with the technology. I also admire Porsche, Ferrari and Formula 1, but I have a Toyota station wagon.
Best regards
Erik
In happy posession of a 24-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, 100/2.8 Macro, 20/2.8, 300/4 and 400/4.5 among other things ;-)
Again, we are talking about lenses that are probably going to be 3 to 10 times more expensive than their 35 mm equivalents and are not that bright.
I am 100% sure that Nikon and Canon could produce a near perfect 50 mm f2 for 2.000 US$. Now,would you buy one?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Again, we are talking about lenses that are probably going to be 3 to 10 times more expensive than their 35 mm equivalents and are not that bright.
I am 100% sure that Nikon and Canon could produce a near perfect 50 mm f2 for 2.000 US$. Now,would you buy one?
Cheers,
Bernard
Make it a 1.4 with AFS and tell me where I can make the deposit
-
Leica R & M lenses are measured at 5, 10, 20, 40 lp/mm, I suspect they are the same. Zeiss/Hassy lenses are also 10,20 40 lp/mm, so...
Yes, in Leica's tradition, they are the same: 5, 10, 20 and 40lp/mm, for Leica "pro-Format", this is, 30x45mm... similar to 36x48mm, and half the 645 format (more or less)...
-
Just my two cents:
Yes, these MTFs show 5/10/20/40lp/mm and the calculated (the 70/180 already take pictures) MTFs are usually nearly identical with the actual MTFs (shown for serial lenses) because of extremely tight production tolerances.
After several years of Leica M I recently completed my lens line-up with a 2/28 - three lenses in about 6 years, because they're so bloody expensive!
But: They're worth every cent in mechanical and optical quality, I know that even a future M9/10 with plenty megapixels will give outstanding results! The MTFs of my lenses look quite similar to the new S-lenses and besides the small files (just 10MP with the M8) they give great results: the corner-to-corner sharpness, the contrast, the bokeh, the flare-resistance, the "look"...
I think this optical quality is exactly what the S2/MFDB-clients want and need! And it's also what Leica is about, buying a Kodak CCD is easy, but designing lenses of this quality is nearly impossible, Leica-engineers told me that several design/production-technologies implemented in the S-series were recently developed for the new high-speed-lenses (1,4 21/24mm, 0.95 Noctilux) or the 5,6/1600mm.
-
Peter Karbe, the lead designer of Leica's lens design team, is also possibly the best lens designer of all time. He has designed several of the most critically acclaimed lenses ever made, like the Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH., and so on, in many cases more competent replacements for lenses from an earlier design genius, Dr. Walter Mandler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mandler), the designer of the Noctilux, among others. If anyone can pull those kinds of numbers from an MF lens, then him and his team. Here is an excerpt from an interview (scroll down a bit). Leica has made the occasional bumble with cameras like the M5 and M8, and the DMR, but they have never in my experience exaggerated optical performance.
http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_history.html (http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_history.html)
-
David Farkas has a very interesting interview with Peter Karbe during the last Photokina (2008)...
http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/ (http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/)
(look at "Day 2" report)...
-
I'll look forward to seeing some real-world comparisons with the Canon G10, but this time with DoF equalised; that is, the G10 at F3.5 and the S2 at F22 .
The S2 will of course be tremendous for shallow DoF work and sharp eyelashes, but for landscape work where maximum DoF is sought, it will probably prove to be a waste of resources. All good lenses start to look very similar stopped down to F11 and beyond.
It's a pity that Leica is only now ready to launch this camera when the economic outlook is so bleak. In times like the present, sales of luxury items tend to be the first to suffer. But I wish them all the best.
-
Leica has made the occasional bumble with cameras like the M5 and M8, and the DMR, but they have never in my experience exaggerated optical performance.
http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_history.html (http://www.overgaard.dk/leica_history.html)
Who designed the R 80 lux? and the 35-70mm elmarit? These are my favorites but I'd agree with you. I don't think Leica has ever overstated their lenses. I think most I've used are quite nice.
And why do you think the DMR is a bumble? I have really enjoyed mine and for the time it was quite good, producing a much higher quality file than its canon and nikon counterparts at base ISO. Much more MFDB like than 35mmDSLR.
-
Who designed the R 80 lux? and the 35-70mm elmarit? These are my favorites but I'd agree with you. I don't think Leica has ever overstated their lenses. I think most I've used are quite nice.
And why do you think the DMR is a bumble? I have really enjoyed mine and for the time it was quite good, producing a much higher quality file than its canon and nikon counterparts at base ISO. Much more MFDB like than 35mmDSLR.
The DMR wasn't a bumble as such (and neither was the M8), but they promised it much too soon, and then there were firmware issues with both colour and SD-card support.
The 80 Lux-R is the R version of the 75 Lux-M, and was designed by Dr. Walter Mandler. It also happens to be my favorite portrait lens of all time. I love the look wide open. I have a Hasselblad 110mm f/2 on the way, so we'll see what happens there The 35-70 Elmarit is a much newer lens, so it wasn't Dr. Mandler, but I don't know if it was Peter Karbe. It may have been, or he may at least have been involved, since it has the signature and technical level of the newest Leica lenses.
-
In times like the present, sales of luxury items tend to be the first to suffer. But I wish them all the best.
I don't think this is a "luxury" item. In my opinion, the design of this new system is for professional use. It is a professional-oriented system. Different in concept to the competition, but truly professional. Prices must be competitive.
-
Hopefully Leica will think beyond the end of their noses on the new S glass and follow-thru on the "..it's true, no it's not, yes it is..." assertions between Phase and Leica of the S lenses being compatible with upcoming (current?) Phamiya bodies. Sell the glass (if true) as the body gains traction in the market (will take some time) and hope to convert users to the S platform (or use as a 2nd body).
The glass and a body's features/firmware/reliability/shootability and the firm's service/responsiveness are what differentiate a system and sell it (or not). The sensors, all sourced from the same handful of folks and all lacking AA filters, are not a source of competitive advantage. Hopefully they'll realize that and exploit /establish the glass as soon as they can while they try and establish the body/system in the market. However, knowing Leica......
-
Who designed the R 80 lux? and the 35-70mm elmarit? These are my favorites but I'd agree with you. I don't think Leica has ever overstated their lenses. I think most I've used are quite nice.
And why do you think the DMR is a bumble? I have really enjoyed mine and for the time it was quite good, producing a much higher quality file than its canon and nikon counterparts at base ISO. Much more MFDB like than 35mmDSLR.
have to agree I shot the DMR for two years and without a doubt the best in 35mm at the time and frankly It still maybe when it comes to image quality, more to life than MPX. The only thing I see close to it in look and feel is the new Sony A900. Very tempting 35mm system right now. I am certainly keeping a close eye on the S2 it represents speed above all else in MF
-
Two reasons basically. Those graphs are so much better than the most expensive 35mm format lenses I've ever seen; and top quality lenses are almost always at least slightly better when they are designed for optimum performance across a smaller image circle for use with a smaller format, such as the Zuiko lenses for the 4/3rds format.
These new Leica lenses project a larger image circle than 35mm format lenses, so it would be a great achievement if they had an MTF response which was merely on a par with, for example, the Leica Summicron-M 50mm F2.
That the MTF response for the larger format wide-angle 35mm lens is actually better than the response for the Summicron-M 50/F2, just seems a bit far-fetched and incredible to me.
However, if the above MTF graphs really are accurately representative of real lenses at 40 lp/mm, then that's just amazing.
Below is the Photodo MTF chart for the Summicron 50/2, which has one of the highest rating for any 50mm lens.
[attachment=10534:Summicro..._50mm_F2.jpg]
Ray, I tend to agree with you. If anything, this S2 MTF data suggests that Leica could do much better in their lens designs for their M and R series lenses.
-
I don't think this is a "luxury" item. In my opinion, the design of this new system is for professional use. It is a professional-oriented system. Different in concept to the competition, but truly professional. Prices must be competitive.
which professionals are we talking about?
The professionals looking for the highest megapixels and highest quality(large scenes,landscapes)
The professionals shooting catalogue, fashion, lifestyle, commercial and require less megapixels (out of which it's hard to justify an extremely expensive investment in a whole new system)
The professionals running studios providing a wide range of photographic services that usually don't require extremely high resolutions?
The professionals who are renting their equipment job from rental houses which I highly doubt are likely to start stocking overpriced leicas?
I find it hard to see where the Leica's going to fit in professionally.
-
I am guessing that very few people buy MTF charts. You are talking a hand holdable system camera with a 40 megapixel chip fixed tight in a body. A very very inflexible and probably under specked system - before it is even launched. I am a Leica fan, but scratching my head as to who will buy this system... would love to hear people's thoughts on this question.
All I can see ahead is carnage in MFD land - in fact it is already happening. I cant see the existing manufacturers standing still with pricing OR chips - waiting for Leica to pick up their user base...and I dont think the world needs ( yet another ) European company making product with no transparency in pricing and Hermes editions of this and that and special deal in this and that if you kiss this or that dealers backside long enough..
I am over that BS - forever. Give me a a product that works straight out of the box - and spare me the agony of having to deal with dealers and salespeople who are basically clue-less and mostly ( of course ) self serving and definitely soon to be jobless.
The RED model is the best way to deal with end users - direct. Cut ALL the middle people OUT. Make your product and pricing logic transparent and stop fretting about your dealer 'network' - let them sell Canon 5Ds and Nikon D90s - woo hoo! thats what most 'professionals' use anyway.
-
which professionals are we talking about?
The professionals looking for the highest megapixels and highest quality(large scenes,landscapes)
The professionals shooting catalogue, fashion, lifestyle, commercial and require less megapixels (out of which it's hard to justify an extremely expensive investment in a whole new system)
The professionals running studios providing a wide range of photographic services that usually don't require extremely high resolutions?
The professionals who are renting their equipment job from rental houses which I highly doubt are likely to start stocking overpriced leicas?
I find it hard to see where the Leica's going to fit in professionally.
leica was never a big player in the professional market this will not change with the s2. it is a camera and format nobody asked for imho it is a kind of "creative product" to impress the management
rather than working professionals.
-
which professionals are we talking about?
The professionals looking for the highest megapixels and highest quality(large scenes,landscapes)
The professionals shooting catalogue, fashion, lifestyle, commercial and require less megapixels (out of which it's hard to justify an extremely expensive investment in a whole new system)
The professionals running studios providing a wide range of photographic services that usually don't require extremely high resolutions?
The professionals who are renting their equipment job from rental houses which I highly doubt are likely to start stocking overpriced leicas?
I find it hard to see where the Leica's going to fit in professionally.
The professionals using Hasselblad, Mamiya or even Canon or Nikon's high resolution cameras for studio work, for instance.
-
The RED model is the best way to deal with end users - direct. Cut ALL the middle people OUT. Make your product and pricing logic transparent and stop fretting about your dealer 'network' - let them sell Canon 5Ds and Nikon D90s - woo hoo! thats what most 'professionals' use anyway.
Let's take a quick reality check. RED has never made a medium format still camera, and so far has shown only pie-in-the-sky bad computer renderings of medium format cameras they'd like to build and may someday ship. RED are currently shipping a $30K camera that is the size of a small enlarger and is capable of stills with the resolution of a five year old point and shoot. RED's main products are hype and vaporware, which are selling like hotcakes to fanboys on the internet, none of whom will never spend $30K on a camera of any sort, still or video.
-
Let's take a quick reality check. RED has never made a medium format still camera, and so far has shown only pie-in-the-sky bad computer renderings of medium format cameras they'd like to build and may someday ship. RED are currently shipping a $30K camera that is the size of a small enlarger and is capable of stills with the resolution of a five year old point and shoot. RED's main products are hype and vaporware, which are selling like hotcakes to fanboys on the internet, none of whom will never spend $30K on a camera of any sort, still or video.
I guess you have a lot of evidence to back up your little dummy spit above? Why the aggressive tone?
personally - I like the idea of dealing directly with the manufacturer of a product - a lot of high end equipment in many industries ranging from automobiles to MRI imaging equipment is 'sold' directly to the end user..it is a proven business model in high end, high margin product. The other proven business model is volume sales of boxes with consumer goods in them that work/ and can be replaced immediately if they dont from stock kept on hand by the volume seller. The business model that doesnt work for high end products - is the same adopted by the MFD back manufacturers up till now..economics always wins out - sometimes it takes bad business managers and bad ideas years to break down..deaths of a thousand tiny cuts - they add up.
-
Let's take a quick reality check. RED has never made a medium format still camera, and so far has shown only pie-in-the-sky bad computer renderings of medium format cameras they'd like to build and may someday ship. RED are currently shipping a $30K camera that is the size of a small enlarger and is capable of stills with the resolution of a five year old point and shoot. RED's main products are hype and vaporware, which are selling like hotcakes to fanboys on the internet, none of whom will never spend $30K on a camera of any sort, still or video.
To some extent your right, other than RED has sold a lot of the original RED's in 12 months and by all accounts more than all three ENG makers combined, so they can produce a product.
As far as making a medium format camera I guess RED is pretty much the same as all larger than 35mm speciality cameras, (is there really medium format anymore) in that they announce it, gauge the reaction, change the specs or the complete idea, then slowly come out with the system or parts of the system.
The interesting thing about the RED is it still relies on lenses in the marketplace (i.e. Mamiya) though larger than 35mm format still cameras have also followed this route for well . .. ever, because with current cameras, other than the Hasselblad H, there has not been a real clean sheet of paper camera system built in any format, unless the Leica makes it to market.
The Leica is interesting because along with Hasselblad they are the only two brands that carry any consumer recognition and bling factor at the country club. Tell someone you use Leica or Blad and they go yea wow, though in the real world bling doesn't pay the bills, the photos do and in the real world waiting for anything, firmware, decent focusing, stable software just doesn't cut it.
I wish Leica well, hope the camera comes out working on all fronts with all the lenses on the shelf, (and under a billion dollars) though if Leica doesn't put a cmos sensor in that thing and offer actual high iso, they can pretty much wrap up the whole thought of selling these things in bulk because nobody needs another slow iso camera that shoots one frame every year and a half.
Deep down I think a lot of us a cheering for RED as it would be great if someone broke the mold and delivered exactly as promised, made it professional, made it upgradable and affordable.
The thing is you kind of have this feeling that by the time the RED or the Leica are full featured ready to buy, Canon or Nikon (or both) will have stitched two 24x36 sensors together and sell a $10,000 camera that has 50 mpx, shoots video and makes coffee and toast between setups.
Then again you kind of get the feeling that by the time the RED or Leica are full featured and ready to buy, 95% of our photography will be viewed on computer or TV screens rather than print and at that point anything over 4k wide is just overkill and any format other than 16x9 horizontal is a legacy from the past.
As far as what RED has actually produced today, you have to give them credit because for nearly a decade film makers have begged for a digital motion camera that would shoot a frame format larger than a asprin and costs less than the space shuttle. Sony, JVC, Canon, Panasonic all sit on their hands and gave the indie guys small tiny incremental upgrades talking about the benefits of 3 ccd's though the systems we're still old ccd based cameras that had the ergonomics of a vhs recorder.
RED did change that thought and don't think the 5dII wasn't a reaction to the RED, though in typical digital marketing fashion the 5dII has features locked out of it, just to protect a professional ENG and prosumer video market that is falling faster than GM stock.
Also RED changed the system of customer to maker communication. RED's own forum has conversations with the owner of the company and are blunt and up front. Try to get the CEO's of Phase One, Canon or Nikon to deal directly in a public forum. You'd have a better chance getting Dick Cheney offer himself up to sodium pentathol.
The days are over when anyone with half a brain is gong to drop $30,000 to $50,000 on a still only camera and wait for stuff to come. We all know that in the world of professional cameras, large rental houses and studios get a deal on equipment, usually a damn good deal and we all know that having to go through the dealer process for a professional camera is just another layer of costs. This doesn't mean some dealers are not worth the money, but it doesn't mean that most of them are just gate keepers that have the makers phone number you don't have.
Today, it's more than money, it's accountability. Heck, Nikon is catching a ration of grief over charging 8 grand for a 25mpx camera which by all accounts has amazing image quality and has the ability to focus on the head of a pin. Nobody is going to drop coin and wait, or worse drop coin and get a response from a maker that the lens, finder, grip, software, is tbd at a later date.
On the flip side if Nikon (or anyone) made a camera with real 2k raw video, manual settings, 25mpx stills and come out with a 35mm 1.4 lens, those cameras would sell off the shelf. If they had made the D3x where the sensor is modular and can be changed as new technology is available everyone would feel a lot more secure in writing the check and buying a case full of lenses.
Instead some people will buy, most people will wait.
-
except video I don't really see what you can do with RED ?
-
I wish Leica well, hope the camera comes out working on all fronts with all the lenses on the shelf, (and under a billion dollars) though if Leica doesn't put a cmos sensor in that thing and offer actual high iso, they can pretty much wrap up the whole thought of selling these things in bulk because nobody needs another slow iso camera that shoots one frame every year and a half.
Current DSLR cameras and MF cameras and backs are different things, for different uses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...mp;changemode=1 (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=30419028&changemode=1)
R.
-
The professionals using Hasselblad, Mamiya or even Canon or Nikon's high resolution cameras for studio work, for instance.
why would the professionals using hassy or mamiya spend another $30k to get a new camera?
-
Current DSLR cameras and MF cameras and backs are different things, for different uses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...mp;changemode=1 (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=30419028&changemode=1)
R.
we can go over this forever, but please tell me how many % of real work do you think needs higer resolution than a 24mx cam with "prime lense" can deliver ? and how many mf files are scaled down before printing ?
sure there are some applications where a high resolution makes sense but hasselblad or phase would be a far better option from a professional standpoint than a developing system with less or no support and nothing to rent.
this camera will probably mark the end of leica as we know it panasonic will get the brand name cheap.
-
Current DSLR cameras and MF cameras and backs are different things, for different uses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat...mp;changemode=1 (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=30419028&changemode=1)
R.
Everytime someone tosses out one of these comparisons the subject isn't moving.
If what your shooting has a heartbeat or moves faster than a tax refund check then you'll find that a 12mpx image in focus without blur has 10 times more real detail than a soft 31, 33 and 39mpx image.
-
Everytime someone tosses out one of these comparisons the subject isn't moving.
If what your shooting has a heartbeat or moves faster than a tax refund check then you'll find that a 12mpx image in focus without blur has 10 times more real detail than a soft 31, 33 and 39mpx image.
not only that, if you shot large projects you have to manage tera bytes of data. wonder how many of them who are so keen on more resolution have experienced this ?
-
Everytime someone tosses out one of these comparisons the subject isn't moving.
If what your shooting has a heartbeat or moves faster than a tax refund check then you'll find that a 12mpx image in focus without blur has 10 times more real detail than a soft 31, 33 and 39mpx image.
amen. Used to be that a 4x5 camera with some blur still had a nice texture in the blurred area...but with digital?just a nice clean lump of blur.
moving objects/handheld? Stick to a canon.
-
If what your shooting has a heartbeat or moves faster than a tax refund check then you'll find that a 12mpx image in focus without blur has 10 times more real detail than a soft 31, 33 and 39mpx image.
So true! And I am enjoying the humor you add.
When I got my Rollei, I spent several days practicing focus chasing my kids around the house, even trying to shoot soap bubbles blown into the studio. It's just hard work to try and match the AF on a DSLR. With high quality lenses, which I expect the Leica S to be, the apex of focus is readily apparent even when you stop down for DOF. My experience is that this phenomenon is more noticeable with digital backs than film. That's why accurate focus is starting to be a big deal. And this in my opinion is the area where all the MF camera manufacturers have let us down. I can't believe its that hard to introduce selectable multipoint AF as the technology has been around for years.
-
Everytime someone tosses out one of these comparisons the subject isn't moving.
Everytime someone asks why MF instead of Canon or Nikon the subject isn't moving.
-
not only that, if you shot large projects you have to manage tera bytes of data. wonder how many of them who are so keen on more resolution have experienced this ?
You can save "small RAW" files when the resolution needed is lower than the maximum, isn't?
-
why would the professionals using hassy or mamiya spend another $30k to get a new camera?
In the film era you can get a Hasselblad V for the price of the best Nikon F camera. Hasselblad and other MF manufacturers' prices were too high for many professionals. The typical equipment based on Nikon 35mm cameras and a MF camera was replaced by Canon 35mm digital cameras in the 90s. The point of MF isn't resolution, but the different look of images from larger formats (more subtle transitions, in sharpness and tonality). The S system is interesting if the price is competitive and if the quality is unique. It can gain many professionals for the MF territory. Hasselblad and Mamiya try to do the same, reducing prices, but it is difficult for 645 systems.
-
Hi,
For professionals it's mostly a question of cost and benefit. If a new camera offers better options for increasing income or better options improving workflow (that is reducing costs) it may be attractive.
Best regards
Erik
In the film era you can get a Hasselblad V for the price of the best Nikon F camera. Hasselblad and other MF manufacturers' prices were too high for many professionals. The typical equipment based on Nikon 35mm cameras and a MF camera was replaced by Canon 35mm digital cameras in the 90s. The point of MF isn't resolution, but the different look of images from larger formats (more subtle transitions, in sharpness and tonality). The S system is interesting if the price is competitive and if the quality is unique. It can gain many professionals for the MF territory. Hasselblad and Mamiya try to do the same, reducing prices, but it is difficult for 645 systems.
-
Everytime someone asks why MF instead of Canon or Nikon the subject isn't moving.
yes, but than why not use a canon, sony ....? oh , i know the look, i do and did shoot form 8x10 to 35 but i find this exaggerated differences betwee 645 and 35 ridicules.
-
which professionals are we talking about?
The professionals shooting catalogue, fashion, lifestyle, commercial and require less megapixels (out of which it's hard to justify an extremely expensive investment in a whole new system)
This is apparently where Leica is aiming; fashion and commercial photography, at least initially, with a generally competent, well-rounded system somewhere down the line (with a 350mm lens, a 30mm T/S lens, and so on).
I wish Leica well, hope the camera comes out working on all fronts with all the lenses on the shelf, (and under a billion dollars) though if Leica doesn't put a cmos sensor in that thing and offer actual high iso, they can pretty much wrap up the whole thought of selling these things in bulk because nobody needs another slow iso camera that shoots one frame every year and a half.
[...]
The thing is you kind of have this feeling that by the time the RED or the Leica are full featured ready to buy, Canon or Nikon (or both) will have stitched two 24x36 sensors together and sell a $10,000 camera that has 50 mpx, shoots video and makes coffee and toast between setups.
Leica appears to be aiming at 37MP, 1.5-2 fps, top-notch responsiveness, and awesome lenses with very good AF and superior sharpness. Their statements and first testers and the camera in general appears to be aimed at a fast-shooting 1Ds3/D3/D3x FF-35mm user, who is frustrated with the IQ and perhaps the lenses, and is looking for a step up, IQ-wise, with minimal compromises (mainly in speed and ubiquity), or the 31MP MF user, who wants more speed and a more dynamic form factor, and perhaps better lenses. I am guessing that the S2 will launch with a 1-stop advantage in the high ISO department over the 31MP MF sensors, based mainly on the amount of time which has passed since the last sensor generation, so perhaps a top-notch ISO 200, ISO 800 with really good quality, and a good ISO 1600, not much more. Their support of both focal plane and leaf shutters in modern lenses will give them a unique advantage.
I am fairly confident that they can hit this goal. The lenses will be very good, perhaps the best; the camera will compete with their targets, +/- a couple of firmware updates, the ISO performance will meet reasonable expectations, and the general IQ will be very high. And they are serious about trying: Leica is currently building new facilities to house 3 times as many people, as far as I have read, in their general move back to Wetzlar.
Whether anyone wants to pay 15000 Euro for the camera and 4000-7000 Euro per lens to get there (it is possible that by using common components and other "tricks" that the lens prices will be a bit lower), is another matter. Whether Leica is able to get Phase One's help translated to getting into rental houses, and their pro support channel into shape, is another open question. What everyone else does while Leica gets their ship into shape is yet another. If the lenses are released fast enough to avoid their customers losing hope is still another.
I think the MF landscape would look a lot better if Leica had at least enough success to keep going with it. They would provide a very good transition from the speed and convenience of FF-35mm to the IQ of large MF backs. If they have a run-away success, they could actually change things, but this seems less likely, at least in the current economy.
-
Leica appears to be aiming at 37MP, 1.5-2 fps, top-notch responsiveness, and awesome lenses with very good AF and superior sharpness. Their statements and first testers and the camera in general appears to be aimed at a fast-shooting 1Ds3/D3/D3x FF-35mm user, who is frustrated with the IQ and perhaps the lenses, and is looking for a step up, IQ-wise, with minimal compromises (mainly in speed and ubiquity), or the 31MP MF user, who wants more speed and a more dynamic form factor, and perhaps better lenses. I am guessing that the S2 will launch with a 1-stop advantage in the high ISO department over the 31MP MF sensors, based mainly on the amount of time which has passed since the last sensor generation, so perhaps a top-notch ISO 200, ISO 800 with really good quality, and a good ISO 1600, not much more. Their support of both focal plane and leaf shutters in modern lenses will give them a unique advantage.
I am fairly confident that they can hit this goal. The lenses will be very good, perhaps the best; the camera will compete with their targets, +/- a couple of firmware updates, the ISO performance will meet reasonable expectations, and the general IQ will be very high. And they are serious about trying: Leica is currently building new facilities to house 3 times as many people, as far as I have read, in their general move back to Wetzlar.
i can't see the frustrated 35mm crowd and we have to wait how much better the leica lenses are in real compared to hc lenses the same with your high iso performance
prediction. hasselblad and phase are sure not under a shock because leica announced the s2 and stopped immediately every form of developmenrt ;-)
-
The S2 has single point AF which won't make it popular with people coming from the 35mm world. I doubt the Kodak sensor will be usable above 400 ISO, not because of noise, but because of streaking. In the field, cumbersome focus and low ISO are a definite handicap for hand-held fashion and events eg. marriages. For set-piece shots - ie tripod-mounted fashion, shift lens architecture images, travel and landscape , I'm sure a "Super full-frame" camera with superb lenses will find a niche and an audience. Unless Hasselblad crash their prices again. I'm sure a "full-frame" Hassy with a 60MP 645 sensor can give even Leica lenses on a smaller format a run for the money.
Edmund
-
I guess I better stop shooting runway at ISO 800 with a 300mm Af Mamiya lens wide open with a Phase Body and a Phase P25 Plus back because certainly it can't be done. BTW there moving too. Oh and single point focus. Now either i am a superman or i am just freaking lucky as hell. Come on folks anything can be done the limits are there but certainly not as tight as one makes it sound. Sure MF is slower than the DSLR's but you can get it done. I start another show next week and I will use the same tools as the last time. Now I am busting chops here and i am not superman by any means. But honestly I think we under rate what can be done with these tools. If interested you can check out this older thread but can't is not a word for Pro's to abide by, really I will say it would have been easier on ME to shoot a Nikon or Canon but that comes as another expense that i am trying to avoid. But it really can do almost anything a DSLR can do and if there is really any hurdle it is back speed. The S2 will improve that by 1.5 FPS and in my case it is ONE shot every 1.5 seconds time lapsed. So if there is a hurdle for me this is it. I even shot several of these 1 stop under 800 and pulled it up in C1 with nice results. Is it the best tool for this maybe not but it can get it done and for me i paid my money and i want to use it and get results. I think the S2 is going to be a interesting tool since speed is what gives it the edge over the conventional MF systems. The lenses I am not remotely worried about but service and support and getting rentals should be our biggest concern. I am looking forward to seeing what Leica does and being a friend of leica myself I hope to get more info on this in January to give some updates on there progress.
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.p...=stage+lighting (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2694&highlight=stage+lighting)
-
Well Guy, it's your living and your earner. I'll certainly enjoy watching you cajole Leica into providing a reliable dSLR for us amateurs and dentists. I'll leave out the lawyers, they're welcome to V1.0
Edmund
I guess I better stop shooting runway at ISO 800 with a 300mm Af Mamiya lens wide open with a Phase Body and a Phase P25 Plus back because certainly it can't be done. BTW there moving too. Oh and single point focus. Now either i am a superman or i am just freaking lucky as hell. Come on folks anything can be done the limits are there but certainly not as tight as one makes it sound. Sure MF is slower than the DSLR's but you can get it done. I start another show next week and I will use the same tools as the last time. Now I am busting chops here and i am not superman by any means. But honestly I think we under rate what can be done with these tools. If interested you can check out this older thread but can't is not a word for Pro's to abide by, really I will say it would have been easier on ME to shoot a Nikon or Canon but that comes as another expense that i am trying to avoid. But it really can do almost anything a DSLR can do and if there is really any hurdle it is back speed. The S2 will improve that by 1.5 FPS and in my case it is ONE shot every 1.5 seconds time lapsed. So if there is a hurdle for me this is it. I even shot several of these 1 stop under 800 and pulled it up in C1 with nice results. Is it the best tool for this maybe not but it can get it done and for me i paid my money and i want to use it and get results. I think the S2 is going to be a interesting tool since speed is what gives it the edge over the conventional MF systems. The lenses I am not remotely worried about but service and support and getting rentals should be our biggest concern. I am looking forward to seeing what Leica does and being a friend of leica myself I hope to get more info on this in January to give some updates on there progress.
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.p...=stage+lighting (http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2694&highlight=stage+lighting)
-
Well Guy, it's your living and your earner. I'll certainly enjoy watching you cajole Leica into providing a reliable dSLR for us amateurs and dentists. I'll leave out the lawyers, they're welcome to V1.0
Edmund
LOL I was waiting for you to reply. LOL
Hey it works but admittedly it is hard on me. You really have to be dead on the money pretty much. I just hate the word can't do this or that. Got that damn M8 to do all kinds of fun stuff. LOL
-
i can't see the frustrated 35mm crowd
Then I think you aren't looking at it right. Everyone who uses MF *and* 35mm is a potential customer. If you could replace your 35mm FF cameras *and* your MF stuff with an S2, would you consider it? Clearly not everyone can get away with that, but Leica's bet is that enough can to keep them alive, and even to make them thrive. There are additional potential customers on both sides of that line, but it could work... The weather-sealing could be Leica's ace in the hole for certain customers; unmatched on the MF side.
we have to wait how much better the leica lenses are in real compared to hc lenses the same with your high iso performance
prediction.
I think that it is not unreasonable to expect each of the Leica lenses to be at least as good as anything else out there. This is already the case with their existing lenses, both SLR and M. Leica has the best technology in the world for making aspherical lens elements, and that by some margin, so if anyone can raise the bar, it is Leica. Anyone who has worked with recent Leica lenses knows this. The prices are another story, and zooms are a wild-card, not Leica's traditional strength, but they may be gaining experience for both auto-focus and zooms via Panasonic. They do need to use that knowledge properly in the MF segment.
The high ISO performance is really not a stretch at all. Existing 33x44mm 31MP sensors in Phase One and Hasselblad backs are already performing for pros at ISO 800 (see Guy's comment about his P25+, and that has a stop less performance at high ISO than the P30+...). For Leica's new 30x45mm Kodak sensor to match that is almost a given, and since a few years have passed, expecting one more stop of performance is really almost pessimistic. Leica will be using microlenses, and apparently the advances there might even give them more. How about a clean ISO 800, good ISO 1600, and ISO 3200 in a pinch? The question is not so much if it will outperform existing 31MP sensor, but more by how much.
hasselblad and phase are sure not under a shock because leica announced the s2 and stopped immediately every form of developmenrt ;-)
Surely. They might need to closely look at their marketing strategy in that segment, however, if Leica has any success. At the moment, they are betting that the same platform is good enough for everyone, but with the iffy software, patchy reliability and low performance of many of these systems, this could be a bad strategy. Leica is aimed straight at a weak spot in existing MF manufacturers' lineups, namely the border to FF-35mm, where they are losing ground every year. There are photographers with money there, looking for the right system for them. The S2 is Leica's wedge to drive that crack wide open.
Again, the devil is in the details, and who knows if they will succeed. But I think that the basic strategy is sound, the execution so far looks right on track, the performance should be comfortably attainable, and the success or failure of the whole deal is more likely to lie in reliability, pricing and availability, both to purchase and to rent (as well as the performance of the AF).
-
Then I think you aren't looking at it right. Everyone who uses MF *and* 35mm is a potential customer. If you could replace your 35mm FF cameras *and* your MF stuff with an S2, would you consider it? Clearly not everyone can get away with that, but Leica's bet is that enough can to keep them alive, and even to make them thrive. There are additional potential customers on both sides of that line, but it could work... The weather-sealing could be Leica's ace in the hole for certain customers; unmatched on the MF side.
I think that it is not unreasonable to expect each of the Leica lenses to be at least as good as anything else out there. This is already the case with their existing lenses, both SLR and M. Leica has the best technology in the world for making aspherical lens elements, and that by some margin, so if anyone can raise the bar, it is Leica. Anyone who has worked with recent Leica lenses knows this. The prices are another story, and zooms are a wild-card, not Leica's traditional strength, but they may be gaining experience for both auto-focus and zooms via Panasonic. They do need to use that knowledge properly in the MF segment.
The high ISO performance is really not a stretch at all. Existing 33x44mm 31MP sensors in Phase One and Hasselblad backs are already performing for pros at ISO 800 (see Guy's comment about his P25+, and that has a stop less performance at high ISO than the P30+...). For Leica's new 30x45mm Kodak sensor to match that is almost a given, and since a few years have passed, expecting one more stop of performance is really almost pessimistic. Leica will be using microlenses, and apparently the advances there might even give them more. How about a clean ISO 800, good ISO 1600, and ISO 3200 in a pinch? The question is not so much if it will outperform existing 31MP sensor, but more by how much.
Surely. They might need to closely look at their marketing strategy in that segment, however, if Leica has any success. At the moment, they are betting that the same platform is good enough for everyone, but with the iffy software, patchy reliability and low performance of many of these systems, this could be a bad strategy. Leica is aimed straight at a weak spot in existing MF manufacturers' lineups, namely the border to FF-35mm, where they are losing ground every year. There are photographers with money there, looking for the right system for them. The S2 is Leica's wedge to drive that crack wide open.
Again, the devil is in the details, and who knows if they will succeed. But I think that the basic strategy is sound, the execution so far looks right on track, the performance should be comfortably attainable, and the success or failure of the whole deal is more likely to lie in reliability, pricing and availability, both to purchase and to rent (as well as the performance of the AF).
I think worst case is it will match the P30 plus with noise and that is rated at 1600 my only worry is 6 micron versus 6.8 which does not seem like much but may have some bearing but i am no engineer either and that is a guess. Hopefully a very clean 800 as minimum otherwise they maybe should not release it. The main advantage I se in the S2 over the MF standards is speed and on all fronts that should be there priority is to leave the turtle behind and run fast on all fronts. They limited themselves to integrated back so they have to have something let's just say special . If you look at all the posts on MF in all the forums , the biggest complaint really is ISO , Speed of FPS , LCD which they addressed, Raw and Jpeg they addressed and maybe some other minor quirks but they seem the biggies and if they can improve them by a good margin than i think many will be taken a second look at it. Hard facts are for folks that already own a system than we need a real push to make a lateral move. Those thinking about MF and those wanting more out of 35mm maybe there biggest takers but many of us just want to fly too.
-
this graphs have to be compare to the rodenstock HR line...
-
Owners of 35mm format DSLRs have been complaining for years about the inadequacy of their lenses as the pixel count increases with each camera upgrade. I recall when the 11mp Canon 1Ds was released years ago, many users felt they really needed to upgrade their lenses to get the most out of the camera and that there would be little point in going beyond 11mp with current lenses.
Canon are now up to the equivalent of 39mp full frame, but in the form of the cropped format 50D which, with 15mp, translates to 39mp full frame.
The Leica S2 has about the same pixel density as the Sony A900 and Nikon D3X and I think it would be true to say that most owners of the latest 35mm FF DSLRs, including owners of the 1Ds3 and 5D2, are a bit concerned that their lenses are perhaps not as good as they could be and should be.
The Leica lenses for the S2 appear to be better than any 35mm format lens currently available, despite their larger image circle. What dismays me is that it appears to cost so much to produce such fine lenses. A camera that would really benefit enormously from such fine lenses is the humble Canon 50D.
If Leica were to design EF-S lenses for the 50D, it should be possible for them to exceed the quality of the S2 lenses, because of the smaller image circle required. We would then have a situation, camera body $1,000, standard lens $20,000.
As always, it seems that the 'law of diminishing returns' applies as one tries to get the maximum performance possible from technology. From purely practical and economic concerns, one might wonder if there's any point in doubling or tripling the cost of a system in order to get what might prove to be marginal improvements of pixel-peeping proportions.
However, I hope the S2 is a huge success. It might encourage other manufacturers to jump on the bandwagon and produce similar quality lenses for smaller formats at a more affordable price.
-
I think many of us have held the S2. It's an interesting object. In a way, it's the perfect opposite and therefore perfect symbiont of the D700, or maybe even of the 5D2.
S2 D700
15 A 2 A
800 B 12800 B
1 C 5 C
Assigning the appropriate units {A, B, C} }in the above table from {f/s, ISO, K$} is left as an exercise for the reader. Guy is excused from this homework class, he has a scheduled appointment with his banker who is very supportive of Guy's actions to save Germany's economy
Edmund
-
LOL first I need to save my own house. LOL
-
This is apparently where Leica is aiming; fashion and commercial photography, at least initially, with a generally competent, well-rounded system somewhere down the line (with a 350mm lens, a 30mm T/S lens, and so on).
Leica appears to be aiming at 37MP, 1.5-2 fps, top-notch responsiveness, and awesome lenses with very good AF and superior sharpness. Their statements and first testers and the camera in general appears to be aimed at a fast-shooting 1Ds3/D3/D3x FF-35mm user, who is frustrated with the IQ and perhaps the lenses, and is looking for a step up, IQ-wise, with minimal compromises (mainly in speed and ubiquity), or the 31MP MF user, who wants more speed and a more dynamic form factor, and perhaps better lenses. I am guessing that the S2 will launch with a 1-stop advantage in the high ISO department over the 31MP MF sensors, based mainly on the amount of time which has passed since the last sensor generation, so perhaps a top-notch ISO 200, ISO 800 with really good quality, and a good ISO 1600, not much more. Their support of both focal plane and leaf shutters in modern lenses will give them a unique advantage.
I am fairly confident that they can hit this goal. The lenses will be very good, perhaps the best; the camera will compete with their targets, +/- a couple of firmware updates, the ISO performance will meet reasonable expectations, and the general IQ will be very high. And they are serious about trying: Leica is currently building new facilities to house 3 times as many people, as far as I have read, in their general move back to Wetzlar.
Whether anyone wants to pay 15000 Euro for the camera and 4000-7000 Euro per lens to get there (it is possible that by using common components and other "tricks" that the lens prices will be a bit lower), is another matter. Whether Leica is able to get Phase One's help translated to getting into rental houses, and their pro support channel into shape, is another open question. What everyone else does while Leica gets their ship into shape is yet another. If the lenses are released fast enough to avoid their customers losing hope is still another.
I think the MF landscape would look a lot better if Leica had at least enough success to keep going with it. They would provide a very good transition from the speed and convenience of FF-35mm to the IQ of large MF backs. If they have a run-away success, they could actually change things, but this seems less likely, at least in the current economy.
I wish them lots of luck.considering how I have yet to see a decent 400ISO from a MFDB maker.
The prices that have been floating around seem to point at $30k for a body only
I can get 3 P30+ backs for that price at least. And do they have any upgrade programs for that kind of price point? The value of a body with a fixed sensor drops fast...
-
I wish them lots of luck.considering how I have yet to see a decent 400ISO from a MFDB maker.
The prices that have been floating around seem to point at $30k for a body only
I can get 3 P30+ backs for that price at least. And do they have any upgrade programs for that kind of price point? The value of a body with a fixed sensor drops fast...
At Photokina they were talking of matching Hassy price per megapixel, which translated to around Euro 15K at tht point, but they agreed the Hassy price would fall.
The part I don't like is that the sensor is already determined to be the Kodak, which at release time will be a full year old, ie a year out of date. I think this sensor will let them down.
Edmund
-
I guess I better stop shooting runway at ISO 800 with a 300mm Af Mamiya lens wide open with a Phase Body and a Phase P25 Plus back because certainly it can't be done. BTW there moving too. Oh and single point focus. Now either i am a superman or i am just freaking lucky as hell.
Yeah but you know which way they are going to walk, the path they will take and they walk at a regular pace then stop and turn. They have lights on them. You get plenty of chances to nail focus for each model a couple of times. Its not that hard. Try something like sports with your setup. I don't think the Leica S2 is going to be any better with its single focus point, but one can hope.
-
The Leica lenses for the S2 appear to be better than any 35mm format lens currently available, despite their larger image circle. What dismays me is that it appears to cost so much to produce such fine lenses. A camera that would really benefit enormously from such fine lenses is the humble Canon 50D.
If Leica were to design EF-S lenses for the 50D, it should be possible for them to exceed the quality of the S2 lenses, because of the smaller image circle required. We would then have a situation, camera body $1,000, standard lens $20,000.
I think everyone is assuming that these S2 MTF charts as originally posted are from the lens only. It could be that these MTF measurements include post-capture processing either by the camera electronics and/or software. This would also allow being able to offer such lens performance at a reasonable price. Hasselblad were the first to publish their MTF lens performance in such a way in one of their Victor magazines, where they showed how they could improve the effective MTF of their H lenses via post capture processing with the H3D.
For economic reasons, I think we will see more emphasis on improving images via electronics, and minimizing the much higher cost of improving the optics only.
-
I think everyone is assuming that these S2 MTF charts as originally posted are from the lens only. It could be that these MTF measurements include post-capture processing either by the camera electronics and/or software.
If that's what Leica are doing, they are being very misleading. There's no hint in the description accompanying the MTF charts that they are referring to anything other than the performance of the lens.
http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1...-35-mm-asph-cs/ (http://www.s.leica-camera.com/summarit-s-1-2-5-35-mm-asph-cs/)
-
I think everyone is assuming that these S2 MTF charts as originally posted are from the lens only. It could be that these MTF measurements include post-capture processing either by the camera electronics and/or software. This would also allow being able to offer such lens performance at a reasonable price. Hasselblad were the first to publish their MTF lens performance in such a way in one of their Victor magazines, where they showed how they could improve the effective MTF of their H lenses via post capture processing with the H3D.
For economic reasons, I think we will see more emphasis on improving images via electronics, and minimizing the much higher cost of improving the optics only.
That a very interesting idea, but how can sharpness be corrected in post? I'm sure Leica will be doing CA, distortion, and vignetting corrections since they were doing some of that already with the M8 and DMR but I think sharpness (contrast) can't be fixed with DAC? (Or if so how is it done?) And that's mostly what you see in the MTF. But you raise a a good point - we haven't seen the curves for distortion. Distortion is one of the trade offs in lens design. Maybe they were able to design the new lenses with DAC corrections in mind and concentrate on just sharpness? That would be a good explanation on how they were able to achieve those MTFs!
-
While we're on the topic, there are many ways to 'cheat'.
Now, I'm not assuming that Leica is doing this--I, for one am assuming that this is raw lens performance, but until Leica publishes further information there will be no way to know.
But one can improve MTF with post processing, as David pointed out.
Eric, it depends on exactly what you mean by "sharpness" but there are algorithms which (with some 'hints') can restore a limited amount of resolution. You can Google deblurring algorithms to get some idea of what they can do, and their limitations.
MTF's can also be 'improved' by showing the MTF of the design (the design's theoretical best performance assuming perfect materials and construction), rather than of an actual, physical lens, with all its real-world flaws. (Zeiss is known for measuring the MTF of real-world lenses).
And other techniques involve using monochromatic light (light of only one frequency) to eliminate the all frequency-based abberations from the MTF chart. (Schneider is known for publishing the spectral distribution of the light source (ideally approximately flat from 400-700nm)).
And I'm sure there are other ways too. So, until Leica publishes the full information on their lenses, it's really anyone's guess. But given their reputation, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for the time being.
-Brad
That a very interesting idea, but how can sharpness be corrected in post? I'm sure Leica will be doing CA, distortion, and vignetting corrections since they were doing some of that already with the M8 and DMR but I think sharpness (contrast) can't be fixed with DAC? (Or if so how is it done?) And that's mostly what you see in the MTF. But you raise a a good point - we haven't seen the curves for distortion. Distortion is one of the trade offs in lens design. Maybe they were able to design the new lenses with DAC corrections in mind and concentrate on just sharpness? That would be a good explanation on how they were able to achieve those MTFs!
-
That a very interesting idea, but how can sharpness be corrected in post? I'm sure Leica will be doing CA, distortion, and vignetting corrections since they were doing some of that already with the M8 and DMR but I think sharpness (contrast) can't be fixed with DAC? (Or if so how is it done?) And that's mostly what you see in the MTF. But you raise a a good point - we haven't seen the curves for distortion. Distortion is one of the trade offs in lens design. Maybe they were able to design the new lenses with DAC corrections in mind and concentrate on just sharpness? That would be a good explanation on how they were able to achieve those MTFs!
Leica correctness vignetting on the DMR, and vignetting and cyan cast on the M8. No pixels are pushed around, and I think it is safe to say from the wording of their press release that they are not planning on starting now. They are a very traditional optics company, and very proud of their performance and technology. I think they will publish and attain raw lens performance, not software-assisted performance. They have almost certainly achieved the published MTF graphics by the extensive use of their glass catalogue (Leica used to have a glass laboratory, and I believe they plan to re-open it), as well as the judicious use of their aspherical lens elements, an area in which they are significantly ahead of any other camera manufacturer, at least at the moment. I don't expect that Leica needs to compromise on distortion to achieve their performance... unless... the only way I can imagine Leica taking this route is not to achieve the performance, but to achieve it at a price. If they are secretly planning on coming in significantly cheaper on a per-lens basis than they historically could, then that might be a reason.
-
i dont believe in the S2 till it hits the shops.
i dont see a market for the S2 which could be big enough for bringing any profit for leica,
i dont see that the S2 will be able to leave a ß level,-
i simply have not enough imagination ....
-
i dont believe in the S2 till it hits the shops.
i dont see a market for the S2 which could be big enough for bringing any profit for leica,
i dont see that the S2 will be able to leave a ß level,-
i simply have not enough imagination ....
The part I don't understand is why they don't simply validate the hardware, and push the thing out the door with a promise of firmware updates, a couple of lenses, and a low-low first adopter price. At the speed at which they're going, the sensor will be obsolete by the time this product hits the street - with the inevitable software delays. And the software will be beta anyway, if history is any guide.
Edmund
-
I think everyone is assuming that these S2 MTF charts as originally posted are from the lens only. It could be that these MTF measurements include post-capture processing either by the camera electronics and/or software. (...)
For economic reasons, I think we will see more emphasis on improving images via electronics, and minimizing the much higher cost of improving the optics only.
I think those are MTF calculated graphs for lens performance only. The firmware of the camera is far from finished yet.
Software cannot correct all aberrations. Vignetting (with a negative effect in local noise) and distortion, or fringe (due to chromatic aberrations and other problems due to the sensor's filters), can be easily corrected by software. Hasselblad or Leica do this. The Hasselblads H correct for chromatic aberrations, Leica M8 corrects for vignetting, Panasonic LX3/Leica D-Lux4 corrects for distortion...
However, aberrations have additional effects on effective resolution and contrast, on the quality of the rendering of the "out of focus" areas, etc... and this cannot be corrected by software.
Software processing, and RAW developers in particular, have a powerful impact on image quality, but the quality of the "input" itself (the image transmitted by the lens), is the key starting point in the image chain:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html (http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html)
R.
-
Yeah but you know which way they are going to walk, the path they will take and they walk at a regular pace then stop and turn. They have lights on them. You get plenty of chances to nail focus for each model a couple of times. Its not that hard. Try something like sports with your setup. I don't think the Leica S2 is going to be any better with its single focus point, but one can hope.
Yes and no the issue is AF still has to keep up with the movement. But yes real sports i would grab a DSLR. But you still need a pretty fast AF system because most shots there coming straight at you and not side to side where panning is much easier on AF. There not walking slow either , so it is a challenge on the system but i agree if shooting football it would be much harder on the MF systems. The AF on the Phase body is pretty quick though and I am sure in the future that will even get better. But 1.5 seconds between frames does not leave you that much in the way of chances. Faster speed backs like the P21 Plus would be a much better back for this stuff or any back that can go .8 . This is where i see the S2 will have a advantage over the conventional system today. I do not think we have anything faster than .8 in any of the systems. 1.5 frames per second not doing the math here seems twice as fast. That is huge for wedding and fashion shooters.
-
That would be a good explanation on how they were able to achieve those MTFs!
Those MTF are achieved by means of excellent lens design and manufacture.
Leica claimed, at the last Photokina, the performance of the S lenses will be outstanding, without the help of software correction... and this was an obvious punch to Hasselblad...
You can desing lenses with a different philosophy: allowing vignetting and distortion to mask other aberrations... and the correct for vignetting and distortion by means of software... but Leica (like Olympus) prefer an "optics-based" design philosophy... The quality of the first step (the image formed by the lens on the image forming plane) must have the best possible quality...
-
i dont believe in the S2 till it hits the shops.
i dont see a market for the S2 which could be big enough for bringing any profit for leica,
i dont see that the S2 will be able to leave a ß level,-
i simply have not enough imagination ....
I am a bit sceptical myself, to be honest. I think that the basic idea is good, but execution will determine the success.
-
I think those are MTF calculated graphs for lens performance only. The firmware of the camera is far from finished yet.
Software cannot correct all aberrations. Vignetting (with a negative effect in local noise) and distortion, or fringe (due to chromatic aberrations and other problems due to the sensor's filters), can be easily corrected by software. Hasselblad or Leica do this. The Hasselblads H correct for chromatic aberrations, Leica M8 corrects for vignetting, Panasonic LX3/Leica D-Lux4 corrects for distortion...
However, aberrations have additional effects on effective resolution and contrast, on the quality of the rendering of the "out of focus" areas, etc... and this cannot be corrected by software.
Software processing, and RAW developers in particular, have a powerful impact on image quality, but the quality of the "input" itself (the image transmitted by the lens), is the key starting point in the image chain:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html (http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html)
R.
Agree the software is far from finished which will be for Leica was to go with C1, so they are on the lens only but what i want to know which is not posted is distortion. Let's face it every wide angle on the planet has it with retrofocus design. If there saying no software corrections than how are they going to fix that unless it is a processed raw out of the camera or later in C1. My bet like the M8 is a lot of stuff will be processed in the raw in the camera and that will slow things down, so the in camera processor for 1.5 FPS must be fast as hell. We need to see how this all plays out in real world but I agree CA, Vignetting and all that according to leica's marketing saying in effect there is no corrections needed than it all has to be done in the Raw itself before it even hits C1. Now with my Mamiya glass in C1 all those kinds of corrections are available to me but it is after the fact of shooting the Raw and in the software itself.
-
They have almost certainly achieved the published MTF graphics by the extensive use of their glass catalogue (Leica used to have a glass laboratory, and I believe they plan to re-open it), as well as the judicious use of their aspherical lens elements, an area in which they are significantly ahead of any other camera manufacturer, at least at the moment.
The problem with aspherics is the diameter of the lens. I don't know how, but Leica has found a way for making ASPH lens elements with larger diameters...
-
the biggest mistake leica made is the design of the s2 it looks too much like a cheap japanese dslr everyone can afford. the only solution to keep potential customers is to announce a titanium version with improved logo and gold plated lenses as soon as possible.
-
the biggest mistake leica made is the design of the s2 it looks too much like a cheap japanese dslr everyone can afford. the only solution to keep potential customers is to announce a titanium version with improved logo and gold plated lenses as soon as possible.
The biggest mistake Leica is making is continuing with these boutique camera designs. There's more money in the third-party optics business, as anyone can easily become your client without buying into your own system. And as Angenieux demonstrated, making one good zoom lens is enough to keep you in business. Of course a little military sideline helps
Edmund
-
The biggest mistake Leica is making is continuing with these boutique camera designs. There's more money in the third-party optics business, as anyone can easily become your client without buying into your own system. And as Angenieux demonstrated, making one good zoom lens is enough to keep you in business. Of course a little military sideline helps
Edmund
i was just kidding, leica made every possible mistake in the digital age but the s2 will be their last one. the first thing the new management did was cancel all relations to long time leica dealers or forced them to buy an initial high amount of cameras to stay premium leica dealer this was rather smart for a company fighting to survive. so it did not come as a surprise that their turnover dropped by 45% this year.
-
I think those are MTF calculated graphs for lens performance only. The firmware of the camera is far from finished yet.
Software cannot correct all aberrations. Vignetting (with a negative effect in local noise) and distortion, or fringe (due to chromatic aberrations and other problems due to the sensor's filters), can be easily corrected by software. Hasselblad or Leica do this. The Hasselblads H correct for chromatic aberrations, Leica M8 corrects for vignetting, Panasonic LX3/Leica D-Lux4 corrects for distortion...
However, aberrations have additional effects on effective resolution and contrast, on the quality of the rendering of the "out of focus" areas, etc... and this cannot be corrected by software.
Software processing, and RAW developers in particular, have a powerful impact on image quality, but the quality of the "input" itself (the image transmitted by the lens), is the key starting point in the image chain:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html (http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/page42.html)
R.
Hasselblad corrects on: CA, Vignetting & distortion.
BTW, I think Leica will carve out a nice little niche for themselves but I doubt it will be the professional users. It will be the 'dentist' dream machine and those people buy their toys no matter how the state of the economy is.
-
have to agree I shot the DMR for two years and without a doubt the best in 35mm at the time and frankly It still maybe when it comes to image quality, more to life than MPX. The only thing I see close to it in look and feel is the new Sony A900. Very tempting 35mm system right now. I am certainly keeping a close eye on the S2 it represents speed above all else in MF
guy,
try the D3x. you will happily forget about the sony and the leica DMR. the latter seems just a romantic notion....i had fun with the M8 myself but
when it comes down to hard IQ and handling facts it just turned out to be a nuisance. i was al poised to buy the S2 but i decided on the H3DII 50
after all. upgradable and reliable. and the D3x really shines. it beats the A900 and the 5Dmark II IQ wise easily.
give it a try, might save you money after all, peter
-
guy,
try the D3x. you will happily forget about the sony and the leica DMR. the latter seems just a romantic notion....i had fun with the M8 myself but
when it comes down to hard IQ and handling facts it just turned out to be a nuisance. i was al poised to buy the S2 but i decided on the H3DII 50
after all. upgradable and reliable. and the D3x really shines. it beats the A900 and the 5Dmark II IQ wise easily.
give it a try, might save you money after all, peter
Thanks Peter i have yet to take a look at this yet. With some Zeiss glass i bet you get a nice look too.
-
Thanks Peter i have yet to take a look at this yet. With some Zeiss glass i bet you get a nice look too.
even with the nikon 14-24mm it does look great...p
-
Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.
If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so, and recently, a bit behind electronically. Well, software too, but they have caught up to that, and now with the M8.2, they are where they should have been .
I have no doubt that the same trend will continue - its in their genes, their design approach, and their manufacturing capabilities. So....
Imagine an S2, amazing lenses (drop dead quality), a reasonable sensor (current type), reasonable software, and great machined hefty product. Enough bells, whistles to keep you happy, but not so many they can't figure out how to make them all work well. Methinks this product is quite feasible, and likely.
The issue (to me) seems to be the cost and market penetration: it is almost unheard of for anyone to introduce a new camera and lenses, and a new format, at high prices not for a specific technical use (Sinar Arc-tec) but for the general professional use. Hassy did it, but they did a slow multi-year transition from an open-back system with new lenses, to now a closed system. But their lenses have been around now for what? 5-8 years?
Rollei/Sinar/Leaf have done some parts of this, but used old lens base to build on, and applied known backs.
Canon/Nikon do it, but stick wthin known parameters, both lenses and sensor dimensions.
So: new camera, lenses, format, high cost, general superior quality. Seems likely to be price dependent on getting market penetration.
One exception: there may be a sizeable local (European) market awaiting this camera that is sufficient to put it into production. No ideas on the size of that market, but 2,000 examples would seem readily absorbable, maybe even 5,000? My guess is the 10-20,000 size market is not likely.
Just to summarize - it'll be great and expensive, and unique. Tough times to introduce such a product. Like Edmund said, one way is to get it out early at a low introductory price point and get some penetration into the market. Otherwise, it could be a long road....
-
Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.
If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so, and recently, a bit behind electronically. Well, software too, but they have caught up to that, and now with the M8.2, they are where they should have been .
I have no doubt that the same trend will continue - its in their genes, their design approach, and their manufacturing capabilities. So....
Imagine an S2, amazing lenses (drop dead quality), a reasonable sensor (current type), reasonable software, and great machined hefty product. Enough bells, whistles to keep you happy, but not so many they can't figure out how to make them all work well. Methinks this product is quite feasible, and likely.
The issue (to me) seems to be the cost and market penetration: it is almost unheard of for anyone to introduce a new camera and lenses, and a new format, at high prices not for a specific technical use (Sinar Arc-tec) but for the general professional use. Hassy did it, but they did a slow multi-year transition from an open-back system with new lenses, to now a closed system. But their lenses have been around now for what? 5-8 years?
Rollei/Sinar/Leaf have done some parts of this, but used old lens base to build on, and applied known backs.
I was one of the first to get a DMR and the M8 but i will not be this time around unless that price is within something that i can manage. This is not a 5k unit there is much more at risk here and they need to make this a less risky purchase because if we put up 30k than we need assurance we will get most of our money back if it don't work out. I figure that is 6 times the risk of getting the M8. How many of us want to take that shot at it. This is just simple common sense for shooters to look at, we know if we went Hassy, Phase, Sinar or leaf we at least know it is well established in the market this is not in MF.
Canon/Nikon do it, but stick wthin known parameters, both lenses and sensor dimensions.
So: new camera, lenses, format, high cost, general superior quality. Seems likely to be price dependent on getting market penetration.
One exception: there may be a sizeable local (European) market awaiting this camera that is sufficient to put it into production. No ideas on the size of that market, but 2,000 examples would seem readily absorbable, maybe even 5,000? My guess is the 10-20,000 size market is not likely.
Just to summarize - it'll be great and expensive, and unique. Tough times to introduce such a product. Like Edmund said, one way is to get it out early at a low introductory price point and get some penetration into the market. Otherwise, it could be a long road....
Well I totally agree , I am not worried about the product what i am worried about is the cost of entry and honestly being ALL new than i would love to see the first 2500 units go out the door at 10 percent above costs. Get the market rolling get the penetration than do the gradual rising of prices after a set number is sold. The only real way to get anyones attention to buy it in the first place is reputation of the new unit and actually getting it into peoples hands without killing it right out of the gate because of costs. Now move the numbers around anyway you want the point is it has to get in peoples hands and your not going to do that pricing it out the gate without a real service record behind it. So come in at some point that makes some real market sense and make it attractive to buy.
-
Well I totally agree , I am not worried about the product what i am worried about is the cost of entry and honestly being ALL new than i would love to see the first 2500 units go out the door at 10 percent above costs. Get the market rolling get the penetration than do the gradual rising of prices after a set number is sold. The only real way to get anyones attention to buy it in the first place is reputation of the new unit and actually getting it into peoples hands without killing it right out of the gate because of costs. Now move the numbers around anyway you want the point is it has to get in peoples hands and your not going to do that pricing it out the gate without a real service record behind it. So come in at some point that makes some real market sense and make it attractive to buy.
i think production costs go down so dramatically after the first units that there is no need to readjust pricing to make a profit. And then there is the lens markup ...
Edmund
-
Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.
If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so,
Since we're talking about a camera that isn't close to shipping yet, this is all theoretical.
Yes, maybe on a monitor at 200% this or any larger than 35mm sensor camera will offer more detail but I don't think you can buy the S2 or any new european system with a few lenses for under $30,000.
For 30k you can take your photography a step further just with a parabolic umbrella, or HMI's or better post production and by the time the S2 is on the shelf does anyone really believe that Canon and Nikon won't have something out there in the 30mpx area as well.
This is a pixel peeping crowd and there is nothing wrong with that in theory, but in the real world where portfolios and websites are viewed at about 1 second a photo and every photograph goes through 4 rounds of retouching, pixel peeping becomes irrelevant.
Even if the economy hadn't dipped downward Hasselblad changed the larger than 35mm world just by dropping their prices. You see it here with topics like what does a p21+ sell for. In theory it should probably sell for 10 grand but in reality $6,500 is probably the going price and I've worked with few ADs or clients that knows or cares about the difference between an 18mpx image and a 33mpx image.
If the economy continues and this is a year of slowdowns every photographer needs to step back and decide where to put their resources. Under these conditions this is the best time to expand your body or work and though photographer's seem more pre disposed to spend money on cameras and lenses the best investment is in better stylists, talent, locations, retouching and promotion.
Photography at any level has never been about 20x loupes and the ability to enlarge 40ft. high, at least not photography that moves you forward. Photography is about showing a unique vision and when it comes to digital cameras, the formats of 35mm to almost 645 there just isn't that great of a difference.
If cameras are the goal and you want to offer something different, then probably stepping back into the world of film will get you closer than anything in digital. There is a difference between a 6x7, 4x5 or 8x10 format vs. 35mm but in the history of photography, film or digital it's all about what you shoot, not necessarilly what you shoot it with.
I'd feel different, and a lot more predisposed to cough up 50 grand if the sensors were larger, or if a Canon, Leica, Phase, Hasselblad, Nikon, Sony, Leaf . . . . produce a much different look, but the differrence is in very small percentages in comparision to what photography is really about.
Let's face it our "films" are now down to just a few choices. Dalsa, Kodak, Canon, Nikon/Sony. That's it, all a bunch of wafers cut from the same 4 makers and we can wrap any aluminium and plastic body around them but the difference just isn't that great anymore.
If the leica was the format of a pentax 6x7 then I'd understand it, or if it offered the same moveable iso as the Canons and Nikons then just the bling factor alone may be worth extra $20,000 but for close to the same image quality and a more limited system, to me this is a camera that probably sounds good talking trash at the country club, but in the world of producing art for commerce, or your den, it will probably make little difference.
Regardless, go through these sites and tell me if format, pixel peeping, ca, dr, file size is important.
http://www.helmutnewton.com/current_exhibi.../gallery.html#5 (http://www.helmutnewton.com/current_exhibitions/fired/gallery.html#5)
http://www.artkane.com/fullsize/lyrics/fzlady.html (http://www.artkane.com/fullsize/lyrics/fzlady.html)
http://www.guybourdin.org/ (http://www.guybourdin.org/)
http://www.peterlindbergh.com/ (http://www.peterlindbergh.com/)
http://www.paoloroversi.com/diaporama/photographs.html (http://www.paoloroversi.com/diaporama/photographs.html)
http://www.nadavkander.com/# (http://www.nadavkander.com/#)
and I could make the list 1000 times longer and it wouldn't change a thing other than to know that the technical attributes of an image are much less important than subject, lighting, talent (both behind and in front of the camera) and budget.
Now saying this, I hope I'm wrong and this is the greatest camera ever. I dig Leica's love the way they feel and like driving a porsche, you just know it's something special, but like the porsche it better perform or it's just a waste of resource.
-
I'm printing my G10 images 44" wide, but they do look stretched a bit. I think the S2 is probably just about dimensioned right for the crowd who want to print big. I made some very nice M8 images, but the M8 is basically an A3+ camera in my opinion. The big Canons and the backs can be cropped with comfort and print larger more easily.
Edmund
and I could make the list 1000 times longer and it wouldn't change a thing other than to know that the technical attributes of an image are much less important than subject, lighting, talent (both behind and in front of the camera) and budget.
Now saying this, I hope I'm wrong and this is the greatest camera ever. I dig Leica's love the way they feel and like driving a porsche, you just know it's something special, but like the porsche it better perform or it's just a waste of resource.
-
I'm printing my G10 images 44" wide, but they do look stretched a bit. I think the S2 is probably just about dimensioned right for the crowd who want to print big. I made some very nice M8 images, but the M8 is basically an A3+ camera in my opinion. The big Canons and the backs can be cropped with comfort and print larger more easily.
Edmund
you printing landscapes?
If you were going for maximum quality you would be better off with a 60mp back yes?
-
Well let's not forget what we can sell to our clients. I have been selling this big gun theory and it's working. I have clients that make stuff so big i have to take a car to get far enough back. LOL
Seriously though if you can sell the MF system to clients to get anything they want done without a lump in your throat when you say it . Than it's all good. I have been burned by clients printing wall size stuff that just falls apart and it is embarrassing. Not any more
-
you printing landscapes?
If you were going for maximum quality you would be better off with a 60mp back yes?
Actually I'm printing macros from the G10. Just *snap* and go. I have a P45+ which I tried to use to do the same stuff -urban architecture details - but in city environments it's impossible to get rid of the vibration enough to get the necessary depth of field, even with a good tripod. S I got the G10. Because of the stabiliser and the huge depth of field, the G10 provides surprisingly good images. I guess the Sony might be an interesting alternative, with its stabiliser. My respect for Michael's reviews is growing over time, now that I've learnt to read them in context.
Edmund
-
Hi,
I'm working with a Sony Alpha 900 right now. It can achieve very sharp images, but only with very careful work. Before spending 30k on a camera I'd suggest we need to spend 1k on a tripod and use it consequently.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
I'm working with a Sony Alpha 900 right now. It can achieve very sharp images, but only with very careful work. Before spending 30k on a camera I'd suggest we need to spend 1k on a tripod and use it consequently.
Best regards
Erik
I think the Sony allows one to save money on the tripod
Although someone should run a low speed test (1s).
Edmund
-
Several improvements we can expect in the coming months in sensor technology and optics:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...-keeping-t.html (http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/12/still-keeping-t.html)
R.
-
Software corrections can face difficulties in dealing with image problems, depending on resolution:
The move from 10 megapixels to 15 megapixels really does make those nasty lens aberrations significantly more difficult to deal with.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml)
-
Software corrections can face difficulties in dealing with image problems, depending on resolution:
True, but in MF, I think that Hasselblad and everyone else is clever enough to carefully design "flaws" into their lenses which are easy to correct with high quality results. I am sure that the distortion in the 28mm which Hasselblad corrects is very straight-forward, and not moustache distortion like the 21mm Distagon. The same with other problems, like CA.
-
Use some of the HC lenses before making blanket statements. In particular the HC28 and than let us know what you think about your statement. On my 39MP the 28 becomes a very good lens after corrections. Your statement perhaps theoretically true but for the moment the reality is proofing differently.
I avoid using the term excellent because I am pretty sure that term will be reserved for the Rodenstock 28 but for my taste/use the HC28 is a phenomenal lens.
Maybe when going higher in resolution this will become a problem...
-
A question.
How good is the HC28 before corrections?
-
A question.
How good is the HC28 before corrections?
Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.
-
Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.
Someone claimed it was quite acceptable even without corrections, but I have not seen the difference, so cannot comment personally.
-
Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.
Thank you.
Here it is:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....t=0&start=0 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=28651&st=0&start=0)
R.
-
Several improvements we can expect in the coming months in sensor technology and optics:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...-keeping-t.html (http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/12/still-keeping-t.html)
R.
Gradient Index optics? Trust me, you can forget this one for large scale lenses. Ditto diffractives, except for specialized applications. Optics will improve significantly, but primarily due to replacing SLR viewfinders with electronic ones (eliminates BFL restrictions).
-
I am a bit sceptical myself, to be honest. I think that the basic idea is good, but execution will determine the success.
I'm afraid that even good execution will leave the camera facing the question, "Why should I buy an unestablished camera for a very large amount of money, when I could buy an industry standard like Hasselblad?" There are a few possible answers -- handiness, perhaps, an extra stop, maybe, but are those answers compelling for the *mass* of MF shooters? I think the real story in MF digital is that the market is small enough, and the money large enough, that eventually one or two companies will survive, and the others will go away. Leica is starting far enough back that it is severely handicapped.
The other advantage to the Hassy-style removable back system is that there are always beginners looking for used equipment, while the pros want to move up to the latest stuff -- so, you sell the old back and buy a new one. With Leica, you sell the whole camera just to get the new sensor. Believe it or not, the box costs something.
Also, to tell the truth, Leica has not been good at cutting-edge tech since the M3; they've simply lost the culture, I'm afraid. They are also behind the curve on software. The M8 (one of which I own) is capable of excellent images, but in many ways, was a kludge. Now it is pretty much obsolete. The Leica forum has a series of comparisons between the Panasonic Micro 4/3 G1 and the Leica M8, which the Leica wins in terms of sharpness using native lenses for both systems, but it doesn't win by much - and the G1 can handle M glass with an adapter, has focus-confirm which eliminates the M's ystem-wide problems with front-and-back focus, and it costs *$600.* That's *one-tenth* the cost of a new M8.2.
I think the S2 may turn out to be Leica's fatal mistake (but, I could be wrong -- maybe the camera will be so good that MF users will be throwing their Hassys into the nearest ditch.) Still, I wish they'd put the money into a EVF/live view/focus-confirming/FF/cutting edge sensor/ rangefinder-styled camera...
Leica reminds me a bit of IBM when the first desktop computers came out -- from a position of dominance in PC production, IBM was always too conservative and expensive, always predicting that X amount of memory was more than anyone could reasonably use, "why would anybody want more than 64K?" and wound up losing their asses to the likes of Dell. Like IBM in the 80's, Leica seems to me to have a culture that simply doesn't understand the new thing.
JC
-
Let's shorten that down to "Leica got old". Now, debate !
Edmund
I'm afraid that even good execution will leave the camera facing the question, "Why should I buy an unestablished camera for a very large amount of money, when I could buy an industry standard like Hasselblad?" There are a few possible answers -- handiness, perhaps, an extra stop, maybe, but are those answers compelling for the *mass* of MF shooters? I think the real story in MF digital is that the market is small enough, and the money large enough, that eventually one or two companies will survive, and the others will go away. Leica is starting far enough back that it is severely handicapped.
The other advantage to the Hassy-style removable back system is that there are always beginners looking for used equipment, while the pros want to move up to the latest stuff -- so, you sell the old back and buy a new one. With Leica, you sell the whole camera just to get the new sensor. Believe it or not, the box costs something.
Also, to tell the truth, Leica has not been good at cutting-edge tech since the M3; they've simply lost the culture, I'm afraid. They are also behind the curve on software. The M8 (one of which I own) is capable of excellent images, but in many ways, was a kludge. Now it is pretty much obsolete. The Leica forum has a series of comparisons between the Panasonic Micro 4/3 G1 and the Leica M8, which the Leica wins in terms of sharpness using native lenses for both systems, but it doesn't win by much - and the G1 can handle M glass with an adapter, has focus-confirm which eliminates the M's ystem-wide problems with front-and-back focus, and it costs *$600.* That's *one-tenth* the cost of a new M8.2.
I think the S2 may turn out to be Leica's fatal mistake (but, I could be wrong -- maybe the camera will be so good that MF users will be throwing their Hassys into the nearest ditch.) Still, I wish they'd put the money into a EVF/live view/focus-confirming/FF/cutting edge sensor/ rangefinder-styled camera...
Leica reminds me a bit of IBM when the first desktop computers came out -- from a position of dominance in PC production, IBM was always too conservative and expensive, always predicting that X amount of memory was more than anyone could reasonably use, "why would anybody want more than 64K?" and wound up losing their asses to the likes of Dell. Like IBM in the 80's, Leica seems to me to have a culture that simply doesn't understand the new thing.
JC
-
?
I find it hard to see where the Leica's going to fit in professionally.
Well if my business picks up at some point, it would find a home in my bag. But as business has all but vanished my Canons are looking like a bit of a luxury at the moment, in 2007 I thought them as cheap as chips!
I would be happy with a range of lenses that performed across the image and if the money is available I would not consider them a luxury item.
Kevin.
-
1. leica is not meant for the masses, never has been and I hope it never will
2. what sad times we would be in if there were no aspriational equipment to work for..
I did not become a photographer to shoot with chinese mass produced equipment..
part of the joy of the medium was the equipment..I am not ashamed to admit that,
and make no apologies for being successful enough to afford what I thought was the
best tools to work with.. and I guess we each judge what is best in different ways.
I hope for the sake of those young photographers out there that there will be some
stuff to dream about..regardless of what is needed to satisfy the client.
I'm afraid that even good execution will leave the camera facing the question, "Why should I buy an unestablished camera for a very large amount of money, when I could buy an industry standard like Hasselblad?" There are a few possible answers -- handiness, perhaps, an extra stop, maybe, but are those answers compelling for the *mass* of MF shooters? I think the real story in MF digital is that the market is small enough, and the money large enough, that eventually one or two companies will survive, and the others will go away. Leica is starting far enough back that it is severely handicapped.
The other advantage to the Hassy-style removable back system is that there are always beginners looking for used equipment, while the pros want to move up to the latest stuff -- so, you sell the old back and buy a new one. With Leica, you sell the whole camera just to get the new sensor. Believe it or not, the box costs something.
Also, to tell the truth, Leica has not been good at cutting-edge tech since the M3; they've simply lost the culture, I'm afraid. They are also behind the curve on software. The M8 (one of which I own) is capable of excellent images, but in many ways, was a kludge. Now it is pretty much obsolete. The Leica forum has a series of comparisons between the Panasonic Micro 4/3 G1 and the Leica M8, which the Leica wins in terms of sharpness using native lenses for both systems, but it doesn't win by much - and the G1 can handle M glass with an adapter, has focus-confirm which eliminates the M's ystem-wide problems with front-and-back focus, and it costs *$600.* That's *one-tenth* the cost of a new M8.2.
I think the S2 may turn out to be Leica's fatal mistake (but, I could be wrong -- maybe the camera will be so good that MF users will be throwing their Hassys into the nearest ditch.) Still, I wish they'd put the money into a EVF/live view/focus-confirming/FF/cutting edge sensor/ rangefinder-styled camera...
Leica reminds me a bit of IBM when the first desktop computers came out -- from a position of dominance in PC production, IBM was always too conservative and expensive, always predicting that X amount of memory was more than anyone could reasonably use, "why would anybody want more than 64K?" and wound up losing their asses to the likes of Dell. Like IBM in the 80's, Leica seems to me to have a culture that simply doesn't understand the new thing.
JC
-
S2 seems really fine but will Leica still be alive for a S3 is not sure at all
every Leica users have enough to wait for a R10 or M9 (the M8.2 is a joke)
-
S2 seems really fine but will Leica still be alive for a S3 is not sure at all
every Leica users have enough to wait for a R10 or M9 (the M8.2 is a joke)
Well not as good as I would like to make me buy it, but it isn't a joke.
Kevin.
-
I mean I don't see any reason to upgrade from M8 to M8 II
-
1. leica is not meant for the masses, never has been and I hope it never will
2. what sad times we would be in if there were no aspriational equipment to work for..
I did not become a photographer to shoot with chinese mass produced equipment..
part of the joy of the medium was the equipment..I am not ashamed to admit that,
and make no apologies for being successful enough to afford what I thought was the
best tools to work with.. and I guess we each judge what is best in different ways.
I hope for the sake of those young photographers out there that there will be some
stuff to dream about..regardless of what is needed to satisfy the client.
I would hope you became a photographer to shoot photographs, not to use the neat equipment...8-)
Yours is a romantic statement, and I understand what you're saying, but there's also some business judgment involved for most people. You can take Hassy (and you know what the system looks like because it's here) or you can take a financially delicate company's promises. So you spend $30,000 on a body and two lenses, and then...the company founders, and there is no support, and there are no more lenses, and there is no S3, and all that heavy learning curve you've just pushed through is for naught. That might well not happen, but then again, it might...and it's your $30,000.
If it were my $30,000, I would regretfully make the decision that I don't want to take the risk. Now, if Leica blooms with a full system, all at once, and if it is remarkably advanced in image quality over everything else out there...then I could see some people jumping on it. But you know what? That ain't gonna happen. The image quality is going to be good for it's sensor size, but there will be other cameras that will offer better absolute quality, simply because the sensor is twice as large.
But -- everybody's got to make their own judgment.
JC
-
To me the big question isn't if Leica will be around but rather about their new "pro" service. I'm still bitter about having to wait several months for my R8 camera body to be repaired. Let's see same day turnaround for my Canon gear through their pro service plus a day of shipping on each side, two day turnaround at the Rollei Hensel service with personal phone calls with updates, or with Leica....waiting.... waiting.... waiting... no phone calls, no return of my phone calls, then weeks later a letter arrives with a printed estimate which they expect me to sign and mail back (in my own envelope that I have to address) to authorize service. Two weeks lost just to get an authorization to proceed with the repair! That's nuts! The generation where business was conducted with letters was replaced with faxes, then e-mail replaced faxes. Leica is at least two eons behind in customer service. I actually got the first update about my Leica camera that was in for service from my Rollei technician who knows the Leica techs. Can you believe that? I have no doubt that the files will be good, but if Leica want's to offer a camera to pros the first thing they need to do is revamp their customer service. No pro is going to wait months for a camera to be repaired.
-
I mean I don't see any reason to upgrade from M8 to M8 II
Yeah agreed, it needed a lot more for me, I like the idea of no flapping mirror and quality lenses, if only it performed at higher iso and a few more pixels.
Kevin.
-
of course, that is why I said it is part of the equation for me..and for everyone..even those with holgas..they have made some connection with the plastic and it works for them..I like shooting with my iphone camera..not because of the low quality but I like the equipment.
when I was yearning to have a linhof, I was shooting with a $150 burke & james monorail..and the pictures were as good as if shot with the linhof, but I like a lot of shooters like the elegance, engineering and committment to excellence that some manufactures achieve..
the difference between image quality with backs/cameras is tiny as it was then, but now that we do all the processing the importance of reliablity becomes much more of an issue..the camera is now has a bigger role..
the only service issue I had was with a rollei lens control for the electronic shutter.. 6 weeks in germany.. and so I have been very lucky over the years.
maybe I do have a romantic outlook now, thanks.. after being burnt out from 20 years of advertising I thought I had lost it completely.
[quote name='John Camp' date='Jan 5 2009, 07:03 PM' post='249652']
I would hope you became a photographer to shoot photographs, not to use the neat equipment...8-)