Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Atina on February 28, 2014, 07:01:00 am
-
Here is the test of the Leica S from DxO:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Leica-S-sensor-review-Consummate-performer
-
Click on your link, then, at the bottom, click on Conclusion > Best lenses for the Nikon D5200 !
Gremlin or hidden message ?
-
The first comment on the bottom of the page is a bit harsh: "Great, m43 performance, just for 100 times more money (over Olympus E-PM2 with similar sensor performance).
You need to be a complete idiot to buy it over Nikon D800 or Sony A7r."
I handled the Leica S at a Leica event and looked at some files made right there in the studio. The camera handles like a dream, it oozes quality and feels superb in hand. The viewfinder is awesome (the unit I handled had a center micro prism / split screen great for manual focusing) and the shutter well damped. It is the best made medium format camera I have ever used. Same with the lenses. I looked at the files and they looked somewhat similar to 645D files from what I could see on lightroom. They looked really good at 100%. I am surprised that it tested worse than the 645D. I have seen high iso samples posted and they look as good or better than the high iso samples from a 645D. Of course if I compare at base iso the sensor in my PhaseOne IQ160 performs worlds better (resolution / DR / color) but from using the 645D for a few weeks I did not get a feel that the Kodak sensor had similar DR than the Canon 5D3, it had more. Oh well.
-
Canon has noise patterns, which reduces the useful DR. MF cameras rarely have this problem, which make DR measurements a bit misleading. For two cameras without pattern noise issues the numbers are quite comparable though.
DR and noise numbers has most relevance for landscape/architecture and high ISO shooters, portrait photographers working in controlled light will always have well-exposed images and have no use from the latest and greatest in DR etc. Then it's much more about how the camera profiling is in the provided raw converter, skin tone rendering and such things, which DxOmark does not test.
So for the portrait and typical commercial photography photographer it's probably a great camera, and that is what it's designed for. I wouldn't be using this for landscape or architecture when comparing it with other existing options.
-
The camera handles like a dream, it oozes quality and feels superb in hand. The viewfinder is awesome (the unit I handled had a center micro prism / split screen great for manual focusing) and the shutter well damped. It is the best made medium format camera I have ever used. Same with the lenses.
I'd second that. It's a great camera and not just when you hold it. I haven't compared it to other MF solutions, but the printed output past a certain size - just shines. Incremental improvements have only made the camera better since launch.
portrait photographers working in controlled light will always have well-exposed images and have no use from the latest and greatest in DR etc. Then it's much more about how the camera profiling is in the provided raw converter, skin tone rendering and such things, which DxOmark does not test.
+1
-
How generous of DxO not to have included a Sony a7r in this comparaison. ;)
More seriously, with the 645D II around the corner I am unclear why anyone would want to invest in a Leica S now.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
As a Nikon d800e owner i do not know more about the Leica S but what i read.
I like the dxomarks for they seem to make it possible to compare some points on a non objective basis, but i agree there are so much more qualities that makes a great sensor and a great camera. DXO does not test how subtle colour and differences are registered. And after that the software part plays an important role.
From a camera point of view i would love to have the viewfinder of the S in my d800e to be able to focus manually. But what i do not like of both is the image size being 2:3.
I would rather have 3:4 for compositions. Also it makes more use of the glasssurface and uses the better parts of the lens.
-
The first comment on the bottom of the page is a bit harsh: "Great, m43 performance, just for 100 times more money (over Olympus E-PM2 with similar sensor performance).
You need to be a complete idiot to buy it over Nikon D800 or Sony A7r."
I think that this is a good example of how the measurements of DXO (which I believe to be relevant and of value) can and will be "misused".
-h
-
More seriously, with the 645D II around the corner I am unclear why anyone would want to invest in a Leica S now.
Bernard,
For your landscape usage, none. For studio - fashion, beauty etc - in two words: tethering and 'feel'. Equally though , did I read in one of the threads that the H3DII-39 can now be bought for about $6,000 ?
For sure, this year should be interesting re MF. I don't think anyone is standing still and I expect Leica may well surprise us yet.
All best,
M
ps and off topic:
Don't get me started on the A7r - despite all the criticism and the vibration issue - can't put it down, although I did cave-in and ordered the 55/1.8. Perhaps in another thread ..
-
I just returned from Iceland where I shot "landscape", "intimate landscapes", macro, in both full daylight and in complete
darkness (northern lights), outside and in ice caves. The Leica S2 functioned flawlessly, but more importantly, the images
exude a three dimensionality, a tonal quality, a micro-contrast that exceeds what my fellow photographers were obtaining
with Canon and Nikons. I was shocked at the low light capability given that my highest ISO is 640 !! My northern lights images
were obtained with only 2 - 5 sec exposures and had little noise. The texture, sculpturing, reflectivity of the different forms
of ice within the ice cave were captured in exquisite detail, depth and tonal quality. Personally, comparing to the images from
my D800E, I was shocked by the DX0 findings-- the Leica S2 certainly does not function as having less DR.
Perhaps the CCD vs. CMOS has something to do with the different look of the images, I cannot know this for sure.
What I do know, is that you buy the Leica S for the LENSES, not the body (although the body is fantastic ergonomically). The
Leica lenses have a look that I cannot obtain with other brands.
I do not do studio photography, only "landscape", "nature", "abstract", "urban decay" and I can assure the person who stated above that the
leica is not for landscapes, that it is indeed excellent for this use.
The Leica is heavy. The lenses are heavy. I was carrying between 30 and 40 pounds. Climbing up a mountain side, I would wonder
if it was worthwhile. Should I switch back to my Nikon, or perhaps get the Sony A7R. Then, I would download the images,
and any doubt evaporated-- back to the gym to build more strength, because it is worth the effort.
What I will now question, is whether I could achieve the same image using Leica lenses on the Sony A7R. This remains to be
seen and proven. I do not tend to use wide angle lenses, so I may not have the issue with color cast and vignetting.
If you want to see some examples with the Leica, please visit my website, go to galleries, portfolios, and then choose
iceland, or carrie furnance, or old trucks, or old cars, etc.
www.rudlinfineart.com
Thanks
craig
-
You are certainly an exceptional photographer. Whether it's the Leica in the end I am not sure, but your great images certainly speak volumes and lend trust to your claim.
-
How generous of DxO not to have included a Sony a7r in this comparaison. ;)
More seriously, with the 645D II around the corner I am unclear why anyone would want to invest in a Leica S now.
Cheers,
Bernard
Well, let me clear it up then. The lenses. The lenses. The lenses. The lenses. The Lenses...
Then the simplicity and well thought out controls and menus. The increadable viewfinder. The ability to use Hasselblad and Contax lenses (yes, more great lenses). The wonderful quality, feel and ergononics of the camera (miles ahead of anything else I've ever held). And the files it puts out. Yes, that old sensor delivers wonderful files.
-
I have yet to see my D800E's advantage of 2 stops for DR or colour with respect to 5Dmkiii…. ??? I wonder what they smoke in DXO…. >:( As with their findings with MF sensors (that compare with some compacts in their findings), ….it looks like they have find the testing method which proves that Sun sets at the east! :o
-
Leica are about making cameras that are fun to own and use and take great pictures, Phase One are about making backs that users will hook up to (something?) and write files second to none.
No one has noticed that the "open" model has its issues: Hasselblad and Leica can make a clear case for cross-subsidies between back, body and lenses while Phase cannot. Nikon and Canon system bodies were indestructible behemoths, because the profit off lenses, motors etc paid for an overengineered body. In the same way, $6000 Leica lenses can pay for better mirror damping and AF in the S.
Edmund
-
I have yet to see my D800E's advantage of 2 stops for DR or colour with respect to 5Dmkiii…. ??? I wonder what they smoke in DXO…. >:( As with their findings with MF sensors (that compare with some compacts in their findings), ….it looks like they have find the testing method which proves that Sun sets at the east! :o
Interesting you should say this. I just purchased a 5DIII and tested it against my D800E, photographing neighbourhood houses in bright sunlight. The exposures, at base ISO, were identical for the shadows. I was able to make a highlight adjustment to see the siding detail on a bright white house in the D800E image, but not with the 5DIII in Lightroom 5.3. I took a range of exposures with the 5DIII, and lo and behold, it took a 2 stop under exposure before I could wrest detail in the siding. As a result the shadows were 2 stops darker, and opening them up resulted in more noise. I find this pretty consistent with the DxO report. However, for the majority of my photography I do not find this to be a major impediment and I do like the 5DIII files, but the DR is definitely less than the D800. I have noticed that the Canon evaluative metering is more conservative (tends to under-expose) vs the Nikons.
-
Leica Should put the new 50MP Sony CMOS sensor in the Leica S ASAP. That should make any argument against it moot. It is the only thing the camera is missing to make it really appealing for a much wider range of customers. Not that the current sensor is horrible. But a lot of people that are on the fence will shy away from the camera because of it. And just like they did with the M9 they should still offer a model with the CCD sensor for those who want it.
PhaseOne was very smart in quickly releasing and making available the IQ250.
-
Hi,
I guess that Phase One were capable to release the IQ-250 early because they have designed a flexible architecture. There may be some other factors of course.
But I agree that Leica should have the Sony sensor in a S-series camera, unless they "develop" their own.
Best regards
Erik
Leica Should put the new 50MP Sony CMOS sensor in the Leica S ASAP. That should make any argument against it moot. It is the only thing the camera is missing to make it really appealing for a much wider range of customers. Not that the current sensor is horrible. But a lot of people that are on the fence will shy away from the camera because of it. And just like they did with the M9 they should still offer a model with the CCD sensor for those who want it.
PhaseOne was very smart in quickly releasing and making available the IQ250.
-
Leica Should put the new 50MP Sony CMOS sensor in the Leica S ASAP. That should make any argument against it moot. It is the only thing the camera is missing to make it really appealing for a much wider range of customers. Not that the current sensor is horrible. But a lot of people that are on the fence will shy away from the camera because of it. And just like they did with the M9 they should still offer a model with the CCD sensor for those who want it.
PhaseOne was very smart in quickly releasing and making available the IQ250.
There's one other thing that keeps it from being "really appealing", that's the fact that it doesn't tether well.
For fashion/editorial work it's not a deal breaker, but it would be nice to have. So, if they could fix that I don't see anything holding it back from the professional market (advertising, editorial market).
-
Interesting you should say this. I just purchased a 5DIII and tested it against my D800E, photographing neighbourhood houses in bright sunlight. The exposures, at base ISO, were identical for the shadows. I was able to make a highlight adjustment to see the siding detail on a bright white house in the D800E image, but not with the 5DIII in Lightroom 5.3. I took a range of exposures with the 5DIII, and lo and behold, it took a 2 stop under exposure before I could wrest detail in the siding. As a result the shadows were 2 stops darker, and opening them up resulted in more noise. I find this pretty consistent with the DxO report. However, for the majority of my photography I do not find this to be a major impediment and I do like the 5DIII files, but the DR is definitely less than the D800. I have noticed that the Canon evaluative metering is more conservative (tends to under-expose) vs the Nikons.
Didn't say that D800E's DR isn't better… I said "I've yet to see its 2 stops advantage"… If you have, you are a better tester than me… I see no more than half a stop.
-
Hi,
I guess that Phase One were capable to release the IQ-250 early because they have designed a flexible architecture. There may be some other factors of course.
But I agree that Leica should have the Sony sensor in a S-series camera, unless they "develop" their own.
Best regards
Erik
Cmos in Leica S? …I guess it being a "not detachable back" camera it does make sense, but I don't see how Sony's sensor could possibly fit in 30x45mm size, or them sharing a sensor not dedicated to S. There is nothing stopping them having "dual" versions of the S though sharing only the body… one CCD and another Cmos could advance them further in the MF market… then there is Sinar too… surely a self contained back should be expected from them! Never the less, there is strong suspicion that Leica & Cmosis have teamed together against solutions for all the rest in MF...
-
There's one other thing that keeps it from being "really appealing", that's the fact that it doesn't tether well.
For fashion/editorial work it's not a deal breaker, but it would be nice to have. So, if they could fix that I don't see anything holding it back from the professional market (advertising, editorial market).
My S2 tethers fine. We're in prelight this week and set up the S2 and our Contax p30+, the S2 using leica image shuttle to lightroom, the P30+ using C1 V6.
The phase is slightly faster to view an image, especially on the first image, but after that they seem pretty even, though I'm not that concerned that a billion images come up on screen as we work.
I'm actually not concerned about shooting a billion images for this project, because we've been down that crunch road of quantity and it is not a money saving, or inspiring way to work and takes a lot of post work to fix issues that should have been attended to on set.
We also did the end of the world test, where you shoot, pull the cord, or the battery, intentionally mess things up and then see how long it takes to get up and running.
The S2 was easy, it picked back up and we kept shooting, so I don't see any issues so far. I'll know more in a few days.
I can tell you that there is a different look with the S2 my phase backs compared to my Canons. DXO is about numbers, maybe they're right or wrong, I personally don't care because in real world work I've seen much different results from scientific testing to the way I work in the world.
They trashed the Lecia m8 and mine shoots beautifully and the file is unique, but maybe that's just the way I work though I'm use to actually lighting an image and working around the "limitations" of file or camera and turning those limitations into a positive.
In fact that's what makes photography different than what we see with our eye, is the limitations of the "film", the lenses, the shooting rate and our personal style. A lot of time the equipment we use has a lot to do with our personal style and obviously scientific testing won't take that into account.
In regards to a cmos S series or any camera, I'm good as long as it's pretty, but not good if it looks generic. This is all personal preference, but the only cmos look I've ever liked was the original 1ds, the RED 1 and the olympus em-5, though I haven't used every camera ever made.
IMO
BC
-
My S2 tethers fine. We're in prelight this week and set up the S2 and our Contax p30+, the S2 using leica image shuttle to lightroom, the P30+ using C1 V6.
The phase is slightly faster to view an image, especially on the first image, but after that they seem pretty even, though I'm not that concerned that a billion images come up on screen as we work.
I'm actually not concerned about shooting a billion images for this project, because we've been down that crunch road of quantity and it is not a money saving, or inspiring way to work and takes a lot of post work to fix issues that should have been attended to on set.
We also did the end of the world test, where you shoot, pull the cord, or the battery, intentionally mess things up and then see how long it takes to get up and running.
The S2 was easy, it picked back up and we kept shooting, so I don't see any issues so far. I'll know more in a few days.
I can tell you that there is a different look with the S2 my phase backs compared to my Canons. DXO is about numbers, maybe they're right or wrong, I personally don't care because in real world work I've seen much different results from scientific testing to the way I work in the world.
They trashed the Lecia m8 and mine shoots beautifully and the file is unique, but maybe that's just the way I work though I'm use to actually lighting an image and working around the "limitations" of file or camera and turning those limitations into a positive.
In fact that's what makes photography different than what we see with our eye, is the limitations of the "film", the lenses, the shooting rate and our personal style. A lot of time the equipment we use has a lot to do with our personal style and obviously scientific testing won't take that into account.
In regards to a cmos S series or any camera, I'm good as long as it's pretty, but not good if it looks generic. This is all personal preference, but the only cmos look I've ever liked was the original 1ds, the RED 1 and the olympus em-5, though I haven't used every camera ever made.
IMO
BC
I absolutely love the Leica LEMO / USB cable for tethering. The LEMO connector is better designed to stay put and to go through a LOT of plug/unplug cycles before it starts to get loose and the cable is not that thick and very flexible. I do not really like using the heavy FW800 cable on my phase but their FW800 receptacle in the back is the best implementation of FW800 I have seen. It just will not come loose by accident.
Tethering with the phase is superb due to the software, both on the Mac (C1P7) and on the iPad (CPilot). The workflow with clients is just superb.
I have played with Red One and Red One MX files and they are superb. I did not love the highlight rendition in some cases but the files were deep.
I have yet to try the new Olympus M43 cameras. Would love to though. Might pick one up in the near future.
-
Some people find comfort for their buying decisions in DxO, others find consolation for their inability to buy. Others still think it's about the silliest exercise in photography today.
- N.
-
I have yet to see my D800E's advantage of 2 stops for DR or colour with respect to 5Dmkiii…. ??? I wonder what they smoke in DXO…. >:( As with their findings with MF sensors (that compare with some compacts in their findings), ….it looks like they have find the testing method which proves that Sun sets at the east! :o
It was an easy test for me. I took a standard outdoor scene at base iso in mixed lighting. I wanted to expose for the highlights, thus, I underexposed the shadows by around 1.5 stops. I was using a 5D MKIII, with the 16-35 and the D800 with a 14-24. Both cameras at base iso, (this is where Dx0 is testing I believe).
Results were that the Canon could not pull hardly any usable shadow detail without showing banding and Canon Red/blue blotches. The Nikon D800 was clean and the file look very good. Both cameras had good highlights as I had exposed for them. There is no real mystery about this, it was so clear in both the Fred Miranda review that came about way back in Feb 2012 and the review that was posted on Lula by Michael (I believe). The Lula review showed books in a medium lit room and clearly just how well the details were recovered. Fred's review showed a hotel front, where a the entrance was in total shade. He pulled up both a 5D MKIII and Nikon D800, and the results were pretty impressive, the Nikon showing very little noise again. This to me is al lthe DxO mark test shows basically the total range I can take a single raw file. Both of these tests were well documented on the web, I am sure the LuLa review is still there, not sure about Fred's. However I have great respect for Fred's photography and his reviews/techniques.
Their scores for the Phase One P45+ at 79 to me are exactly correct. The P45+ was very hard to use in a mixed outdoor lighting situation. If you exposed for the highlights, then your shadows were detail-less and not worth recovery and if the shadows were exposed for, then your high lights were always totally blown out. The Canon 6D will do better than the 5D MKIII in the shadows, as the noise does not have the extreme red/blue blotches, instead taking on a more grain like appearance. I still own and use the 6D for about 1/2 of my night photography. These results also tie right back to the Dx0 score on both cameras. Eric showed this again with his P45+ testing.
This has also come out again with the IQ250/IQ260 testing that DT did, just look at one of the raws where the camera has shifted at all, and try to recover the shadows from the IQ260, it's nothing but pure noise, where as the IQ250 is showing amazing amounts of detail recovery. Enough to see the fact that the large partiion on the left side of the frame is fabric covered and you can see the details of the fabric with shadow recovery. This to me is DR, the range that you can take a single file.
This what Dx0 also is implying I believe with their tests. Color is anyone's guess and technique. Everyone's setup is different and they have their own ways to work with it. The ability to adjust a single file as much as 2.75 stops of exposure without loss of detail is an impressive feat.
It's easy to exposure bracket a Canon 35mm camera and get excellent results, however it's more work than I want to do since I can get an excellent result from a single D800 file 98% of the time.
Paul C.
-
Some people find comfort for their buying decisions in DxO, others find consolation for their inability to buy. Others still think it's about the silliest exercise in photography today.
- N.
The DxO measurements show that the cameras are working; but one has to realize that the manufacturers cooperate with DxO to *publish* only a description of an ideal sensor - stuff like sensor defects, colorshading, pattern noise, vignetting, etc gets swept under the carpet.
Also, reducing a camera to a sensor is like reducing a car to an engine: It will run only if you add a drivetrain and wheels (lenses, shutter), and a steering wheel and seats (AF, controls) may be useful too.
Edmund
-
My S2 tethers fine. We're in prelight this week and set up the S2 and our Contax p30+, the S2 using leica image shuttle to lightroom, the P30+ using C1 V6.
The phase is slightly faster to view an image, especially on the first image, but after that they seem pretty even, though I'm not that concerned that a billion images come up on screen as we work.
I'm actually not concerned about shooting a billion images for this project, because we've been down that crunch road of quantity and it is not a money saving, or inspiring way to work and takes a lot of post work to fix issues that should have been attended to on set.
We also did the end of the world test, where you shoot, pull the cord, or the battery, intentionally mess things up and then see how long it takes to get up and running.
The S2 was easy, it picked back up and we kept shooting, so I don't see any issues so far. I'll know more in a few days.
I can tell you that there is a different look with the S2 my phase backs compared to my Canons. DXO is about numbers, maybe they're right or wrong, I personally don't care because in real world work I've seen much different results from scientific testing to the way I work in the world.
They trashed the Lecia m8 and mine shoots beautifully and the file is unique, but maybe that's just the way I work though I'm use to actually lighting an image and working around the "limitations" of file or camera and turning those limitations into a positive.
In fact that's what makes photography different than what we see with our eye, is the limitations of the "film", the lenses, the shooting rate and our personal style. A lot of time the equipment we use has a lot to do with our personal style and obviously scientific testing won't take that into account.
In regards to a cmos S series or any camera, I'm good as long as it's pretty, but not good if it looks generic. This is all personal preference, but the only cmos look I've ever liked was the original 1ds, the RED 1 and the olympus em-5, though I haven't used every camera ever made.
IMO
BC
Good to hear.
The last time I tried, it was much slower than my Phase to Capture and I had some issues with the connection.
But that was a while back and hey, sometimes things get better.
Me being a Leaf Capture and Phocus surviver just makes me very wary about software…
The camera itself is wet dream, that's for sure.
-
Perhaps the CCD vs. CMOS has something to do with the different look of the images, I cannot know this for sure.
...
The lenses are heavy. ...
With the S2's big and excellent lenses and bigger sensor, with the inherent optical and electronic advantages of using a longer focal length to form a larger image on a larger sensor with more photo sites, and with photons gathered at a faster rate at a given same f-stop, and more photons in total gathered at the same exposure index (ambiguously called "ISO"), I see plenty of well-understood reasons to expect that the S2 gives better image quality than the smaller and far cheaper lens and sensor alternatives you compare to. I do not to see why so many people look to the use of the older CCD technology that most camera makers formerly used but have since abandoned as a significant cause. [CMOS active pixel sensors in "SLR" sizes are not cheaper than CCDs when produced at equal volumes, and indeed the common pattern was for CMOS sensor models to come in at higher prices than the CCD models from the same maker in the same format size, so "cheapness" is probably not why most DSLR makers have abandoned CCDs.]
-
Hi,
DxO Mark just measures the capability of the sensor to render images. And images seem to matter little to photographers it seems.
It's a bit like time keepers, you can have a plastic Casio with 30 features, a solar powered Citizen in titanium, a stainless steel Seiko, a Rolex and one of those cheapy clocks syncing to AM radio for atomic time. The last ones are probably the best time keepers. If you need a watch for something else than keeping time, take any of the others.
Regarding the Leica I think it is a fine camera. I don't like DxO mark as a merit of figure, but their data is basically sound. The problem with DxO-mark is that they mix everything in a figure of merit. Like, I never use high ISO. Why would I care about it?! The other thing is that DxO-mark measures essentially noise, low noise gives high DxO figures. But most cameras are good enough and once they are good enough, differences matter little.
Best regards
Erik
Some people find comfort for their buying decisions in DxO, others find consolation for their inability to buy. Others still think it's about the silliest exercise in photography today.
- N.
-
For Landscape it maybe the only camera you want. If your landscapes involve sandstorms in Namibia on Hell's Highway or sleet and freezing rain in Iceland or Antarctica, being able to walk around with your camera hanging off your shoulder unprotected and know it will keep on working can be a plus for some.
PaulT
http://www.paultornaquindici.com
-
Hi,
DxO Mark just measures the capability of the sensor to render images. ... I don't like DxO mark as a merit of figure, but their data is basically sound. The problem with DxO-mark is that they mix everything in a figure of merit. Like, I never use high ISO. Why would I care about it?!
Agreed: many people love rendering a multidimensional assessment into a single number, and it is usually nonsense --- like a "car excellence score" that weighs every car on measures including ability to transport my five imaginary children, haul my imaginary two-ton boat, or win my imaginary drag races. It could be fun to have a "personal score widget", where one could choose the relative weights to apply to the various raw data. But realistically, I just look at the numbers from various sources that matter somewhat to me, interpret them relative to my objectives ... and then find out all I can about how a camera handles, which has become more and more decisive in my gear choices over the years as the IQ differences diminish.
-
But ... if a device needs to be rendered to a single number, the number is already there - The price!
Edmund
-
Yes,
Of course, in a free market economy price and value are tightly connected.
Best regards
Erik
But ... if a device needs to be rendered to a single number, the number is already there - The price!
Edmund
-
Looks like DXo has been keeping busy. They tested the RED EPIC Dragon. Beat every other sensor they have ever tested. WOW.
LINK (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/03/red-epic-dragon-jumps-to-top-of-dxomark-sensor-charts-with-score-of-101?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_1)
-
Hi,
Quite impressive, especially as the sensor is pretty small! DxO has not published all the data yet, but it seems impressive for sure! Just asking how they could achieve it? A breaktrough?!
Best regards
Erik
Looks like DXo has been keeping busy. They tested the RED EPIC Dragon. Beat every other sensor they have ever tested. WOW.
LINK (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/03/red-epic-dragon-jumps-to-top-of-dxomark-sensor-charts-with-score-of-101?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_1)
-
Looks like DXo has been keeping busy. They tested the RED EPIC Dragon. Beat every other sensor they have ever tested. WOW.
LINK (http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/03/red-epic-dragon-jumps-to-top-of-dxomark-sensor-charts-with-score-of-101?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0_1)
The X sensor in my R1's and Scalet has more latitude than my still cameras.
We use to use it with continuous light as a kind of running polaroid to prelight, but it covered too much territory, so I had to modify my brain if I was shooting stills and Reds.
You just don't want to overexpose because like most digital light flare, or blown out windows, sky can get kind of strange with that magenta cast, but that's more digital than it is camera make/brand.
In regards to the Leica, setting up in prelight we ran two systems the Leica and my Contax Phase.
Honestly, they work virtually identical. Slightly different knob placement and I like the look out of camera of the Leica a little better, but in regards to focus, focus lock, handling, tethering, Shooting, they feel like their made from the same company, except obviously the Leica is newer and my prep time in cleaning contacts and prepping the leica vs. the contax is much less.
It's pretty amazing that a 7/8 year old digital backs and 10 year old camera system works as well as a virtually new one.
That's why I say price in the long game isn't an issue as long as you use the equipment and you don't get caught up in changing things every week.
In regards to small sensors, this is from a motion shoot with some pickup stills. These were first "polaroids comparing the cameras on set) Bottom image is from a 1dx, Top image from an olympus em-5.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/em5_1dx.jpg)
With the olympus I didn't pull any slider to get some outside of the window detail, with the 1dx the windows were blown, so sensor size (depending on camera) isn't everything for every project.
IMO
BC
-
My S2 tethers fine. We're in prelight this week and set up the S2 and our Contax p30+, the S2 using leica image shuttle to lightroom, the P30+ using C1 V6.
The phase is slightly faster to view an image, especially on the first image, but after that they seem pretty even, though I'm not that concerned that a billion images come up on screen as we work.
I'm actually not concerned about shooting a billion images for this project, because we've been down that crunch road of quantity and it is not a money saving, or inspiring way to work and takes a lot of post work to fix issues that should have been attended to on set.
We also did the end of the world test, where you shoot, pull the cord, or the battery, intentionally mess things up and then see how long it takes to get up and running.
The S2 was easy, it picked back up and we kept shooting, so I don't see any issues so far. I'll know more in a few days.
I can tell you that there is a different look with the S2 my phase backs compared to my Canons. DXO is about numbers, maybe they're right or wrong, I personally don't care because in real world work I've seen much different results from scientific testing to the way I work in the world.
They trashed the Lecia m8 and mine shoots beautifully and the file is unique, but maybe that's just the way I work though I'm use to actually lighting an image and working around the "limitations" of file or camera and turning those limitations into a positive.
In fact that's what makes photography different than what we see with our eye, is the limitations of the "film", the lenses, the shooting rate and our personal style. A lot of time the equipment we use has a lot to do with our personal style and obviously scientific testing won't take that into account.
In regards to a cmos S series or any camera, I'm good as long as it's pretty, but not good if it looks generic. This is all personal preference, but the only cmos look I've ever liked was the original 1ds, the RED 1 and the olympus em-5, though I haven't used every camera ever made.
IMO
BC
And this from our buddy Joel... with the caveat that it sounds like he gets his cameras free (at least for a period of time) from Leica it seems.
http://vimeo.com/88014431
-
And this from our buddy Joel... with the caveat that it sounds like he gets his cameras free (at least for a period of time) from Leica it seems.
http://vimeo.com/88014431
Yes, but my head doesn't buy what my heart thinks is going down.
In the circumstances, what else would anyone be likely to say - make a plug for Nikon?
;-)
Rob C
-
In the circumstances, what else would anyone be likely to say - make a plug for Nikon?
Sad, really, to see respected names from the past resorting to this sort of crap. At least we now know that you can't tell the difference between a 10x8 view camera and the Leica S in a 2m tall print! Let's see what the large format guys make of that (and perhaps someone could pass the message on to the likes of Andreas Gursky and Gregory Crewdson).
I suppose we'll have Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi explaining soon how they would never have scored those goals if it wasn't for Adidas and Nike. Or, perhaps David Beckham doing a retrospective and letting us all know that the secret to his success was all due to Calvin Klein underwear.
At least I'll know the world has stopped turning when I see BC, clutching a Nikon D66xx, in front of camera and telling us all how his career would never have happened if it hadn't been for Nikon ...
-
Disclaimer: [LHQ - light hearted quip]
-
So it scored 76?
Must be a crap camera then, RED have a camera that scores 100! That's right folks ONE HUNDRED.
::) ::) ::)
-
Yes, but my head doesn't buy what my heart thinks is going down.
In the circumstances, what else would anyone be likely to say - make a plug for Nikon?
;-)
Rob C
Indeed, it's merely an ad.
-
In the circumstances, what else would anyone be likely to say - make a plug for Nikon?
Rob C
If he uses a Nikon . . . yes.
There is nothing wrong with saying the S series works for a lot of stuff, but let's face it I'm not going to shoot 5fps street photography with it.
It's a different machine made for a certain genre. Nothing wrong with that.
What is wrong is this type of endorsement rings false, it makes me want to never buy a camera.
Interviews where the photographer is sitting at a table with three cameras in front of him/her rings false and Leica doesn't need this to sell cameras.
I expect any minute for these guys to break into infomercial speak, with a flashing RED super that says, "but wait there's more".
In marketing and branding building trust takes time and is hard. You have to make great products or services, follow up, keep your levels high.
Losing trust is almost impossible to repair. Holding a little leica and saying the other big leica shoots like 8x10 film makes me hit command w on the keyboard.
Camera companies are never going to get it and obviously never gonna stop doing it.
They constantly use people that haven't shot a gig in 5 years and get them to praise stuff they don't really use at the same level they use to work in.
I've done it with one camera company and it made my stomach hurt. I don't mind telling about what I use, what I like, what I don't like and of everything I own there are huge plusses that come with every system, with huge minuses.
Also if I shoot something I love, I usually THEN love the camera, if I shoot c__p THEN I don't like the camera.
I think whoever put's their name on this stuff should take a breath and think about the guy/girl that is on Amazon and spending their only fun money for something they think will do what it won't.
As a friend of mine says. The truth is complicated, but it's easy to remember.
IMO
BC
-
At least we now know that you can't tell the difference between a 10x8 view camera and the Leica S in a 2m tall print! Let's see what the large format guys make of that (and perhaps someone could pass the message on to the likes of Andreas Gursky and Gregory Crewdson).
He says 1.5m and is pretty careful in his choice of words, didn't explicitely that it was the same scene,... that may have played as well.
Now, with a great lens on the S, and average one on the 8x10, scanning,... the difference in a 1.5m print is probably not night and day. I have seen 2m high prints from an Olympus OMD-5 that were drop from your chair good.
So yes, he is of course most probably getting paid by Leica for his testimony, but it doesn't necessarily mean he is lying about this episode.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
He says 1.5m and is pretty careful in his choice of words, didn't explicitely that it was the same scene,... that may have played as well.
Now, with a great lens on the S, and average one on the 8x10, scanning,... the difference in a 1.5m print is probably not night and day. I have seen 2m high prints from an Olympus OMD-5 that were drop from your chair good.
So yes, he is of course most probably getting paid by Leica for his testimony, but it doesn't necessarily mean he is lying about this episode.
Cheers,
Bernard
It's not the facts, it's not the photographer (hey a gigs a gig) it's the delivery.
If someone actually uses the camera it has weight, if they only tried it, then it's just a advertising review.
If it comes across as a sales pitch, then it loses validity.
If they actually buy it, then the value of the message goes up.
When Michael does a review, he doesn't fixate on charts or figures, talks about use, usually shows images and tells his opinion warts and all.
Rarely do you get the impression that Michael is a fan boy or handed a list of what to say and most importantly when he likes something he actually purchases it.
I recently viewed a UK video on the Panasonic gh4 4k camera. The Panasonic Rep didn't side step or just pitch the camera. He ran down the list answered hard questions.
I actually learned more from that 2 minutes video on the gh4 than I would in reading twenty pages of blogs.
IMO
BC
-
If you believe DxO, the new RED Dragon sensor wipes the floor with every other digital capture device. Whatev's
-
Hi,
Regarding DR and noise related stuff that is what DxO-mark measures and seem to measure well. DxO also tests lenses and those tests are probably quite relevant, but I don't think they test MF lenses.
Best regards
Erik
If you believe DxO, the new RED Dragon sensor wipes the floor with every other digital capture device. Whatev's
-
Hi,
Regarding DR and noise related stuff that is what DxO-mark measures and seem to measure well. DxO also tests lenses and those tests are probably quite relevant, but I don't think they test MF lenses.
Best regards
Erik
Yes, it is unbelievable how well the DxO camera tests correlate with real world experience.
I'm a bit sceptical of their type of lens test, especially since any such will max out whenever the lens outresolves the sesnor.
Edmund
-
One must seriously consider what they smoke in DXO… ;D Despite all the web posts with D4S vs. D4 high ISO comparison which shows significant further improvement for the new model, they not only found no improvement at all, :P but also found it considerably worst than DF, which they claim is clearly better than D4…. (they are the same - I've checked that myself). ???
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D4s-versus-Nikon-Df-versus-Nikon-D4___945_925_767
-
Despite all the web posts with D4S vs. D4 high ISO comparison which shows significant further improvement for the new model, they not only found no improvement at all, :P but also found it considerably worst than DF, which they claim is clearly better than D4…. (they are the same - I've checked that myself). ???
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D4s-versus-Nikon-Df-versus-Nikon-D4___945_925_767
The DXO "sports (low-light ISO)" seems to be the exposure index at which the mid-tone SNR is about 30dB, around EI=3200, whereas the DXO graphs show the D4s only gaining its advantage over the D4 and Df at even higher EI levels of 51,200 and up. At what EI settings did you compare and see an advantage to the D4s?
-
The DXO "sports (low-light ISO)" seems to be the exposure index at which the mid-tone SNR is about 30dB, around EI=3200, whereas the DXO graphs show the D4s only gaining its advantage over the D4 and Df at even higher EI levels of 51,200 and up. At what EI settings did you compare and see an advantage to the D4s?
When did I say that I've compared D4 with D4S? …I compared my D4 with a (recently bought) friend's DF… they are exactly the same.
-
One must seriously consider what they smoke in DXO… ;D Despite all the web posts with D4S vs. D4 high ISO comparison which shows significant further improvement for the new model, they not only found no improvement at all, :P but also found it considerably worst than DF, which they claim is clearly better than D4…. (they are the same - I've checked that myself). ???
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D4s-versus-Nikon-Df-versus-Nikon-D4___945_925_767
All three look to be very close to each other. It's probably just sample variation. Not much difference at all between them in the tests.
-
When did I say that I've compared D4 with D4S? …I compared my D4 with a (recently bought) friend's DF… they are exactly the same.
It does seem quite possible that the measured D4 vs Df differences are either within sample variance or not enough to be visibly significant: that is a hazard of presenting measurements without either error bars or practical context.
But I was thinking more of your comment about "all the web posts with D4S vs. D4 high ISO comparison which shows significant further improvement for the new model", on the assumption that you were commenting on examples that out have seen in those posts. So, what I am trying to ask is at what EI (so-called "ISO") values is this D4s advantage being seen?
-
FYI
Today worked with the S2 on set.
Great camera, focuses well, not dslr like, but the Leica 120 is pretty, the file is very nice.
In the process when we changed sets, did a little quick test.
Shot our p30+ on my contax with the 140 zeiss. and for grins did about 25 frames on the olympus em-1 and the em-5 with the 75mm oly lens.
Now these are widely different cameras and format sizes.
Result.
the S2 is pretty does everything well, running to a hot folder on Lightroom. It takes about 3 to 4 seconds an image for the frame to come up (applying settings in lightroom) running the last 17" macbook pro with thunderbolt, a 27" monitor, the Leica tethered through usb 2.
iso 360, using hmi lighting.
The Contax, almost identical in file quality to the S2. In fact I can't tell a difference in regards to sharpness and detail compared to the S2. The difference is running the p30+ to C1 v6 using fw 800 the full preview is almost instant, with adjustment settings.
iso 400 using hmi lighting
The focus is identical to the S2, though just a little faster, a little more precise and no hunting where the S2 did some hunting. The tethering speed in C-1 is just mind blowing fast.
The Olympus em-1. I won't use this for the whole project because it won't tether, but the color and look is almost identical to the phase one. Obviously less detail but only about 25% less at the most. Nice file, fast buffering and instant focus. The focus is just crazy fast on this camera.
iso 400 using hmi lighting.
The Olympus em-5. Once again I won't use this for the whole project because of tethering but the look of this file is way different than the other three. It has more nose but it's grain like noise, sharpness detail slightly less then the em-1, same with the p30+ and S2.
iso 400, using hmi lighting.
Now the look of the file. 180 degrees from the other cameras. Crazy film like, I mean if this was scanned 35mm file you'd say uh yea, sure.
I can make all of these camera files look good, but the em-5 just blew us all away. I mean everyone including the AD that said, wow that is cool, which camera did you use . . . the leica. I said no this little one and he said oh come one.
My point?
These are different cameras, costs widely different numbers, all have a place but on set, in controlled conditions, any of the 4 will work more than professionally.
The p30+ just is insane that it's 8 years old, on a body and lens that is out of production and it easily equals the S2. The only difference is it's larger, heavier and requires two sets of batteries, plus the lcd is less than good, but anyone that thinks medium format is over priced hasn't used a digital camera like this for 7 years. That averages about $4,700 per year.
The em1 is by far the best shooting of the four. Focus is instant, always sharp, always obvious and the file is professional but not much different in look of the two medium format cameras. It just lacks some detail in comparison.
The em-5. This is a commercial project, but the em-5 is art. I don't know what olympus did to that sony sensor, but man if they made it larger with the build quality of the em-1 and could tether, they'd own the world.
FWIW we only did 5 frames with the Canon 1dx, just to make sure everything was running well and since we had a heavy day, I really couldn't compared cameras. I did all these quick tests in minutes.
But honestly the 1dx didn't shoot 1 bit better than the olympus either one.
So my real point?
Use what you like and don't worry about dxo, pixel peeping, or anything that gets in the way of your photography it, because all of these cameras are very good.
My third point. Why didn't Sony (since they work with olympus), come out with the 5 axis stabilization and why not ask the olympus guys how they got the look of the em-5 sensor out of the a sony sensor?
IMO
BC
-
Sad, really, to see respected names from the past resorting to this sort of crap. At least we now know that you can't tell the difference between a 10x8 view camera and the Leica S in a 2m tall print! Let's see what the large format guys make of that (and perhaps someone could pass the message on to the likes of Andreas Gursky and Gregory Crewdson).
Has Gursky transitioned from Linhof to Hasselblad for his work?
What does Gregory Crewdson using for his work these days?
-
J,
Thx for the experience report -
BTW, its seems the EM1 has a Panasonic chip, which they seem to have been the lead customer for but which I expect to migrate to everything Pana including the next pocket rocket (GM2?).
My take from your note: Every prosumer camera is now "professional". It's all in the head, eyes.
Edmund
FYI
Today worked with the S2 on set.
Great camera, focuses well, not dslr like, but the Leica 120 is pretty, the file is very nice.
In the process when we changed sets, did a little quick test.
Shot our p30+ on my contax with the 140 zeiss. and for grins did about 25 frames on the olympus em-1 and the em-5 with the 75mm oly lens.
Now these are widely different cameras and format sizes.
Result.
the S2 is pretty does everything well, running to a hot folder on Lightroom. It takes about 3 to 4 seconds an image for the frame to come up (applying settings in lightroom) running the last 17" macbook pro with thunderbolt, a 27" monitor, the Leica tethered through usb 2.
iso 360, using hmi lighting.
The Contax, almost identical in file quality to the S2. In fact I can't tell a difference in regards to sharpness and detail compared to the S2. The difference is running the p30+ to C1 v6 using fw 800 the full preview is almost instant, with adjustment settings.
iso 400 using hmi lighting
The focus is identical to the S2, though just a little faster, a little more precise and no hunting where the S2 did some hunting. The tethering speed in C-1 is just mind blowing fast.
The Olympus em-1. I won't use this for the whole project because it won't tether, but the color and look is almost identical to the phase one. Obviously less detail but only about 25% less at the most. Nice file, fast buffering and instant focus. The focus is just crazy fast on this camera.
iso 400 using hmi lighting.
The Olympus em-5. Once again I won't use this for the whole project because of tethering but the look of this file is way different than the other three. It has more nose but it's grain like noise, sharpness detail slightly less then the em-1, same with the p30+ and S2.
iso 400, using hmi lighting.
Now the look of the file. 180 degrees from the other cameras. Crazy film like, I mean if this was scanned 35mm file you'd say uh yea, sure.
I can make all of these camera files look good, but the em-5 just blew us all away. I mean everyone including the AD that said, wow that is cool, which camera did you use . . . the leica. I said no this little one and he said oh come one.
My point?
These are different cameras, costs widely different numbers, all have a place but on set, in controlled conditions, any of the 4 will work more than professionally.
The p30+ just is insane that it's 8 years old, on a body and lens that is out of production and it easily equals the S2. The only difference is it's larger, heavier and requires two sets of batteries, plus the lcd is less than good, but anyone that thinks medium format is over priced hasn't used a digital camera like this for 7 years. That averages about $4,700 per year.
The em1 is by far the best shooting of the four. Focus is instant, always sharp, always obvious and the file is professional but not much different in look of the two medium format cameras. It just lacks some detail in comparison.
The em-5. This is a commercial project, but the em-5 is art. I don't know what olympus did to that sony sensor, but man if they made it larger with the build quality of the em-1 and could tether, they'd own the world.
FWIW we only did 5 frames with the Canon 1dx, just to make sure everything was running well and since we had a heavy day, I really couldn't compared cameras. I did all these quick tests in minutes.
But honestly the 1dx didn't shoot 1 bit better than the olympus either one.
So my real point?
Use what you like and don't worry about dxo, pixel peeping, or anything that gets in the way of your photography it, because all of these cameras are very good.
My third point. Why didn't Sony (since they work with olympus), come out with the 5 axis stabilization and why not ask the olympus guys how they got the look of the em-5 sensor out of the a sony sensor?
IMO
BC
-
J,
Thx for the experience report -
----------------
My take from your note: Every prosumer camera is now "professional". It's all in the head, eyes.
Edmund
Well sort of. I mean the olympus won't tether, has a certain range of focus for tracking, has a great file, though the em-5 is a very small camera.
For editorial no problem, for full time commerce, it needs to be more robust and full featured. This is where a dslr will win out.
___________
The last two days shot 29 to 30 set ups of on figure fashion with the Leica S2 and video clips of 20 sessions with the Pansonic gh3's.
The S2 tethered flawlessly using image shuttle and Lightroom.
The only complaints I have, which are very, very minor, is if you shoot at a semi moderate pace, it takes about 5 seconds for the first image, then every few seconds for the remaining images to come into lightroom full rez using a powerbook.
But if you shoot fast and long bursts, then it will hold 7 to 10 images then release them at once to lightroom which takes a while to render out.
This can be good and bad. I find it preferable tojust load the buffer and shoot a body of images, then let them see them at once which is usually better than seeing every image every second, but that's just me.
But you can shoot slower and they come in pretty fast, though keep in mind we set up a lot of specialized adjustments in lightroom to give a more finished look. I'd say an image fully rendered aboug 3 or 4 seconds.
The Contax lenses work as fast as the leica lenses, except the leica lenses have a little less bite and seem less contrasty, but that's really hard to compare.
Great camera, so far robust, and today shot hmi, flash, mixture from 160 to 640 iso with no issues.
IMO
BC
-
sounds like one of those new round dustbin macs might be useful.
however, I think maybe you need to have several different disks, there might be too much of a queue with Lightroom trying to write converted files while the Leica tries to write the originals on the same disk unit? I'd hang different disks off different buses.
i hope never to tether. but then I guess my experimental cams will be tethered.
Edmund
Well sort of. I mean the olympus won't tether, has a certain range of focus for tracking, has a great file, though the em-5 is a very small camera.
For editorial no problem, for full time commerce, it needs to be more robust and full featured. This is where a dslr will win out.
___________
The last two days shot 29 to 30 set ups of on figure fashion with the Leica S2 and video clips of 20 sessions with the Pansonic gh3's.
The S2 tethered flawlessly using image shuttle and Lightroom.
The only complaints I have, which are very, very minor, is if you shoot at a semi moderate pace, it takes about 5 seconds for the first image, then every few seconds for the remaining images to come into lightroom full rez using a powerbook.
But if you shoot fast and long bursts, then it will hold 7 to 10 images then release them at once to lightroom which takes a while to render out.
This can be good and bad. I find it preferable tojust load the buffer and shoot a body of images, then let them see them at once which is usually better than seeing every image every second, but that's just me.
But you can shoot slower and they come in pretty fast, though keep in mind we set up a lot of specialized adjustments in lightroom to give a more finished look. I'd say an image fully rendered aboug 3 or 4 seconds.
The Contax lenses work as fast as the leica lenses, except the leica lenses have a little less bite and seem less contrasty, but that's really hard to compare.
Great camera, so far robust, and today shot hmi, flash, mixture from 160 to 640 iso with no issues.
IMO
BC
-
i hope never to tether. but then I guess
Edmund
Edmund,
I think you should forget about the camera and view this.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/60072add5a/between-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-ben-stiller?playlist=135161
Use it as inspiration.
You could do you on web series, call it something like, between two Canons. You know draw some pixels on a black background.
I think it would be a hit.
BC
-
low budget no budget :)
Edmund,
I think you should forget about the camera and view this.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/60072add5a/between-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-ben-stiller?playlist=135161
Use it as inspiration.
You could do you on web series, call it something like, between two Canons. You know draw some pixels on a black background.
I think it would be a hit.
BC
-
One more day of production, though so far this week shot 3853 frames with the S-2 tethered, through Leica Image shuttle and lightroom.
Working strobe and daylight, daylight and hmi, heavy schedule, full sets.
Not one glitch, except the cord got pulled once and we reconnected.
No restarts, etc. etc. and the batteries in the Leica S2 last forever.
Now with the Canons might have double that number, but not the amount of good frames, so speed is relative, though the camera handles like a dslr with a viewfinder you can actually manually focus.
IMO
BC
-
One more day of production, though so far this week shot 3853 frames with the S-2 tethered, through Leica Image shuttle and lightroom.
Working strobe and daylight, daylight and hmi, heavy schedule, full sets.
Not one glitch, except the cord got pulled once and we reconnected.
No restarts, etc. etc. and the batteries in the Leica S2 last forever.
Now with the Canons might have double that number, but not the amount of good frames, so speed is relative, though the camera handles like a dslr with a viewfinder you can actually manually focus.
IMO
BC
Sounds like you're a happy customer. Congrats!
Edmund
-
Sounds like you're a happy customer. Congrats!
Edmund
It's not perfect, nothing is . . . but.
For this type of production in 2007 we'd have used my contax/phase. We'd shoot about 12 setups a day with some options, but nothing mandatory.
Maybe some video, but not every setup.
Then it moved to more session per day, much more options (in other words, more wardrobe, talent, set changes) and mandatory video with 30 main sessions a day another 10 of major changes.
So we slowly moved to shooting 35mm, eventually the 1dx and shot a billion frames.
I think we spent as much time culling down the c__p out of thousands of frames as we did in processing for galleries.
The S or S2 made sense to me. It's not a 35mm camera, not near as cross purposed with moving focus points. Kind of like a smaller contax you can focus.
I hate to say it because I test everything, but never really tested it in anger until this shoot. I did bring our two contax and phase backs, the 43 system and all my Canon systems (which we never touched).
Not a glitch so far, (knock on wood) and with less images but better images, we had very little culling down, and the first weeks galleries are going up as I write this.
Leica did a very good job, it feels like a billion bucks, solid and professional. The leica lenses work identical to the contax lenses with focus though the leica 120 has a little different feel. Different look though not 50% different but different.
The only dislike, which it took a day or two to get used to is the f stop wheel on the back. Perfect position, but if you push it in (it has multifunction use) you go from your manual preset to an auto function.
It's a little to easy to push accidentily, though there might be a lock out in the menu, I haven't really checked, because I've caught it all but one time and after a day or so, it didn't happen anymore.
Nice camera.
Thanks
BC
-
30 Main sessions a day?
Your makeup and dresser team must be going crazy.
I wonder how long the shutter on any of those cameras is going to last at this rate.
Edmund
It's not perfect, nothing is . . . but.
For this type of production in 2007 we'd have used my contax/phase. We'd shoot about 12 setups a day with some options, but nothing mandatory.
Maybe some video, but not every setup.
Then it moved to more session per day, much more options (in other words, more wardrobe, talent, set changes) and mandatory video with 30 main sessions a day another 10 of major changes.
So we slowly moved to shooting 35mm, eventually the 1dx and shot a billion frames.
I think we spent as much time culling down the c__p out of thousands of frames as we did in processing for galleries.
The S or S2 made sense to me. It's not a 35mm camera, not near as cross purposed with moving focus points. Kind of like a smaller contax you can focus.
I hate to say it because I test everything, but never really tested it in anger until this shoot. I did bring our two contax and phase backs, the 43 system and all my Canon systems (which we never touched).
Not a glitch so far, (knock on wood) and with less images but better images, we had very little culling down, and the first weeks galleries are going up as I write this.
Leica did a very good job, it feels like a billion bucks, solid and professional. The leica lenses work identical to the contax lenses with focus though the leica 120 has a little different feel. Different look though not 50% different but different.
The only dislike, which it took a day or two to get used to is the f stop wheel on the back. Perfect position, but if you push it in (it has multifunction use) you go from your manual preset to an auto function.
It's a little to easy to push accidentily, though there might be a lock out in the menu, I haven't really checked, because I've caught it all but one time and after a day or so, it didn't happen anymore.
Nice camera.
Thanks
BC
-
30 Main sessions a day?
Your makeup and dresser team must be going crazy.
Edmund
The Real World and this was in a daylight studio in NY where every 45 minutes we'd lose the daylight fill, have to bounce hmi's to compensate, then kill them, or kill 1/3of them and do two frames to hit the mix, then get to it.
It all turned out pretty.
But that's nothing. Our makeup artist just came off a gig (not ours) where she did hair/makeup/styling on 6 actors for a video, over 10 setups a day with dialog.
Try doing hair and styling clothes at the same time.
I was told, Dallas buyers club did 49 setups a day.
IMO
BC
-
I once saw some images from "Memoirs of a Geisha" that showed they built a lightbox the size of a house, literally, suspended on a crane, to solve their daylight problems. I guess if it comes out pretty in the end, and you're still alive ...
Edmund
The Real World and this was in a daylight studio in NY where every 45 minutes we'd lose the daylight fill, have to bounce hmi's to compensate, then kill them, or kill 1/3of them and do two frames to hit the mix, then get to it.
It all turned out pretty.
But that's nothing. Our makeup artist just came off a gig (not ours) where she did hair/makeup/styling on 6 actors for a video, over 10 setups a day with dialog.
Try doing hair and styling clothes at the same time.
I was told, Dallas buyers club did 49 setups a day.
IMO
BC
-
Explain.
How did you lose the daylight fill every 45 minutes?
Why did you have to kill the HMIs after you've bounced them?
Why did you only do two frames, and what does "hitting the mix" and "getting to it" mean?
:)
-
Explain.
How did you lose the daylight fill every 45 minutes?
Why did you have to kill the HMIs after you've bounced them?
Why did you only do two frames, and what does "hitting the mix" and "getting to it" mean?
:)
I'd have to draw you a diagram, but what I meant was the weather and light in the daylight studio changed by the hour. NY has had weather from 50f, to 20, rain, almost snow, clouds sun, etc.
When we set up prelight, we did so hoping for sunlight in the studio for ambient fill, dropping the shutter to a 60th, though as it got dark went to 1/15th.
In prelight I planned for long days (into night) and weather, so tried our best to mimick the daylight by using flash and hmi fill bouncing from the windows to the studio.
Had we been on a first floor we would have just shot diffused light through the window, but most NY daylight studios are on the upper floors, so though possible, not feasable.
In other words the light changed a lot, so we were semi prepared and under a 30 shot day you really don't have 30 minutes to move stuff around and test. You have time to adjust shoot about two frames then start the session and client's are demanding, want the same look you started with so you gotta be fast and prepared.
The S2 helped just because it was stable. Nothing is more frustrating than having everything ready and a camera issue, or focus issue, or any issue for that matter.
Today is an easier day, though very different setups.
IMO
BC
-
BC
I’m glad to read that your S2 is doing so well. Congratulations and may it serve you for many years, like your Contax system.
In another thread I noticed you mentioned the 120 mm was hunting sometimes and not always fast to lock on. That is a well known quirk of this lens in particular, the 120 actually should have had a focus limiter. I have the 70 mm and the 120 mm and there’s quite a difference with the long throw of the 120. Other S lenses tend to lock on focus faster without any hunting. In that respect the 120 takes some time getting used to. I can work around the hunting by aiming the AF cross at a contrasty subject near where I want the image to be sharp and then focus again for the last bit. For example eyebrow first, then the eye itself. AF on all S lenses is very accurate.
Word has it Leica may bring a specialised portrait lens, maybe a 100 mm Summicron. That would help to avoid the double duty (macro/portait) quirks of the 120 mm. So far I’m very happy with the 120, the rendering is nice and it’s quite sharp, though maybe a little less dreamy/characterful wide open than the Contax 140 mm.
-
BC
I’m glad to read that your S2 is doing so well. Congratulations and may it serve you for many years, like your Contax system.
In another thread I noticed you mentioned the 120 mm was hunting sometimes and not always fast to lock on. That is a well known quirk of this lens in particular, the 120 actually should have had a focus limiter. I have the 70 mm and the 120 mm and there’s quite a difference with the long throw of the 120. Other S lenses tend to lock on focus faster without any hunting. In that respect the 120 takes some time getting used to. I can work around the hunting by aiming the AF cross at a contrasty subject near where I want the image to be sharp and then focus again for the last bit. For example eyebrow first, then the eye itself. AF on all S lenses is very accurate.
Word has it Leica may bring a specialised portrait lens, maybe a 100 mm Summicron. That would help to avoid the double duty (macro/portait) quirks of the 120 mm. So far I’m very happy with the 120, the rendering is nice and it’s quite sharp, though maybe a little less dreamy/characterful wide open than the Contax 140 mm.
Thanks,
I've been doing that finding something with detail parallel to the talent to stop the hunting, but honestly, I like the camera's screen, can manually focus it so I just switch to manual and it works.
Today shot one talent horizontal that moved quick and it's impossible to autofocus a face that quickly, so I went to manual missed a few got most and I'm not thinking about moving someone into the focus point, I'm just thinking about focus and composition.
I like a 120 for today's full length as locations are smaller and 120 to 110 fits perfectly, but I'll probably buy a 100 if they make it.
IMO
BC
-
One more day of production, though so far this week shot 3853 frames with the S-2 tethered, through Leica Image shuttle and lightroom.
Working strobe and daylight, daylight and hmi, heavy schedule, full sets.
Not one glitch, except the cord got pulled once and we reconnected.
No restarts, etc. etc. and the batteries in the Leica S2 last forever.
Now with the Canons might have double that number, but not the amount of good frames, so speed is relative, though the camera handles like a dslr with a viewfinder you can actually manually focus.
IMO
BC
Have you used the S2 on location without flash (or just a touch of fill) handheld? Just wondering how well it handles hand holding with the 70 or 120 at shutter speeds under 1/250th.
I've only tested the S2 in the studio, but it seems like the perfect location camera…also, what's the noise like at ISO 400 & 640? Grain like noise? Or do the colors get funky.
And how do you like the colors at 5500k? In good light my Phase get's really close to Kodak Portra in look, which is like injecting me with a dose of Heroin. It's the one thing next to tethering (although you don't seem to have lost your mind tethering with the S2) that would be really hard o part with. I know you can get there with any camera, but what's the starting point like?
Also, I'd have to fill the gap between the 70 and 120 – can you say anything about using the Contax 80mm or the Hassy 100mm? Have you tried them with the S converters?
Thank
-
Have you used the S2 on location without flash (or just a touch of fill) handheld? Just wondering how well it handles hand holding with the 70 or 120 at shutter speeds under 1/250th.
I've only tested the S2 in the studio, but it seems like the perfect location camera…also, what's the noise like at ISO 400 & 640? Grain like noise? Or do the colors get funky.
And how do you like the colors at 5500k? In good light my Phase get's really close to Kodak Portra in look, which is like injecting me with a dose of Heroin. It's the one thing next to tethering (although you don't seem to have lost your mind tethering with the S2) that would be really hard o part with. I know you can get there with any camera, but what's the starting point like?
Also, I'd have to fill the gap between the 70 and 120 – can you say anything about using the Contax 80mm or the Hassy 100mm? Have you tried them with the S converters?
Thank
And I can't answer all of your questions until we get into serious post procesisng, but yesterday worked in iso 80 (Pull) to iso 640.
Since I tethered to lightroom, I can't really compare the look to my Contax or C-1, which kind of go hand in hand, though once again in post processing I'll know much more.
In regards to lenses, I don't have hasselblad but have 35, 45, 55, 80, 140, 210 contax lenses and used all but the 35 and 210. I also have the leica 120 I used extensively, though my two favorite lenses on any camera is the contax 55 and 80.
The focus is medium format focus, matches my contax, or a mamiya or a hasselblad H, except I can manually focus it easier than I can a Mamiya.
So far the camera is robust and tethering is slower than my p30+ and c-1 but solid and no issues. You just have to learn the leica shuttle set up (easy) mark a hot folder and then turn on lightroom. I also assume you can do the same with C-1, though I only use c-1 6 for my Contax so I can't really compare.
Of cameras I use, I would think it's kind of a cross between a medium format camera and a 35mm. It's faster in use than most medium format due to it's form factor, since it's 2:3 instead of 4:3 horizontals are easier, for verticals you have to leave some room for page crops.
I don't know, like the camera, it works professionally is sharp, though not quite as sharp as my p30+ though out of camera I've always believed phase does some extra sharpening on their files.
In lightroom I can make a portra look, which to me is slightly flat and less saturated, but that's easy.
In regards to grain, there is no grain, but 640 iso seems tops maybe a push to 800 in software.
Yesterday did a lot of mixed colors and lights and used lightroom to present some effects.
Shot in studio, out, windowlight, flash, hmi, mixed. etc. No issue. One great thing (or not great depending) is if you go beyond 125th of a second the flash won't fire, (with the focal plane shutter). Obviously if you have leaf shutter lenses it will fire at all shutter speeds.
So far great camera, feels kind of like my contax but easier to work. Right now I have my two contax and phase backs for backup, though my case has ballooned to 68 lbs, but I have a lot of double lenses for backup also.
IMO
BC
PS. One interesting thing is yesterday in one session, using window light and continuous HMI fill, I was kind of at the limit. About 125th of a second at F 3.8 to 4 something at I think 360 iso. The shot looked great but the talent was walking so I got some slight movement blur, not from the camera but the talent.
I pulled out an olympus em-1 at 200 iso, 1/400th amd 500th of a second and f2.8 which was about the same dof as the s2. The Olympus at 1/400th of a second and only being 16 mpx, actually had more detail than the S-1 because it was dead sharp throughout the range.
Pretty crazy that all those megapixels go to waste if there is movement, though the olympus is not as robust and obviously doesn't tether so I went back to the Leica, though I find this interesting.
-
In regards to lenses, I don't have hasselblad but have 35, 45, 55, 80, 140, 210 contax lenses and used all but the 35 and 210. I also have the leica 120 I used extensively, though my two favorite lenses on any camera is the contax 55 and 80.
The focus is medium format focus, matches my contax, or a mamiya or a hasselblad H, except I can manually focus it easier than I can a Mamiya.
Okay, sounds reasonable. The (Phaseone) DF certainly is not an easy manual focus camera – very grainy screen, so it's f11 and intuition or switch to a Canon.
In lightroom I can make a portra look, which to me is slightly flat and less saturated, but that's easy.
Yeah, but I'm talking more about skin tones, great reds and blues and the way a phase file, like a film file, can have a good strong curve and melt away in the highs and lows without blocking up/breaking off. And it does it with ease, not like a Canon file, which seem un-workable under some lighting conditions and usually just look thin and brittle and pinkish. But that's probably a cmos thing, although you keep raving about your Oly's, so maybe it's just a Canon thing.
PS. One interesting thing is yesterday in one session, using window light and continuous HMI fill, I was kind of at the limit. About 125th of a second at F 3.8 to 4 something at I think 360 iso. The shot looked great but the talent was walking so I got some slight movement blur, not from the camera but the talent.
I pulled out an olympus em-1 at 200 iso, 1/400th amd 500th of a second and f2.8 which was about the same dof as the s2. The Olympus at 1/400th of a second and only being 16 mpx, actually had more detail than the S-1 because it was dead sharp throughout the range.
Pretty crazy that all those megapixels go to waste if there is movement, though the olympus is not as robust and obviously doesn't tether so I went back to the Leica, though I find this interesting.
There you go again. Man I'd like to see those files because when I look at om-d files on these forums I just cringe. Bad color and way too much contrast (on the ends of the curve).
Not trying to knock anyone, I just haven't seen anything that I thought was really good.
But I'll be honest, bokeh and high ISO are not high priority for me, so maybe I'm not in the same ballpark as most.
But great color, good highlight and shadow transition – like a good Pentax 67 negative – that's something that would like to see.
Many thanks for the infos.
-
... so it's f11 and intuition or switch to a Canon.
Very good - really good - the best description of DF focus in under 200 words.
The focus is medium format focus, matches my contax, or a mamiya or a hasselblad H, except I can manually focus it easier than I can a Mamiya.
OOC - (out-of-curiosity) - Are you using the standard focusing screen or the split-screen one ?
-
Ne'er a truer word was said in jest :)
Using Canon's files means a constant fight against burn-out or shadow noise.
Canon could learn a lot from Phase's color science, and Phase could learn a lot from Canon's ability to make decent cameras.
Edmund
... a phase file, like a film file, can have a good strong curve and melt away in the highs and lows without blocking up/breaking off.
The (Phaseone) DF certainly is not an easy manual focus camera – very grainy screen, so it's f11 and intuition or switch to a Canon.
-
Okay, sounds reasonable. The (Phaseone) DF certainly is not an easy manual focus camera – very grainy screen, so it's f11 and intuition or switch to a Canon.
So I should go ahead delete the 430 frames I did with the IQ250/DF+ (180 of which were wide open) of the Miami wedding I shot this weekend?
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001377.jpg)
110LS, f/2.8. Autofocus on DF+ set to continuous tracking
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001419.jpg)
110LS, f/2.8. Manual focus on DF+ (AF might have been problematic due to ambient light being strongly backlit - didn't try, just used manual)
-
So I should go ahead delete the 430 frames I did with the IQ250/DF+ (180 of which were wide open) of the Miami wedding I shot this weekend?
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001377.jpg)
Autofocus on DF+ set to continuous tracking
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001419.jpg)
Manual focus on DF+
Doug,
In the right photographer"s hands, any camera is the right camera :)
Edmund
-
Do you think the clients will be able to tell what it's shot on when printed 12x16 on that wrinkly canvas stuff that's all the rage or shared on Facebook?
::)
-
Do you think the clients will be able to tell what it's shot on when printed 12x16 on that wrinkly canvas stuff that's all the rage or shared on Facebook?
::)
Girl looks starry-eyed, guy shell-shocked :)
Neat image.
Edmund
-
My only point being that you can read a lot of very definitive statements like "not an easy manual focus camera... f11... or switch to a Canon." I have no doubt this is 100% true... for the speaker. Whether any such statement is true for *you* I think is much better determined by your own testing than forum posts.
-
My only point being that you can read a lot of very definitive statements like "not an easy manual focus camera... f11... or switch to a Canon." I have no doubt this is 100% true... for the speaker. Whether any such statement is true for *you* I think is much better determined by your own testing than forum posts.
Then equally, by virtue of your own logic, your posts are 100% true for you, but not necessarily for others - jpg's notwithstanding.
Doug, in all honesty, I think you're over-reacting. It was a humorous quip and IMO quite amusing too. I don't believe anyone with a modicum of logic, would have interpreted it as anything else other than that - not even prospective PhaseOne customers !
M
-
Then equally, by virtue of your own logic, your posts are 100% true for you, but not necessarily for others - jpg's notwithstanding.
Absolutely positively. I try very hard to not assume my experiences will translate to someone else's. Especially given my inherent bias (even if you fight hard to keep perspective you can never entirely eliminate your own bias).
Everyone must find their own truth and in my experience only one's own testing can do that.
-
Okay, sounds reasonable. The (Phaseone) DF certainly is not an easy manual focus camera – very grainy screen, so it's f11 and intuition or switch to a Canon.
I just reviewed yesterday's shoot. Mostly in focus some out, 1/2 manual focus. Last shot had huge backlight, with only and slight led fill and I'm talking all white window, white props so maybe 7 stops difference at least. Hit manual focus on 80% or so of the images and this is a very quick moving model, even in a stationary postion.
Yeah, but I'm talking more about skin tones, great reds and blues and the way a phase file, like a film file, can have a good strong curve and melt away in the highs and lows without blocking up/breaking off. And it does it with ease, not like a Canon file, which seem un-workable under some lighting conditions and usually just look thin and brittle and pinkish. But that's probably a cmos thing, although you keep raving about your Oly's, so maybe it's just a Canon thing.
I'm with you on skin tones, hate that orange look, or bright reds and blotches. Right now i'm working a lot of cool skin look.
I could get close in lightroom to show the effect we'd present. Not 100% because for these images it will take some special post work, but I like lightroom for a quick effect. C-1 is excellent tethering software, fast and not as moveable as lightroom.
The Leica file and my p30 file are almost identical in sharpness and depth. Not thin brittle or pinkish, though I do set my own calibration per talent so I guess that a lot to do with the processor.
The olympus, I have set very flat by moving the in camera curves. The 43 files are good have more latitude than my 1dx but they're not as deep as a leica file.
I'll have to admit the p30 as old as it is holds up and holds up well. Great back with the Contax, but not near as fast or as easy as the leica. We set it up on a second station, but finally just tuned it off because the Leica was stable and that dslr format is just faster and easier for me. I love my contax, they work great but they're slower and though they tether much faster in c-1 than lightroom, I have more disconnect errors, probably due to the back and camera having different power sources (that's just a guess) where the leica is an all in one item. The leica has one of the world's great tethering cords in the way it semi locks to the camera. I can't say enough about the stability and the accuracy of the ground glass to the sensor
Though early last year I did a quick test with the h5d 40 and thought those were the nicest skin tones out of the can without adjustment, but I didn't want to go to the cost of switching lenses, bodies, backs, complete platforms including backups. That would have ben over $50,000. The leica let me keep my Contax and lenses all in one case for much much less.
Who would have thought a leica would be less money than a phase of a hasselblad?
There you go again. Man I'd like to see those files because when I look at om-d files on these forums I just cringe. Bad color and way too much contrast (on the ends of the curve).
Not trying to knock anyone, I just haven't seen anything that I thought was really good.
But I'll be honest, bokeh and high ISO are not high priority for me, so maybe I'm not in the same ballpark as most.
But great color, good highlight and shadow transition – like a good Pentax 67 negative – that's something that would like to see.
Many thanks for the infos.
Your welcome.
Yea most 4/3 samples I've seen are not uh really good, but you have to learn to set the camera up. It takes a long time to learn the menu, once done your usually done.
Once again the only drawback on the olympus is the em5 has a real pretty film look out of camera, though the em-1 is more close to my leica files, but the em-1 is a very good camera.
EVF's are a learned taste, but once you get use to them optical finders seem strange, though when I shoot the leica for 5 hours and grab the olympus at first it kind of freaks me out.
If you get one for testing, learn the settings, make a flat film with the curves and really shoot with it. The only problem is it doesn't tether. Man is olympus ever going to hear that message?
I'm not dissing the new phase though, because I really haven't tried it. I just think it's too expensive when compared to comparable brands, but Phase would probably disagree.
A new phase body I would find interesting, though I doubt if I'll buy anything but a second leica for backup in the larger than 35mm world.
My next purchase will be the panasonic gh4 for video and if leica does make a 100mm I'll get one of those.
IMO
BC
-
So I should go ahead delete the 430 frames I did with the IQ250/DF+ (180 of which were wide open) of the Miami wedding I shot this weekend?
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001377.jpg)
110LS, f/2.8. Autofocus on DF+ set to continuous tracking
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/CF001419.jpg)
110LS, f/2.8. Manual focus on DF+ (AF might have been problematic due to ambient light being strongly backlit - didn't try, just used manual)
Nothing is impossible, and you have good flat light, they're walking straight towards you, which let's you anticipate focus (that shot was planned), so yeah, under good circumstances manual focus works. A fast moving model in dim light is a different story, and I would hesitate to manual focus wide open in that situation…but then again, I'm a mere human.
Just to clarify, I wasn't originally referring to manually focusing a staged shot, rather catching a fleeting moment.
-
The Leica file and my p30 file are almost identical in sharpness and depth. Not thin brittle or pinkish, though I do set my own calibration per talent so I guess that a lot to do with the processor.
I know the p30+ file well. Great back(s) (all the + backs) and if those backs had decent screens, I would own one.
The olympus, I have set very flat by moving the in camera curves. The 43 files are good have more latitude than my 1dx but they're not as deep as a leica file.
Just a question, could you get a Fuji NPC (flat and dreamy) look by moving the in camera curves and still shoot raw? Like profiling a raw file?
The leica has one of the world's great tethering cords in the way it semi locks to the camera. I can't say enough about the stability and the accuracy of the ground glass to the sensor
What a silly idea to actually make tether cable lock and put it in a position that doesn't flap in your face all the time… I do admire the sense of humor phase has when it comes to cable ports – the usb3 hole in my IQ back was a great place to store a cigarette for the longest time.
I'm not dissing the new phase though, because I really haven't tried it. I just think it's too expensive when compared to comparable brands, but Phase would probably disagree.
Then you're the only one not dissing it (No need to comment Doug, I'm kidding, kind of…).
It's okay, but it's still a Mamiya 645 at heart. Although I do love the AF/MF ring on the Schneider lenses (Okay, not really part of the Mamiya) – I use that ring constantly.
Do the Leica lenses have manual focus overdrive? I don't remember anymore how switching between af and mf worked on those lenses.
A new phase body I would find interesting, though I doubt if I'll buy anything but a second leica for backup in the larger than 35mm world.
The new Phase body… it's like waiting for the second coming of Christ – we have high hopes, to put it mildly.
I'm pretty sure if Mamiya is involved it's gonna be the Graham Chapman of Messiah's…
-
I know the p30+ file well. Great back(s) (all the + backs) and if those backs had decent screens, I would own one.
Just a question, could you get a Fuji NPC (flat and dreamy) look by moving the in camera curves and still shoot raw? Like profiling a raw file?
What a silly idea to actually make tether cable lock and put it in a position that doesn't flap in your face all the time… I do admire the sense of humor phase has when it comes to cable ports – the usb3 hole in my IQ back was a great place to store a cigarette for the longest time.
Then you're the only one not dissing it (No need to comment Doug, I'm kidding, kind of…).
It's okay, but it's still a Mamiya 645 at heart. Although I do love the AF/MF ring on the Schneider lenses (Okay, not really part of the Mamiya) – I use that ring constantly.
Do the Leica lenses have manual focus overdrive? I don't remember anymore how switching between af and mf worked on those lenses.
The new Phase body… it's like waiting for the second coming of Christ – we have high hopes, to put it mildly.
I'm pretty sure if Mamiya is involved it's gonna be the Graham Chapman of Messiah's…
The p+ backs I have are very good, it's just with a contax, they are a three to four part system. In other words the back, prism, body and lens must have completely clean and secure connections or it will drop off and everyone knows you have to watch firewire because it's fast but also can disconnect slightly and your off. Capture integration has a cable, kind of like the old leaf cable that has fw 400 to 800 connector that works well, but the old Leaf fw 400 cable was the only cable I used that always worked without issue.
Also on my contax all the batteries have to be fully charged and if the body drops off your off, or the back, so you have to keep an eye on both.
Honestly I wasn't going to spend 50 grand on another still camera and if the Leica hadn't accepted all of my contax lenses I would probably have passed. The Zeiss Contax lenses are so well built that they feel the same as when I bought them new and all but two out of the 8 lenses I own are new, so I assume they'll last a long time.
The one leica lens I have, the 120 is very good, to me doesn't look any different than the contax lenses, though to our crew they all said they saw a difference, but who knows? The Leica is a little smoother maybe with less crisp bite than the zeiss, but it's all close in digital.
For manual focus you just set it for manual focus on the back, a two button push and it's fine and easy and you have a button on the back to hit for autofocus if you need it.
The thing is though I like the form factor of a contax with a removable prism, but for some reason it makes me work more static. I can't say why, but it just does, where with the Leica I work more fluid. Probably all in my head, but the Contax I'm much more gentle with the Leica I kind of toss around like a 35mm.
I have only one minor complaint of the leica and it's the f stop wheel on the back. If you push it in it goes to auto and for me I know it but as you know, hand a camera to an assistant to hold and some will hit or change every setting on the camera, but it snaps right back to where you were so it's not a search the menu type of issue.
The leica menu is simple, simple, looks like the p back buttons but easier, as each button moves it to a different section that is fast to access.
The battery on the leica last all day. I have three and we changed it for safety but didn't have to.
As far as color I can make any look I want, though color is very subjective, what looks like Agfa or Fuji to you might look like chrome film to me. What I like about the Leica is it seems less prone to ambient color bounce. I never saw the room syndrome, which means if a room is white or grey then the subject is colorless. Cmos cameras seem to do this a lot where the surrounding colors seem to dominate the scene.
I love that it's a dng file though not all dng's are created equal and it works in lightroom and iridient very well, so I'm pretty much covered before I go to photoshop.
C1 is great tethering software and fast but I stay on 7 as c1 7 requires newer computers with newer graphics cards. I have some, but since I have three locations and I don't know about 12 computers I run, I just don't want to start tossing out computers because of file formats and software requirements so for the Contax I stay with c1 6 and if I want an effected look like I shot Saturday, I tether through c-1 but run a hot folder to lightroom anyway, so working a with lightroom doesn't bother me, though the images come into lightroom in bursts if your running corrections so you have to get use to it.
The clients at first said it was slow but then everyone got use to it and honestly I don't like people seeing every frame before I get a session partially started because you start getting direction saying now move this, move that before you ever get started.
The thing I found most amazing was how the contax lenses were all in focus with the leica with their adapter and worked natively. I found that pretty amazing as I'm usually not a fan of adapters, but for safety I bought two and there wasn't an issue or even a thought about it.
IMO
BC
Just a note. Bottom line to me was I wanted a ccd camera for some still work, didn't want to go the 50 grand route of changing everything I own and the leica is kind of a modern version of the contax, though still kind of old school.
It tethered, it works, it was stable in a very brutal week so I have no complaints. Would I like some things faster, sure, but overall it's fine, the price is good, I shot the gigs, the check will clear and not to buy into brand bling, but it has a nice feel to it, nicer than any camera I own except probably my m8 and my olympus.
Now truth be told, if the olympus would tether and maybe was a little larger format, I'd probably never have thought of the leica, but it doesn't it won't, probably never will and in all honesty professional production usually requires robust equipment.
Note 2 and this is a wish not a reality. If Sony would have made the a7/R with a full set of fast lenses, a reasonable tethering option, the full frame autofocus of the olympus and panasonic, a touch screen like the panasonic for pulling video focus and a module like the gh4 for 10 bit 422 video and true xlr inputs, they would have covered most of my still and video needs. But Sony like they only took it part way and I guess that's the way the consumer digital world works.
It's a shame because like someone said the Sony "could" be perceived as a digital back for lenses of all sorts, but they didn't go as far as leica and make the focus as robust and they limited other factors.
I assume to hit certain price points, but with add ons like the gh4 bottom module for video, they could have really had something.
-
"If Sony would have made the a7/R with a full set of fast lenses, a reasonable tethering option"
I downloaded the free sony app and was shooting into capture1 in a few mins. No dropouts or restarts but then I didn't get trigger happy as it was still life and have no idea what the buffer is like.
As for fast lenses well MR Zeiss needs to pull his finger out or it's an adapter and just about any lens ever made.
I'm shooting at a high end watch brand in geneva this week (think $400,000 timepieces) and have to shoot some diamond setters/watchmakers with available light and am tempted to try the focus peaking and focus manually. It will either work famously or I'll be reaching for the 5DIII which I trust to nail it 99% of the time at 2:8 to 4:0
-
s finger out or it's an adapter and
I downloaded the free sony app and was shooting into capture1 in a few mins.
[...]
have to shoot some diamond setters/watchmakers with available light and am tempted to try the focus peaking and focus manually. It will either work famously or I'll be reaching for the 5DIII which I trust to nail it 99% of the time at 2:8 to 4:0
Try it and you won't go back for anything (at least not when it comes to manual focus). For 'critical focus' I would still trust the enlarged 'live view' first but the 'fp' is a great visual confirmation.
The other plus (never realised until I played with it) is that with wide-angles it's a great aid for 'seeing' dof in real time - particularly in street/candid shooting. Curious to see if it helps you when your shooting those Patek's.
BTW, isn't it customary for them to give one to the photographer as a 'thank-you' present ? [LHQ]
-
Try it and you won't go back for anything (at least not when it comes to manual focus). For 'critical focus' I would still trust the enlarged 'live view' first but the 'fp' is a great visual confirmation.
The other plus (never realised until I played with it) is that with wide-angles it's a great aid for 'seeing' dof in real time - particularly in street/candid shooting. Curious to see if it helps you when your shooting those Patek's.
BTW, isn't it customary for them to give one to the photographer as a 'thank-you' present ? [LHQ]
This probably doesn't matter to most, but to me the only reason to have a mirrorless camera is for the video functions. Without robust video optical finders are fine, because mirrorless still has some slight lag for still viewing and burns through batteries faster.
The upside is focusing is wysiwyg along with tone and color settings.
Let's face it, most people went to the A7r because canon didn't have a 35mpx still camera and they owned canon lenses.
The thing that drives people nuts about Sony (especially in video/motion cameras) is they're always all over the place.
Panasonic is on the right track (sort of) with video offering a 4k camera and if you want to spend the money you get a module for 4:2:2 non compressed and xlr inputs. That's a hell of a deal for a $3500 system.
It's just panasonic doesn't seem concerned with stills and their parallel brother in m43 Olympus doesn't seem to care about motion, so it takes twice the bodies to handle two functions.
Sony could have covered it all had the A7 had full autofocus across the complete frame (see olympus and panasonic), offered in camera stabilization (see olympus) better video (see panasonic) and adapters that let Canon and other autofocus lenses work as well as they do on their native systems (see Leica).
But they didn't and though I tested the s__t out of the A7, (not the R) I couldn't get as good a still image as my olympus em-1, didn't have the same functions, focus as fast and quite frankly for people and moving objects offer as sharp an image.
Though we all work differently, but Sony really has a chance to make that system killer rather than limited and the video on the A7 and A7R is limited.
This is just a guess, but I assume that Sony want's to move you to the next higher priced product (can't blame them for that), but when you know that what you buying is only a few firmware tweeks, or added module away from what you really need it's kind of frustrating.
For photographers that shoot static objects in still images, want 35mpx and want to continue with their Canon glass, the A7R is fine, but it didn't hit the marks for what I needed.
I'm all for buying what I need and it was the A7R that moved me to the Leica. For the price of an A7R and some Sony zeiss lenses I could buy a Leica and use my contax lenses so I kind of went Leica, sony, leica sony, uhhhh . . . Leica, especially since I had video covered with the RED's and the Panasonics.
IMO
BC
-
It's a great camera in its own little niche though flawed, but then you can say that about most cameras :)
I doubt sony expected many canon users to dip a toe in their brand with the A7r though and that wouldn't have happened without metabones help.
Leica did the smart thing with their lens adapters.
-
Leica did the smart thing with their lens adapters.
I agree completely. The adapters allow photographers to dip a toe into Leica's S pool without buying into a full system & extend the capabilities of their existing lenses, then once the S body is in the hands of photographers the door is open to lens sales. The adapters were a very smart move IMHO.
-
Nothing is impossible, and you have good flat light, they're walking straight towards you, which let's you anticipate focus (that shot was planned), so yeah, under good circumstances manual focus works. A fast moving model in dim light is a different story, and I would hesitate to manual focus wide open in that situation…but then again, I'm a mere human.
Just to clarify, I wasn't originally referring to manually focusing a staged shot, rather catching a fleeting moment.
The walking shot was AF and flat low lighting is not ideal for that. The shot of them kissing was strongly backlit, not ideal for MF. But yes, both of those were on the easy end of the range of situations I shoot in at a wedding - the two I shared were just the more pretty of the images I shot.
I have plenty of spontaneous moments shot with MF as well...
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-1.jpg)
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-2.jpg)
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-3.jpg)
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-4.jpg)
(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-5.jpg)(https://digitaltransitions.com/images/upload/dep/iq250-wedding/wedding-6.jpg)
Again, don't get me wrong. For very fast moving or very low light a dSLR is the only way to go. The dark-reception-flower-toss demands fast fps, fast AF, and excellent low ISO capabilities - excellent ettl flash helps too. Phase/Hassy/Pentax/Leica et al aren't fast-action or low-light cameras. But your statement that you can't focus manually without using f/11 does not match my personal experience.
-
BC,
In short, from your post above, there's not much, if anything, that we disagree on.
I'm all for buying what I need and it was the A7R that moved me to the Leica. For the price of an A7R and some Sony zeiss lenses I could buy a Leica and use my contax lenses so I kind of went Leica, sony, leica sony, uhhhh . . .
The reasons you gave for choosing Leica are those that moved me to Sony ( though I had to think about it because of the shutter jitter bs) but in the end pulled the plug . We've discussed this before, you're pro , I'm talking as an amateur, but within those two very distinct disciplines, there is one undeniable factor in common – interoperability.
Your main reason for going Leica, as you said above, were for the adaptability of your lens set – the very reason that I went Sony. The M8 was the last Leica, but now most of the lenses are on the Fuji/Sony combination.
Your criticisms of the Sony are right – they don't have the Leica / Olympus DNA – yet. Plus their habit of killing a promising yet 'never-quite-right' product line is almost legendary. But they broke the 35mm FF Canon/Nikon lens stranglehold and in the end if it falls, it's just one body not a whole lens set.
Back to the Leica S . With a new S just a few months away, Leica have a real chance to establish themselves as a major player in the MF field. I just hope they bring Live View and FP to the new CMOS sensor and don't blow the opportunity to become a driving force in the MF market. For sure though, their move to bring legacy glass compatibility to the S was a ground breaking move. Interesting times.
All best,
M
-
I'm still laughing about the fact that Phase One's predatory pricing, thrifty body revisions and sense of entitlement have turned Leica into a value-based medium format competitor.
What kills me in Cooter's report are the details, Leica batteries which last and last, the Leica lens adapters, or the Leica tethering cable that doesn't shake loose, or the Leica software which actually does what it says on the box. It's not rocket science, it's solid detail work.
Nobody gets the small stuff right by accident. That's what Apple has been teaching the phone industry.
The guys at Wetzlar must be rolling around their brand new carpeting and laughing, laughing, laughing ...
Edmund
PS. I'm getting the boards for my open source camera designed and made in Germany - if I ever get to that stage.
-
I love that it's a dng file though not all dng's are created equal and it works in lightroom and iridient very well, so I'm pretty much covered before I go to photoshop.
It might be too early to answer this question but how does Iridient compare to LightRoom?
I use Iridient for Fuji (X-Pro1/X-T1/X100s) and also started using it for Leica M.
Iridient does precisely what I want it to do, i.e.. produce a malleable file that can be further processed in PhotoShop.
Although C1 is very good I don't need most of its complexity and I loathe that it is so resource hungry.
I always thought that LightRoom was the only way for Leica S… Being able to use Iridient would be a big plus.
-
I find it funny how Leica's ability to use legacy lenses from other formats as a "Cheap way to build a kit" is seen as something new.
I bought an entire set of perfectly usable Mamiya lenses (Ultrawide, short tele, long tele) for use on my kit for USD 1,400. That's less than what a Single Hasselblad H or Contax lens is going for these days.
No adapter needed too.
-
Your (BC's, that is) criticisms of the Sony are right – they don't have the Leica / Olympus DNA – yet. Plus their habit of killing a promising yet 'never-quite-right' product line is almost legendary. But they broke the 35mm FF Canon/Nikon lens stranglehold and in the end if it falls, it's just one body not a whole lens set.
Yeah. I see the Sony as a "legacy" lens platform that also features some native lenses. It's high-quality crack for a lens geek like me...I've lost lots of time over the past 2+ months having fun with it. OTOH I'm out & about doing actual photography at the moment, and I've got my Olympus E-M1 & E-M5 with me plus a handful of lovely Oly lenses. I just trust the m43 gear more to do the job (and in some cases actually allow things I couldn't otherwise do).
Now if Sony pulled a Leica and came out with their own full-featured EF- & F-mount adapters I suspect they'd really kick off some camera industry gravitational wave action. (Sorry, couldn't resist that. It's been quite a day in the astrophysics world!)
-Dave-
-
The Leica is old school. It's a ovf, big lens, big sensor slower camera with one focus point.
Though in actuality it's smaller than my 1 series Canons, and kind of feels the same, except I can manually focus.
The Sony is new school and . . . which has it's pluses and minuses. If Sony wanted to it would have all pluses.
I never said the contax lenses were cheap, they weren't but I owned them so it was an easy move for me. I never thought the Leica was better or worse than a phase or hasselblad, or anything for that matter, just different and well built. I like it, but hey I shot some pretty stuff lately so I always like a camera if I shoot pretty stuff.
I think those older Mamiya lenses are sharp, I never liked the build quality of some of them, except for the 300 2.8 which was magic if used right.
Iridient (sp?) is great, but I haven't done anything with the Leica files in it yet. We've just returned from traveling so I'll see more in the next few days.
But I do know that I won't spend 50 grand on a still camera or any camera again unless it's an arriflex so I'm not the right guy to talk to about 50 grand cameras.
But I gotta give credit to Doug. Not just shooting a wedding with a medium format camera, but shooting a wedding period. Man that's brave cause the only way I could do that is if witness protection moved me to New Mexico and told me to start over.
IMO
BC
-
The Sony is new school and . . . which has it's pluses and minuses. If Sony wanted to it would have all pluses.
IMO
BC
I think the Sony could be much better still if someone could redo the firmware like people redid the 5DII and III with Magic Lantern. That sensor might profit from some cleaner (non delta) encoding of still images and from tricks to extract higher DR. Also, the menus could probably be improved. Hint - Sony- hint ... why not allow an open source firmware project to take hold ?
Edmund
-
I never said the contax lenses were cheap, they weren't but I owned them so it was an easy move for me. I never thought the Leica was better or worse than a phase or hasselblad, or anything for that matter, just different and well built. I like it, but hey I shot some pretty stuff lately so I always like a camera if I shoot pretty stuff.
I think those older Mamiya lenses are sharp, I never liked the build quality of some of them, except for the 300 2.8 which was magic if used right.
Wasn't aimed at you per se, I understand that it makes perfect business sense for you to get a system that will allow you to work with your existing Contax lenses.
But the general sentiment in the forum regarding this topic is that Leica has done something unprecedented, which simply isn't true. One of the main reasons I went with Phamiya (And Nikon when I moved to 35mm digital) is the ability to use legacy AF lenses for not much.
The old Mamiya lenses (Except the 35, which is built like a tank) are plasticky, but not much unlike a Modern Nikon G prime. The 210mm I have is as sharp as the 80mm Schneider LS, which is impressive in my books.
-
I find it funny how Leica's ability to use legacy lenses from other formats as a "Cheap way to build a kit" is seen as something new.
I bought an entire set of perfectly usable Mamiya lenses (Ultrawide, short tele, long tele) for use on my kit for USD 1,400. That's less than what a Single Hasselblad H or Contax lens is going for these days.
No adapter needed too.
There is a difference between allowing the use of a different brand of lenses and having a bunch of legacy glass that comes with your legacy body. In the first case it is a conscious decision to make your camera more attractive by increasing the number of available lenses, the second is just the result of having a legacy lens mount on your camera. It might not be an entirely new idea, but I think for Leica it was a very clever move as it may convince photographers to go with Leica even when they are not happy with the Leica lens selection (this is less of a problem for Mamiya). The downside is that they are creating competition for their own lenses, of course, but it also creates a signal that they believe their own lenses to be superior.
-
Just to be clear, this is not meant to imply the superiority of any MF or non-MF camera system. I have no horse in that race.
-
I guess with Leica the thought is to move bodies and put people in their cars, I mean cameras and get people out there actually producing work with their cameras.
Then like me you go hmm, I'd like an autofocus 120, you buy it, then you go hmm, I'd like an 70 with a leaf shutter and you . . .
well you get the idea.
IMO
BC
-
Precisely. And I think it is a very clever move.
Martin
-
General sentiment on the forum is, I believe that people liked the Hassy square format and regret it. Gimme back my square!
:)
Edmund
Wasn't aimed at you per se, I understand that it makes perfect business sense for you to get a system that will allow you to work with your existing Contax lenses.
But the general sentiment in the forum regarding this topic is that Leica has done something unprecedented, which simply isn't true. One of the main reasons I went with Phamiya (And Nikon when I moved to 35mm digital) is the ability to use legacy AF lenses for not much.
The old Mamiya lenses (Except the 35, which is built like a tank) are plasticky, but not much unlike a Modern Nikon G prime. The 210mm I have is as sharp as the 80mm Schneider LS, which is impressive in my books.
-
Not to belabor the subject, but buying the S2 . . . wasn't a business move, it was a ME move.
I've got cameras and honestly a client will accept a 1dx file just like a medium format file. I see a difference . . . maybe a few clients say they do, but once production starts everybody forgets if your shooting with a RED and Arri a Phase, A Canon or a Nikon.
Actually the D800 is probably the most cost efficient camera made, but It wasn't for me and i can't explain why.
The last two years we've busted tail and worked a billion hours shooting combination still and motion projects where the motion is more important than the stills. I like motion, have learned volumes, love it when I have time to work a concept, script and not have to shoot a billion setups a day, but in my heart and soul I'll always be a photographer.
I had a 1 day break last November, went to the Mayfair store in London and for the first time held a Leica S or S2 and It felt nice. Almost bought it there, but I deal with Steve at CI and I knew he'd be the go to guy for my type of craziness and he was, found me what I wanted and life went on.
But the Leica was for me and my producer/stylist partner who loves fashion, loves stills and loves pretty work. She loves the leica gallery in NY, she loves the look of the leica camera and she likes what we shot. The problem is I really like shooting stills with it. This week we also had to shoot some motion (I hate the term video) and it's wasn't priority but it was important and honestly for the first time in two years I didn't want to shoot the motion, I just wanted to keep shooting stills, so yes, the Leica was for us.
It was fun to go back and manually focus, not see a lcd viewfinder, put on a big lens that wasn't a PL and required a focus puller.
And I'll say this again. I'm not comparing it to anything I don't own. I love the look of the hasselblad h5d 40 and the file it produces, I respect the sturdiness of the Phase backs and dig my old Contax, but . . . so maybe it was a business decision, but honestly it probably was just because sometimes you have to enjoy life.
IMO
BC
P.S. I really don't want square. It sounds like a good idea, but clients crop and move stuff around too much anyway. I really don't want to see a planned vertical turned into a cropped horizontal or the opposite.
-
But your statement that you can't focus manually without using f/11 does not match my personal experience.
No need to split hairs here because we're totally different in what we do and how we do it, but I said "anything is possible".
The Intuition remark I stand by, because I'm talking about *me*, not you.
I'll rephrase: I have no desire to manual focus, wide open on a grainy focusing screen with a peeping red dot, when a client is on set, with the main objective of not getting fisted for working with a photographer that's more interested in bragging rights than getting the job done. I'm not afraid to try and get interesting shots, but the p1 cam sucks at manual focussing, IMO.
The screen is too grainy to *see* critical focus, that's why they put the peeping red dot in there.
BTW, I do manual focus quite a bit, but I choose to do it with some DOF with the p1, or with a Pentax 67II/Mamiya RZ which were designed for it and give a better look for that kind of stuff.
-
I guess with Leica the thought is to move bodies and put people in their cars, I mean cameras and get people out there actually producing work with their cameras.
Then like me you go hmm, I'd like an autofocus 120, you buy it, then you go hmm, I'd like an 70 with a leaf shutter and you . . .
well you get the idea.
IMO
BC
Interesting side note on Leica's thought process: I know several fashion photographers here in Europe that use Leica S cams for commissioned work.
http://s-league.net/ceemes/en/home.html
The way it works: Leica will loan you an S system (Cam, lens, batteries, etc.) for a job, for free, if you credit them (you have to be a working professional, apply and be accepted). That's quite a statement IMO about how and what a company thinks about photography and who they make their equipment for.
-
phase do something similar, If you are a world renowned trendy NY artist using the medium of photography phase will give you their latest backs/cameras/lenses for free for months at a time. Even if you are rich and famous enough to afford the kit yourself.
(Not rumour or supposition but I signed an NDA so can't name names)
-
phase do something similar, If you are a world renowned trendy NY artist using the medium of photography phase will give you their latest backs/cameras/lenses for free for months at a time. Even if you are rich and famous enough to afford the kit yourself.
(Not rumour or supposition but I signed an NDA so can't name names)
World renowned isn't a prerequisite here – just have to be a serious photographer. That website doesn't show everything, I know several photographers who have used the S for all kinds of projects.
p.s.: not trying to promote Leica here, just wanted to mention it, fwiw…
p.s.p.s.:
actually, you may have misunderstood me. I know all camera companies work with names to promote.
I mentioned this because I know several blokes, just working dudes like me, and they use the S for projects and commissions. Not big dogs in NY/LA/London.
-
But the general sentiment in the forum regarding this topic is that Leica has done something unprecedented, which simply isn't true. One of the main reasons I went with Phamiya (And Nikon when I moved to 35mm digital) is the ability to use legacy AF lenses for not much.
IDK about general sentiment but as far as I'm concerned it isn't that it's a new idea, but that it's a smart idea.
-
smart, crazy, lucky, whatever...it worked.
it took some balls to kill the R system and legacy R lenses and build something new (and 10x more expensive).
afaik there's no thinner line between smart and dead than in the camera making business. ask contax - the smartest/deadest of them all.
-
ask contax
Smart engineers, stupid management.
-
you know briese lighting equipment? i do, the company is in hamburg - i use their studos and i've talked to mr. briese a few times. pretty successful lighting company. world wide.
why? because the guy is a fanatic about lighting equipment. he didn't make that stuff for me or you or mario testino, he made it all for himself. he thought it up and made it because no one else did and he wanted the best light possible.
hensel, profoto, bowens, etc. it's pretty much all the same. and this guy said, bullshit, i can make it 10 times better than this crap. and he did it.
i'm not saying profoto isn't good, i like it and use it. but mr. briese wouldn't use it for lighting his closet.
management? his wife answers the phone when you call. ask her something and she'll say: 'just a second' (covers the phone) "hans werner (that' his name), there's a young man who wants to know..." and then she puts you through to the man.
i think leica has that same dna. they just make seriously good equipment as best they can, because that's what they love to do. period.
p.s.: just to come full circle, with p1 it feels different. They feel more like a tech company. there's a dedication there, but it feels very different. the p1 camera for example, can you imagine a leica logo on it? no way, not good enough. it's not physical perfection. leica is tactile, when you handle one you feel like you're holding something special, and that says a lot to me about a company. i'm not dissing phase, i own their equipment and i enjoy using it. but they need to cut to the chase and make a statement with their next camera. it needs to say "this is as good as it gets" when you pick it up, not "this feels like 2002" wrapped in plastic.
-
Hi,
I would suggest it is both a new idea and a smart idea. The Leica can adapt to both Hasselblad H and Contax lenses with full automatic function. So they deliver a nice body for Contax users like BC and also grant owners a wide selection of lenses, which is especially smart as it seems to take some time for Leica to develop a full line lenses.
For instance, it is not possible to mount a Canon lens on a Nikon, it would not focus at infinity. Leica made the S2 with short enough flange distance so they could adapt a wide set of lenses. A bit of thinking out of the box, and also pretty smart.
Best regards
Erik
IDK about general sentiment but as far as I'm concerned it isn't that it's a new idea, but that it's a smart idea.
-
The strategy obviously works!
Here is another testimony of somebody who switched to Leica keeping his Contax lenses:
http://blog.leica-camera.com/photographers/interviews/mark-mann-creating-timeless-portraiture/
-
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2014/03/credit-for-the-leica-s/?utm_source=20140318en&utm_medium=E-Mail (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2014/03/credit-for-the-leica-s/?utm_source=20140318en&utm_medium=E-Mail)
Could be there's a new Leica S series on the way.
Seems likely.
-
The strategy obviously works!
Here is another testimony of somebody who switched to Leica keeping his Contax lenses:
Leica has been busy on lenses, with a new 45mm and in the cinema world producing PL mounts as faster than most can keep up.
The still lenses aren't crazy priced but they're far from cheap, the movie lenses, well, you need to rent or go into the desert and dig up those 24 bars of gold your grandfather buried in the 70's.
I have a feeling, that Leica is in it for the long haul, but who knows? At least they have weathered the film to digital storm, kept profitable and seem to be interested in new product.
They aren't everyone's cup of tea, but honestly out of the cameras I use and the cameras I enjoy, nothing is more fun than my m-8, nothing to me looks more unique in camera and file, nothing I use could be at times more frustrating.
The m8 compared to the S is like a old restored truck, next to a new Land Rover.
I think Leicas are special and I also think that whether you use a camera for your living or for pleasure, there is nothing wrong with using something that makes you smile.
IMO
BC
-
I think the fact that Leica is offering a $5K rebate for an SLR trade-in (how about an old Pentax film body?) on the updated S is a strong indication something new is in the pipeline. Whether it will use an existing sensor or an entirely new design is the question. Couldn't agree more with BC about the M8.
-
I think the fact that Leica is offering a $5K rebate for an SLR trade-in (how about an old Pentax film body?) on the updated S is a strong indication something new is in the pipeline. Whether it will use an existing sensor or an entirely new design is the question. Couldn't agree more with BC about the M8.
Yeah, their trade in is about as much as the used Pentax digital MF body value. Very fair - ideal for people wanting to sell their Pentax 645D :)
What disturbs me in this discussion is that essentially there is no *technical* difference between the 645D and the S2.
Kudos to Leica for opting out of the huge price cartel and making a camera that works almost like an SLR, but if there is to be hope for MF we still need some more realistically priced options.
Edmund
-
Your right and everyone would like a 645 d or d2 at under 10 grand with a large lens set that didn't give buyers remorse.
The problem is in cameraland, there is always a catch.
The Pentax, good jpegs, great screen, good viewfinder, legacy lenses. Also small buffer, limited and expensive newer lenses, doesn't really tether that well and unless you want to search out older lenses and find the right combination, at the end of the day you don't save huge with Pentax newer lenses. The biggest issue with Pentax is transparency. All of their plans seem to come at a rumor bases.
Last year I spoke to the largest specialty Pentax dealer in the East Coast and he was selling off all his 645's at a discount, saying Pentax will move to full frame 35mm. We'll so far that didn't happen and I don't think Pentax cares that much about professionals. That's kind of a shame because most people rave about the pentax aps cameras, but all of this is just a guess.
I assume they built the 645d for the Japanese market that shoots scenics and flowers and previously did so with film. For them, the 645d was perfect, but it never seemed that Pentax ever planned on making a large worldwide push.
You see this with all makers, searching out that niche that they can exploit. The new phase cmos camera seems to be a push towards wedding and event photographers. Personally I assume that shipped has sailed to high end 35mm cameras, or even the 5d2 set, but Phase is smart and that seems to be a market they found open for medium format, though at $35,000 I have to wonder.
Basically in all things in life, there really is no free lunch.
IMO
BC
-
Yeah, their trade in is about as much as the used Pentax digital MF body value. Very fair - ideal for people wanting to sell their Pentax 645D
The offer is actually for either a MF or SLR . Trade in an old D200 and then sell the Pentax ! Leica may well surprise a lot of people, both on the 'S' front .. and the M.
-
Your right and everyone would like a 645 d or d2 at under 10 grand with a large lens set that didn't give buyers remorse.
The problem is in cameraland, there is always a catch.
The Pentax, good jpegs, great screen, good viewfinder, legacy lenses. Also small buffer, limited and expensive newer lenses, doesn't really tether that well and unless you want to search out older lenses and find the right combination, at the end of the day you don't save huge with Pentax newer lenses. The biggest issue with Pentax is transparency. All of their plans seem to come at a rumor bases.
Last year I spoke to the largest specialty Pentax dealer in the East Coast and he was selling off all his 645's at a discount, saying Pentax will move to full frame 35mm. We'll so far that didn't happen and I don't think Pentax cares that much about professionals. That's kind of a shame because most people rave about the pentax aps cameras, but all of this is just a guess.
I assume they built the 645d for the Japanese market that shoots scenics and flowers and previously did so with film. For them, the 645d was perfect, but it never seemed that Pentax ever planned on making a large worldwide push.
You see this with all makers, searching out that niche that they can exploit. The new phase cmos camera seems to be a push towards wedding and event photographers. Personally I assume that shipped has sailed to high end 35mm cameras, or even the 5d2 set, but Phase is smart and that seems to be a market they found open for medium format, though at $35,000 I have to wonder.
Basically in all things in life, there really is no free lunch.
IMO
BC
J,
Yes, there have been reports that the 645D has had good domestic success; when in Japan, I was very surprised to discover to what extent the japanese are dedicated to photography as a hobby and pastime. There was also a big "marriage" market there for set-piece imagery, as in Korea; this was owned by Fuji who supplied everything from special cameras (think Fuji S5 with the sensor tailored for the highlights in the bride's dress), dyesub printers etc. I don't know who has this market now.
Now, when Phase tries to go into events, I have my doubts - I do know one or two things first hand about that side of photography, and it is all about focus, speed, batteries, card capacity, usable zoom lenses. I believe that in studio shooting -set me right- the comp won't run out of power or storage, you can stop and change lenses if you want to, but in the field after an hour or two every resource you have including your own arm strength is exhausted, every pause eg. to change cards is a lost image, hitting the buffer is a nightmare, often your assistant cannot get to you, you need to move with the crowd, so you're stuck with whatever equipment you have in your hands or hanging off your shoulders. Sure, you can say "I will switch to an SLR for anything unpredictable", but I don't many guys who are willing to pay for Phase, bring Phase to an event, and be happy having to switch to Canon because the stage lighting has cut out.
I know that when I did the fashion shows, big houses like Dior had theatre-grade lighting and choreographed photo positions, the models would strut predictably and hit their marks with the precision of Prussian military and the audience would be photographers, press and trade buyers. But my clients sent me to do the minor shows, eg. houses like Givenchy or couture specialists like Elie Saab or Martin Margiela who do their business in large part with rich individuals. And there improvised lighting, and strange buildings mixed the preparations, proceedings and wind-down into a randomly lit and often quite entertaining teenager's party.
Edmund
-
Hi,
Just to put things into a bit perspective:
China 2 Billion customers
India 1.5 Billion customers and catching up
US 0.3 Billion custumers
EU 0.4 Billion customers
Who do you think matters most?
Of course, there are differences, but I am pretty sure that the centre of gravity in the photographic industry moves to the east.
Best regards
Erik
Your right and everyone would like a 645 d or d2 at under 10 grand with a large lens set that didn't give buyers remorse.
The problem is in cameraland, there is always a catch.
The Pentax, good jpegs, great screen, good viewfinder, legacy lenses. Also small buffer, limited and expensive newer lenses, doesn't really tether that well and unless you want to search out older lenses and find the right combination, at the end of the day you don't save huge with Pentax newer lenses. The biggest issue with Pentax is transparency. All of their plans seem to come at a rumor bases.
Last year I spoke to the largest specialty Pentax dealer in the East Coast and he was selling off all his 645's at a discount, saying Pentax will move to full frame 35mm. We'll so far that didn't happen and I don't think Pentax cares that much about professionals. That's kind of a shame because most people rave about the pentax aps cameras, but all of this is just a guess.
I assume they built the 645d for the Japanese market that shoots scenics and flowers and previously did so with film. For them, the 645d was perfect, but it never seemed that Pentax ever planned on making a large worldwide push.
You see this with all makers, searching out that niche that they can exploit. The new phase cmos camera seems to be a push towards wedding and event photographers. Personally I assume that shipped has sailed to high end 35mm cameras, or even the 5d2 set, but Phase is smart and that seems to be a market they found open for medium format, though at $35,000 I have to wonder.
Basically in all things in life, there really is no free lunch.
IMO
BC
-
What disturbs me in this discussion is that essentially there is no *technical* difference between the 645D and the S2.
As I figure it the lens mount is a big technical difference.
-
Yeah, their trade in is about as much as the used Pentax digital MF body value. Very fair - ideal for people wanting to sell their Pentax 645D :)
What disturbs me in this discussion is that essentially there is no *technical* difference between the 645D and the S2.
Kudos to Leica for opting out of the huge price cartel and making a camera that works almost like an SLR, but if there is to be hope for MF we still need some more realistically priced options.
Edmund
that discount is the same as the deal offered on the credo 40 now. Without any trade ins. Comes with a great lens too.
the aptus II 5 kit has been going for 4 figures for ages now. Again,without trade ins.
I have no problems with leica getting credit for a good marketing move but come on now. Not every other option in the market costs 30grand.
-
Not 30 but 16-17 grand, plus a $100 DLSR for trade-in.
-
I got the Sony 5 inch (diagonal) external viewfinder which I use on my D800E for live view, and manual focusing is a great deal better, in addition, since it mounts on the flash shoe, you can use it for waist level shooting, something I favor in my landscape work.
-
I hate to say it but a rival blog is what made me buy an S2
http://newcameranews.com/2014/03/15/leicanalysis-what-makes-a-leica-photo-special/
See for yourself and tell me your not impressed.
IMO
BC
-
Ha, ha. Too funny.
-
I hate to say it but a rival blog is what made me buy an S2
http://newcameranews.com/2014/03/15/leicanalysis-what-makes-a-leica-photo-special/
See for yourself and tell me your not impressed.
IMO
BC
OK, I'm sold.
Do they accept Amex?
-
Many would say an M8 or M9 is over-priced and under-specified
I read today that it was actually Leica that invented and first patented autofocus… never would have guessed that...
-
Now that's the gnat's nads! Exhibit #1: attached pic of Der Leica für die Menschen.
:D
-Dave-
-
Hi,
Just to put things into a bit perspective:
China 2 Billion customers
India 1.5 Billion customers and catching up
US 0.3 Billion custumers
EU 0.4 Billion customers
Who do you think matters most?
Erik
Don't you need to mix those figures with disposable income to reach a meaningful "customer" number?
-
I read today that it was actually Leica that invented and first patented autofocus… never would have guessed that...
A little dated, as we know now Leica cancelled the R system rather than make an autofocus R, but sheds a little light on the original Leitz AF system:
http://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2012/03/leitz-correfot-autofocus-system.html
-
Yes,
But many Chinese, Indians and Russians are wealthy, and those economies develop at a rapid rate. Also, those markets are less saturated and will stay so for a long time as more and more citisens enter middle class.
GDP in China is third behind USA and EU, right now, they passed Japan three years ago. So China is a bigger market (with regard to purchasing power) than any other country in the world, except the US. India is 4-th, followed by Japan and Germany.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html?countryname=China&countrycode=ch®ionCode=eas&rank=3#ch
India seems to struggle with their economy, but they have great engineers and scientists and sustainable population growth.
If you buy a computer from say Dell, everything in it will come from China, except the hard disk which normally comes from Thailand. And much of the software is written in India.
Best regards
Erik
Don't you need to mix those figures with disposable income to reach a meaningful "customer" number?
-
If you buy a computer from say Dell, everything in it will come from China, except the hard disk which normally comes from Thailand. And much of the software is written in India.
They used to say the Chinese make the computer, and Microsoft make the profit, but I think that is slowly becoming untrue.
Edmund
-
Obviously, it is possible to make a great test without any chart or image. They still have a pie-chart, though.
Best regards
Erik
OK, I'm sold.
Do they accept Amex?
-
Erik, you have much to,learn about humor in the English language.
-
Yes,
But many Chinese, Indians and Russians are wealthy, and those economies develop at a rapid rate. Also, those markets are less saturated and will stay so for a long time as more and more citisens enter middle class.
Erik
But ;D isn't the danger (for the camera makers) the emerging market, which I agree is not DSLR saturated unlike the "developed" west, may miss that DSLR step and go to sophisticated phones for the connectivity? I agree the MFD market potential is there and it may be that niche does better, relatively, than the DSLR makers who have already seen compact sales plummet?
-
Hi,
Preferences in the BRIC countries may be different from the traditional zones of trade, I don't know, but those markets cannot be ignored for sure. Many of the limited edition cameras end up in far east, AFAIK.
I don't think BRIC citizens are less demanding than say US. Phone cameras are limited by lens choices and sensor size. So I guess that sophisticated customers in search of image quality will always demand more complete cameras. But connectivity belongs to any camera.
Just a small example, two years ago I was shooting at Grand Teton National Park and met a young lady from Guangzhou (formerly know as Canton) in China. She worked in the export business, but started her own business to earn money for travel. She needed a camera for shooting her products, so she bought Canon 5DIII and 24-105/4LIS lens. Yes, she had an Iphone, too. Just an example of young people in an expanding economy.
I have seen a note that China sales are above 50% Leica's market, but could not confirm it: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=134367
Best regards
Erik
But ;D isn't the danger (for the camera makers) the emerging market, which I agree is not DSLR saturated unlike the "developed" west, may miss that DSLR step and go to sophisticated phones for the connectivity? I agree the MFD market potential is there and it may be that niche does better, relatively, than the DSLR makers who have already seen compact sales plummet?
-
Post deleted (because of lack of humor)
Edmund
-
FYI, Shooting a commercial production, I've seen a fair amount of moire on lightly ribbed and smooth sweaters.
Not color but color and pattern moire, using the leica 120.
First I freaked, but in lightroom the moire tool worked magic and I really mean magic. I can't believe it could take moire bands out of a ribbed sweater without destroying detail, but it did.
I haven't seen it on 99.% of the project, but obviously if there is something slightly off, that's the image a client selects.
Bottom line it was a 5 minute fix (honestly) and I can't say it was the leica or the 120, I just think it was messing with the camera gods.
Anyway, the camera worked great, still does, no other issues, but make sure you learn the moire tool in lightroom because it's amazing.
IMO
BC
-
Moiré just means your system is sharp. I guess you cannot really unfocus, but you could put something that blurs very slightly in the light path, eg, a filter with enough thumbrints :)
Edmund
FYI, Shooting a commercial production, I've seen a fair amount of moire on lightly ribbed and smooth sweaters.
Not color but color and pattern moire, using the leica 120.
First I freaked, but in lightroom the moire tool worked magic and I really mean magic. I can't believe it could take moire bands out of a ribbed sweater without destroying detail, but it did.
I haven't seen it on 99.% of the project, but obviously if there is something slightly off, that's the image a client selects.
Bottom line it was a 5 minute fix (honestly) and I can't say it was the leica or the 120, I just think it was messing with the camera gods.
Anyway, the camera worked great, still does, no other issues, but make sure you learn the moire tool in lightroom because it's amazing.
IMO
BC
-
Moiré just means your system is sharp. I guess you cannot really unfocus, but you could put something that blurs very slightly in the light path, eg, a filter with enough thumbrints :)
Edmund
Pre Photoshop used to be a smear of Vaseline, Petroleum jelly, on a UV filter, how much depended on the bride ;D
-
I should have named this lightroom is magic, because of the few times I've seen heavy pattern moire it was nearly always on smooth blouse and shirts with a slight pattern like a rib or a very small weave and I've seen it on different cameras from Canon to Leaf to Phase now Leica and if you catch it when shooting (which we normally do) we either pull back a fraction or if possible move in and it usually goes away.
This was an odd example and was very heavy moire in multiple places and angles of the image. Our retoucher wanted a close pose to retouch the effected areas and I just thought I'd try lightroom's moire tool.
I really didn't think it would work and there was some slight softening of the ribs of the top, but very slight. Nothing that anybody would notice, though the pattern moire was gone. Really amazed me and I don't know if it works like this all the time, but . . .
IMO
BC