Leica s2

[tashley]

sorry david, but 20x30 prints with the m8 just do not cut it for serious fine art photographers. maybe if you have not seen what 50mpx can do. the
37mpx of the S2 maybe ok for fashion photographers but people who need to really print big will always look for max res.
peter

I vote otherwise. I know this is a 'how long is a piece of string' topic but many people I know have made and exhibited M8 20 x 30 prints that have knocked our socks off. People started noticing this soon after the camera was released. I also shoot a P45+ on both Phamiya and Cambo cameras and have this past year been using 1DSIII and 5DII and I have a large format printer and have made many, many prints on 24" wide paper from all cameras. At its two lower ISOs the M8 holds up very well at the size you state. Some people go larger with it, I wouldn't.

Have you tried it?

Tim

[markowich]

tim,
sure i have tried it (with the m8, not the m8.2, but that should be the same). for low information content
photography (and i mean here in the sense of information science, i.e. abstracts) 10mpx is ok even for 20x30 prints
but certainly not for landscapes and other sujets where details are important. in my tests the D3x beats m8 prints
easily and, of course, the H3DII 50 beats the D3x. but this is almost a triviality. anyway, i am waiting for my P60
(to be used on alpa) and for the H3DII 60. the gap between the D3x and the real high end stuff is not big enough for
the S2 to fit in, particularly at the price point that is rumored.
peter

I vote otherwise. I know this is a 'how long is a piece of string' topic but many people I know have made and exhibited M8 20 x 30 prints that have knocked our socks off. People started noticing this soon after the camera was released. I also shoot a P45+ on both Phamiya and Cambo cameras and have this past year been using 1DSIII and 5DII and I have a large format printer and have made many, many prints on 24" wide paper from all cameras. At its two lower ISOs the M8 holds up very well at the size you state. Some people go larger with it, I wouldn't.

Have you tried it?

Tim

[tashley]

tim,
sure i have tried it (with the m8, not the m8.2, but that should be the same). for low information content
photography (and i mean here in the sense of information science, i.e. abstracts) 10mpx is ok even for 20x30 prints
but certainly not for landscapes and other sujets where details are important. in my tests the D3x beats m8 prints
easily and, of course, the H3DII 50 beats the D3x. but this is almost a triviality. anyway, i am waiting for my P60
(to be used on alpa) and for the H3DII 60. the gap between the D3x and the real high end stuff is not big enough for
the S2 to fit in, particularly at the price point that is rumored.
peter

Fair enough! I haven't used a D3X but if have sort of decided that if I don't like the S2 and Nikon does a sort of 5DII version of the D3X then I'll maybe switch. I am so fed up with poor Canon AF and their AA filter is like fog but the D3X is just so much bigger and heavier than it needs to be!

[markowich]

Fair enough! I haven't used a D3X but if have sort of decided that if I don't like the S2 and Nikon does a sort of 5DII version of the D3X then I'll maybe switch. I am so fed up with poor Canon AF and their AA filter is like fog but the D3X is just so much bigger and heavier than it needs to be!

i agree. also i dislike canon's wide angles. mush in the corners. i haven't tried the new TSE lenses but the others are inferior to nikon's top
offerings...IMHO.
peter

[Carsten W]

the gap between the D3x and the real high end stuff is not big enough for
the S2 to fit in, particularly at the price point that is rumored.

... considering only resolution and not other factors, yes, I would agree. However, the S2 has enough of a resolution advantage over the D3x for it to be a worthwhile step, for someone who is not even considering a traditional MF solution, for whatever reasons. I see the gap, and I am optimistic that Leica has judged correctly that they can sell 1000 cameras a year in that niche. In two months we will start to see what really happens.

[Carsten W]

Fair enough! I haven't used a D3X but if have sort of decided that if I don't like the S2 and Nikon does a sort of 5DII version of the D3X then I'll maybe switch. I am so fed up with poor Canon AF and their AA filter is like fog but the D3X is just so much bigger and heavier than it needs to be!

Tim, definitely test a D3x/D700x before buying. I know people who cannot put their finger on exactly what the problem is, but just don't get excited about the results. It is no MF or Leica replacement.

[tashley]

Tim, definitely test a D3x/D700x before buying. I know people who cannot put their finger on exactly what the problem is, but just don't get excited about the results. It is no MF or Leica replacement.

I have heard similar from some people - and some just hate the colours. I would try before buying for sure but I have so often found that file quality is something you judge over a really long series of images. Grrr, it's complicated isn't it?! I just want to take great shots and make lovely prints....

[rethmeier]

I went from MFDB to the D3x and I'm happy to say it does the(my) job.
Of course an arTec with HR's and a MFDB back would,could(should) give me better files.
However the Nikon works for me at the moment and compared the Canon counter parts,I believe the D3x suits me better.

The S2 is not interesting for me,because there are no shift lenses(yet)

Best,
Willem.

[mcfoto]

The S2 I just don't see it. First of all the chip size sits in the middle (30x45mm)  plus they use a CCD chip ( forget the high iso). Then they are not using Phase One C1, another dumb move. Then the price which seems to be on the high ground & why would you switch from MFD to a smaller chip size? Finally Leica does not have HDV like the Canon 5DII @ $2500 USD.
Denis

[tashley]

The S2 I just don't see it. First of all the chip size sits in the middle (30x45mm)  plus they use a CCD chip ( forget the high iso). Then they are not using Phase One C1, another dumb move. Then the price which seems to be on the high ground & why would you switch from MFD to a smaller chip size? Finally Leica does not have HDV like the Canon 5DII @ $2500 USD.
Denis

Most of the MFDB chip sizes are less than full format, they vary in size and the smaller ones are a similar size to the one you'll get on the S2. There's no 'right' or 'wrong' chip size, only resolution, low noise, colour fidelity, tonal accuracy and dynamic range. Also AFAIK the S2 will be supported by C1. Why would Phase One leave it out? They make a RAW converter that they sell as being a general, not a Phase-specific, solution. Also, I love the video on my 5DII but a lot of people don't use or need it.

[hubell]

Also AFAIK the S2 will be supported by C1. Why would Phase One leave it out? They make a RAW converter that they sell as being a general, not a Phase-specific, solution.

Why? For the same reason they have left out Hasselblad, Leaf and Sinar raw files. They don't want to do anything that would help direct competitors to their digital backs. I can (almost) guarantee it. Of course, if I am wrong, the Capture Integration team can jump in here.

[Doug Peterson]

Why? For the same reason they have left out Hasselblad, Leaf and Sinar raw files. They don't want to do anything that would help direct competitors to their digital backs. I can (almost) guarantee it. Of course, if I am wrong, the Capture Integration team can jump in here.

Guess we'll see at the time of release.

Without a dedicated raw processor fine tuned to the camera the S2 would be missing a VITAL link in the image quality chain. Phase One gained half a stop of dynamic range, significant micro-detail, and much more aesthetic grain/noise going from C13 to C14 (which is in turn much better than LR for the same IQ issues). Leica makes a huge deal in their marketing about their attention to detail on every minute aspect of quality (e.g. taking the IR filter into account in the optic path design of the lens for the microscopic impact that has on actual image quality). Leaving out dedicated raw processing would be akin to making the high-end racing car and filling it with low-octane fuel (sure it would out-do a Ford, but it would defeat the purpose of ultra-fine-tuning everything else).

[gwhitf]

Why? For the same reason they have left out Hasselblad, Leaf and Sinar raw files. They don't want to do anything that would help direct competitors to their digital backs. I can (almost) guarantee it. Of course, if I am wrong, the Capture Integration team can jump in here.

I agree, Howard. I'd say, after what we've seen with Hasselblad's historic moves, and the fade away of other companies in MF, I'd certainly not want to buy a camera that did not control EVERY facet of their product. I'd not want to buy something, if their software was dependent on another company.

I wouldn't blame Phase one bit if they sealed off Leica and any other MF camera from their software. This is business; this is about survival; this is not socialism; this is not about "playing fair".

Why couldn't Leica kidnap that Raw Developer guy, and force him to design killer software for their S2? Whatever the case, Leica needs to come to market with fully-owned solution. Imagine buying (investing) in that camera, and then having the software taken away...

[sdai]

This thread is full of ill-informed hearsay and wishful thinkings.

So far, there're several things clear about the S2:

1. There's no word whether the Kodak sensor supports pixel binning or not, how do they get usable ISO1600? I don't know. Plus, pixel binning needs specific software support such as C1.

2. Phase One scrapped the deal with Leica and chances are there'll be no C1 support for the S2.

3. The 6 micron Kodak sensor only has 70db S/N while the DALSA 6 micron sensor has 74db, a difference of 2/3 stops in DR.

4. S2 only uses 14 bit A/D while all MFDBs run at 16 bit.

There's no point to argue about rumors.

[dfarkas]

This thread is full of ill-informed hearsay and wishful thinkings.

So far, there're several things clear about the S2:

1. There's no word whether the Kodak sensor supports pixel binning or not, how do they get usable ISO1600? I don't know. Plus, pixel binning needs specific software support such as C1.

The S2 product managers said it will have pixel binning, long before Phase was even "involved." Why would they put it in firmware if the camera wasn't designed to do it? We will have to see how it is ultimately implemented. Also, I was assured that binning would result in 1-2 stops extra ISO range.

2. Phase One scrapped the deal with Leica and chances are there'll be no C1 support for the S2.

Are you sure it wasn't the other way around? The "strategic alliance" was announced on Sept. 22. By Sept. 23, Leica management was already having fits over Phase's PR efforts. By March, the writing was already on the wall and there was serious discussion of going in a different direction. Phase can choose to spin this anyway they want, but the reality is that this ended from both sides. There was a real concern at Leica that Phase would somehow deliver less than optimal conversions for S2 files through C1, now that the S2 is a viewed as a direct competitor (and, belive me, Phase does view the S2 as competition).

Hasselblad has no C1 support either. And anyone who trudged through Flexcolor, waiting for Phocus to be released, will tell you that sometimes in-house s/w isn't the best. If I can pop my files into LR and have a smooth, seemless workflow, all the better. I like C1, but the more I use LR, the more advantages I'm seeing. Things like localized adjustments, masking, dust spotting, etc. keep me out of Photoshop and allow me to keep all edits in RAW and non-destructive. Adobe will not stop their pace of development. LR will continue to get better, faster, and more full featured. Also, digital asset management and tight integration with web and print, as well as the entire CS4 collection make LR a pretty strong contender.

3. The 6 micron Kodak sensor only has 70db S/N while the DALSA 6 micron sensor has 74db, a difference of 2/3 stops in DR.

Let's see what the acutal resutls show. The sensor S/N numbers are one peice of the puzzle. A->D conversion also plays a large role here. According to Leica, they have one of the most efficent and clean A->D converters. A system is indeed a sum of its parts.

4. S2 only uses 14 bit A/D while all MFDBs run at 16 bit.

One, this fact has been debated ad naseum. Many BDs claim to be 16-bit, but are actually 14-bit. Two, If the sensors are only capable of using 12-14 bits of data due to a 12-stop DR, will there be a tangible and visible difference in IQ or file plasticity? Again, we will see.

There's no point to argue about rumors.

I agree with you here. I've made it my goal to stick to facts that I have learned directly from the S2 product managers. Rumors and misinformation help no one.

David

[hubell]

Guess we'll see at the time of release.

Without a dedicated raw processor fine tuned to the camera the S2 would be missing a VITAL link in the image quality chain. Phase One gained half a stop of dynamic range, significant micro-detail, and much more aesthetic grain/noise going from C13 to C14 (which is in turn much better than LR for the same IQ issues). Leica makes a huge deal in their marketing about their attention to detail on every minute aspect of quality (e.g. taking the IR filter into account in the optic path design of the lens for the microscopic impact that has on actual image quality). Leaving out dedicated raw processing would be akin to making the high-end racing car and filling it with low-octane fuel (sure it would out-do a Ford, but it would defeat the purpose of ultra-fine-tuning everything else).

Strange, I have not seen any caveats in the advertising for Capture One as a raw converter for Canon and Nikon that, if you really care about maximizing image quality, you should use the Canon or Nikon raw conversion software and NOT Capture One.

[bcooter]

I agree with you here. I've made it my goal to stick to facts that I have learned directly from the S2 product managers. Rumors and misinformation help no one.

David

David,

You know more about the actual facts on the Lecia than I guess anyone, but from the buyer POV the facts haven't changed, the market has.

Nothing makes logical sense in the digital camera world and I'm including Nikon,  Canon  and Sony in on this also.

Canon sells a 5d2 that has twice the features of their 1ds3 for 1/2 to 1/3 the price and I think even Canon was caught by surprise about how much the market wanted a camera like the 5d2.

You know Nikon will follow suit with a d700x or 7000x, or D7,000,000x or whatever they seem to name cameras and if Leica never comes out with software other than a 30% discount on Lightroom, it will still be 5 times easier to use than Nikon's NIK software, which has to be the most insane interface ever devised.

Sony, they must have a board room made out of sand to stick their heads into during a meeting  because even though they almost invented video their top of the line still camera doesn't offer live view, much less video capture.  It's like they just kind of forgot that they knew how to do it.

The "fact" that the Leica is a revelation in the world of medium format just because it has a readable lcd and produces an in camera jpeg kind of shows you have far behind mfd is.

Still, I guess this Leica camera suits some people's needs (actually their wants), but I wonder who the market is, because if it's professionals they better get them into rentals way before they sell the first lens or body to a single user.  (See the professional success of the AFI, HY6 for reference).

They also better have a better repair system than they offer for the M8 because waiting 3 months for a lens to be returned still out of focus isn't gonna cut it in today's world, cause today's world is a ball buster of get it done now.

If I was Leica, I wouldn't mention the M-8 because as much as I love that camera, I wouldn't stake my career on it, not unless I had a dozen of them in backup.  

I'd like to see this thing  succeed, heck I'd like to see it succeed at a price point of $25,000 because then the economy has truly turned around.

Until then time will tell, but there is this ceiling that still only digital cameras seemed to have reached.  From 30 to 50mpx it seems that most people aren't rushing out to buy anything at the moment and I assume it's because there just isn't that much difference in the final image.  Or maybe buyers are just waiting for 39mpx digital backs to come down to the low e-bay price of $2,000.  

If you want to see robust sales, call the people that make video gizmos for the 5d2.  They are all back ordered for weeks and months and that's gotta tell you something about where the market is heading. Call Samy's rental and ask for a D lens for a Phase/Mamiya III and they will give you a blank stare.

Ask them if they have a two channel sound mixer with xlr inputs for a 5d2 and they'll say yep, we carry that.

Now on the top end professional level I find most of this talk about proprietary software, specially designed lenses, magic coatings all funny, because on the high end of the scale, every image that ends up at the Big Time New York City retoucher is probably processed in Photoshop CS3, on a G5 without a single slider moved, other than exposure.

I know the people that sell "traditional" still cameras will take exception to this, but I find talking 30x40, 40x60, 60x90 prints a small niche market,  because it's becoming  a 72 dpi, 2k world and if anyone thinks big print is going to make a big comeback hasn't t read that the NYT's is bleeding 79 million a quarter, or been down to their local printer to see the empty parking lots.  Sure some people want to print BIG on their Epsons, but most of those people aren't shooting with crews of 20  or, processing 2,000 files a night.

I also know that the people that sell "traditional" still cameras haven't talked to any professional photographer's clients, because they could care less if it's a Leica, a Blad or a Nikon.

All this talk is probably mute anyway, because all of these cameras are mostly just variations of an old theme, which is mirror up, take a shot, mirror down and saying 1.5 fps is almost comical considering the RED and probably the scarlet will shoot at 60 fps.

I'm thinking the Scarlet will turn it all sideways anyway and what we're working with today will look a hell of a lot different in a few years, (probably less)  and even if RED doesn't become the standard, it's going to make the lower (and higher) priced competitors open their eyes, pop their head out of the sand and run to the computer to design something that competes.

Then again in the world of digital cameras, maybe not.

BC

[hubell]

Why couldn't Leica kidnap that Raw Developer guy, and force him to design killer software for their S2? Whatever the case, Leica needs to come to market with fully-owned solution. Imagine buying (investing) in that camera, and then having the software taken away...

I don't understand why somebody---Nikon, Canon, Leica, Hasselblad, etc.--- has not bought that company. The quality of its conversions are first rate compared to ACR and Lightroom, and its sharpening tools are way better. Even Adobe, although there the problem is that the people who would have to recommend it would have to implicitly acknowledge they are not doing such a good job and they need to acquire this tiny little company down in Texas run by one guy.

[tashley]

Then again in the world of digital cameras, maybe not.

BC

I clicked the Visit my Website link at the bottom of your excellent post. Is that REALLY you?

;-)

[sdai]

... although there the problem is that the people who would have to recommend it would have to implicitly acknowledge they are not doing such a good job and they need to acquire this tiny little company down in Texas run by one guy.

It would best represent our interests if this guy can be left alone. The last thing he needs to know is a big corporate squarehead telling him what to do.