The S2 is "better" than the D3X

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

We now have an excellent review of the Leica S2 on the "diglloyd site", http://www.diglloyd.com/prem/prot/DAP/LeicaS2/index.html (an excellent article worth the few dollars digllyod charges for DAP subscription).

We also have some other reviews in progress, by Erwin Puts  http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/page176/s2part4.html and also by Nick Rains.

Guy Mancuso and Jack Flescher have also a very good discussion of the S2 on GetDPI and we also had a short review by Mark Dubovoy here on LuLa.

It's pretty obvious that the Leica is "better" than the Nikon. It has a bigger sensor and more pixels. According to Erwin Puts the Leica lenses are probably the best lenses Leica ever made. So unless Leica really messed up the Leica must outperform the Nikon D3X regarding resolving power and sharpness.

Obviously, the two cameras attract different type of photographers. The Nikon is a very good general purpose camera while the Leica certainly is more in need of exacting work. According to Lloyd Chambers there are issues with AF on he Leica, not so much regarding accuracy as selective focusing capability, even if Lloyd also found that AF is not good enough to utilize the lenses at large apertures. This should come as surprise to no one, I presume.

I played a bit with the two raw images Lloyd made available for download. These two images are very attractive, because they have a very good subject for lens/sensor testing and also because they are shot with much care. I have looked at these images at different time after costuming different number of espressos and came up with different conclusions.

- No doubt, the S2 has more detail. This can be fully expected.
- Nikon needs more sharpening. With a bit agressive sharpening the images are a close match when scaled to the same size (in my case 50x75 cm at 360 PPI)
- Tonality and contrast matter a lot
- The sharpening on the Nikon enhances noise, it takes some care to reduce that
- There are a lot of aliasing artifacts (moirés, color artifacts and false detail) in the S2 images especially in stucco detail, but also in the mosaic

So basic image quality is better on the S2 than on the D3X. We have some usability issues which may or may not matter. Lloyd has issues with AF on the Leica. I, for instance, seldom shoot maximum aperture normally more like f/8, so my demands on AF would be less.

The question is in part, is the gain in image quality worth paying three times the price? We need to keep in mind that it's not just the camera but also the lenses. Another issue is that Leica also has competition from MFDBs which use similar technologies but larger sensors. Phase One teamed up with Schneider for lenses and Hasselblad designs their own even if production is at Fujica. The S2 is probably better built than the MF competition, both camera and lenses are environmentally sealed and AF is probably better than the competition, at least according to Mark Dubovoy.

The P65+ is significantly more expensive than the S2 but also has a bigger sensor and more resolution. MFDBs have the additional flexibility that they can be use view cameras and "Alpa" type bodies.

I hope that Leica has found a niche, developing a camera that the market demands. There are certainly some issues with the S2, but software will develop will improve with time. I also hope and presume that Leica will be forthcoming in upgrading old S2 cameras to latest technology.

Best regards
Erik Kaffehr

[tesfoto]

A man discussing two cameras he never used or owned, based on an average of other reviews and discussions. This is simply BS and one of the reason forums like LL becomes less and less attractive for working pros. The ratio of noise/real info is increasing on this site and making it less attractive.

Forums like GetDPI, Fred Miranda, DP Review, etc have been gone for a long time.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

The reason I started this discussion is twofold. One is that we now have excellent comparison shots between the D3X and the S2 by both Lloyd Chambers and Nick Rains. The other issues is that Guy Mancuso did point out that the S2 is a "tweener". It's position in the market is between high end full frame digital and high end MFDBs. It is essentially an MF (or nearly MF) DSLR. The price/performance point of the S2 needs probably to be discussed.

Some of us are more interested in technical aspects of imaging like advantages and disadvantages of OLP filtering. With the images from Lloyd Chambers and Nick Rains we now for the first time have very good images to compare filtered and non filtered images. For that reason I felt it was a good idea to start a new thread which would more discuss practical aspects and usability.

Best regards
Erik Kaffehr

A man discussing two cameras he never used or owned, based on an average of other reviews and discussions. This is simply BS and one of the reason forums like LL becomes less and less attractive for working pros. The ratio of noise/real info is increasing on this site and making it less attractive.

Forums like GetDPI, Fred Miranda, DP Review, etc have been gone for a long time.

[tesfoto]

Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

I didn’t expect you to understand.

[eronald]

I didn’t expect you to understand.

if your comment is "too little original data" then you have a point. But the same is true of scientific conferences where people each  add small quanta to an existing body of experimental data.

 if you want to add some more data feel free to post some images and experiences.

Edmund

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I'd consider the "raw" files I downloaded from Lloyd Chambers's site to be original data. My observations are of course not.

Anyway I started this topic more to discuss the Leica S2 position in the marketplace. It's a very bold step from Leica to go into low end medium format with an entirely new design.

The reason I say "low end medium format" is that they have chosen to use a relative small sensor. So Phase and Hassy will always be able to have "better" sensors than Leica as they use the same vendors of sensor hardware. It's quite obvious that silicon estate is one of the more important aspects of image quality, a bigger sensor stresses lenses less and collects more photons, simple as that. Better technology may compensate for a smaller sensor area, but Phase, Hassy and Leica have quite similar technology.

I guess that Leica tries to build an integrated platform that will utilize each component to the maximum, excellent lenses, low tolerances and so on.

I know that you have both Phase (P45 ?) and also D3X, so you have experience with both.

Best regards
Erik

if your comment is "too little original data" then you have a point. But the same is true of scientific conferences where people each  add small quanta to an existing body of experimental data.

 if you want to add some more data feel free to post some images and experiences.

Edmund

[tesfoto]

if your comment is "too little original data" then you have a point.

YES

I am challenging a man (scientist and amateur photographer) who discuss and made a summery review of two cameras he did not even try.

Come on… It makes me yawn, it makes me tired, it makes me realize that there is too much BS to read to get real and first hand info.

Thank you Lloyd for doing a great job, I am happy to pay for your service.

But the same is true of scientific conferences where people each  add small quanta to an existing body of experimental data.

One scientist to the other, while they kept on discussing DR and DxO

[Rob C]

Whilst I wouldn't condemn anyone for starting threads such as this one, neither would I pretend to be particulary enthused. The other one about the Zeiss engineer's findings was started with some vague interest and by the time I got to the second or third set of graphs I realised it was time for coffee which, unfortunately/fortunately, I had to get up of my ass and go make.

This really comes to another point: there are probably two main species of reader/contributor to this LuLa: the photographer and the technically enthusiastic searcher after absolutes. A Holy Grailist, if I may put it like that, which though it sounds vaguely French and political, isn't meant to be either.

I am perfectly happy to leave the maths and engineering and chemistry to its specialists; I am very interested in seeing photographs from good photographers; I am equally interested in reading of most of those people's exploits and opinions and though I may not agree with them all, they are interesting to me nonethless. It's one of the few areas, along with the other arts, in which I find my fellow man of any interest to me at all.

One of the problems with the internet is that it seamlessly spreads outwards from that bright screen into your life to fill any vacuum there, to the extent that it can actively prevent you from filling said vacuum with things relevant to your own, real life. In the end, one can find that one's days and nights are spent doing little else than surfing and filling the time with stuff that, some years ago, wouldn't have even been considered of any interest at all.

The internet is the true opiate of the masses, of which I confess to being both member and unfortunate addict.

Rob C

[Chairman Bill]

And there is a point where first hand accounts are anecdotal. Meta-analysis, looking widely at a range of reviews, collating & presenting data from those reviews, can & often does provide a more rounded review of a topic than one person's thoughts. I'd also point out that it's a thread to which people can contribute, if they want to, and nobody is making people read it.

[fredjeang]

I'm very very shocked by the interest found on those types of comparaisons, extremely limited, and I also hope that Lu-La will not fall into the same fashion.

I will point again that comparing the S2 to a D3x is not appropriate, just an exercice of simple curiosity.
If you are a serious S2 potential buyer, I mean that you are looking for informations that you might use practically and not being curious about cheaper good alternatives,
then you know that this camera has caracteristics (sensor, slow operation, approach etc...) that are in the domain of MFD. Don't let fool yourself by the dslr design because
this is an MF camera with all the hassles and the goodies of MFD. So, if you are looking seriously to this Leica, it is because you are aware and prepared to deal with MF camera,
therefore what you want to know is how it compares to a 40 MP Phase or Hassy equivalent, not even a P65.

If I was a potential Leica S2 buyer, I won't give a damn about that the Nikon is 3 or 10 times cheaper for a samish IQ. I'm just interested and have the money to do it and price is a secondary option.
Many of us can not access those gear, and I will never go to a store and ask for testing this Leica or any other MF gear if I'm not in a position to buy it or seriously considering it.
This is simply internet curiosity, and it sells well.

Also, all we hear is about IQ-money equation. Sadly...really sadly, very very little serious information about operation with studio lights, how it operates on the field in different professional situations etc...
This is all amateur kind of datas, made for curious amateurism and web smoking rooms. IQ is a very small part of the equation. Because today, most of the cameras produced have really good IQ.

What I really thank in GetDPI (and I'm not a forum member because I don't have the time to be in more than one forum), is that they talked about things like weight balance more than white balance...
if you follow me. This is a crucial information because it is something you will have to deal with it all the time and not possible to change. Those are relevant informations.

The very first time I handled a D3, I knew immediatly that it was not a camera for me. Just for the handling. I read everywhere that this is a magnificent tool, but because of the sensation in my hands,
I'm not going to buy it ever, even it is the best camera of the all universe. It just don't feel right in my hands. Others will find the opposite and thank god we have many options.

In the moment you are working seriously on your photography and concentrate in your art and craft, all those datas, comparaisons, DxO etc...are just falling appart. What you want is a tool that match your style,
your hand, your approach, your vision, your needs and your bank account. Oh, and your visual attraction too.
And what is important is how this tool is behaving in real conditions.

I'm sorry but if you have the time to spend in those scientific superstitions, supositions, and all the list of maybes and ifs, then you are not focussed in the production of your imagery itself.
Because in the case you where concentrating on your vision, you will find very little interest in those datas. It is a matter of where you put your attention and energy.

I also read that the Leica is better built because weather sealed. But some time ago, I opened a thread about the use of MF backs in harsh conditions and MF users where
talkinbg about their experiences. It appeared that those MF backs are extremelly capable of handling extremes conditions, and they don't claim weather seals.
But those where informations from many years users in desert, moutain, ice etc... not for a few days testing that maybe or if.

We should maybe reflexionate on the fact that most if not all serious artists and top photographers are rarelly participating to these kind of debates, neither need to know the curves etc...
1- they don't have the time to do it
2- they know that most of the gear are ok
3- they are focussed in their art

Maybe our interest for these testing is showing that we are not on track but distracted.

Best regards.
 

[BJL]

Thanks Erik,

    until such time as this forum is rich with people who have both an S2 and a D3X, and have made and posted careful comparisons, I am happy for posts like this.

As an aside, this is similar in spirit to the valuable meta-studies produced by the US National Academy of Sciences; collecting available studies and assessing their data and methodology to produce a synthesis that is potentially more reliable than any singe study used. For one thing, the prejudices of the authors of any one study can be corrected for.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

One scientist to the other, while they kept on discussing DR and DxO

I don't understand this voluntary 'contribution' to this thread, because there is no discussion (in the sense of differing opinions) amongst scientists about that. Besides, there are ISO standards that should have settled any misunderstanding there might be left. The discussions are more about/between those not understanding the basics, which is fine, they may learn something (I know I do).

Could you explain what you mean, or are you just venting some 'steam' because you don't like discussions between people with different backgrounds? I'm trying to understand what you are trying to bring to the table, as it might help moving the discussion to a higher level, that's all.

Cheers,
Bart

[Nick Rains]

I'd also point out that it's a thread to which people can contribute, if they want to, and nobody is making people read it.

Exactly.

If someone starts a thread that no-one is interested in then it gets no replies, fades towards the bottom of the page and is gone...

If a few folks are interested in discussing something photographic, no matter how obscure or uninteresting to others, then I think we should quietly move on to the next thread and leave them to enjoy their musings.

[feppe]

I'm very very shocked by the interest found on those types of comparaisons, extremely limited, and I also hope that Lu-La will not fall into the same fashion.

I don't know what site you have been reading, but it sure isn't LL. There have been numerous comparison articles starting (at least) in 1999. Many of them have been so controversial they are still being referenced on other sites after years.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Thanks for a lot of comments.

May I suggest that we turn back to the topic and discuss the position of the S2 in the marketplace?

Best regards
Erik

I don't know what site you have been reading, but it sure isn't LL. There have been numerous comparison articles starting (at least) in 1999. Many of them have been so controversial they are still being referenced on other sites after years.

[tho_mas]

May I suggest that we turn back to the topic and discuss the position of the S2 in the marketplace?

?
you've summarized some points from some reviews with regard to IQ, which is fine.
so would you like to disucuss the "value" of the 2 cameras based on those few IQ observations?
I think that's beyond discussion...

[ErikKaffehr]

Sorry,

I should perhaps leave out my observations. My suggestion is not to compare the Leica S2 to D3X but it's place in the marketplace. On the other hand, it's quite obvious that the S2 needs to have a significant advantage over the D3X to have a place in the marketplace. On the other side it has competition from established systems like Hasselblad and Phase One. Both Hassy and Phase offer upgrade paths to bigger sensors with more resolution plus flexibility to move the back on a different equipment, like a view camera.

On the other hand, what reasons except image quality, in a wide sense, would you have to buy any camera for? I thought cameras were gear making for  pictures?!

Best regards
Erik

?
you've summarized some points from some reviews with regard to IQ, which is fine.
so would you like to disucuss the "value" of the 2 cameras based on those few IQ observations?
I think that's beyond discussion...

[tho_mas]

On the other hand, what reasons except image quality, in a wide sense, would you have to buy any camera for? I thought cameras were gear making for  pictures?!

"usabilty" and "features" with regard to the kind of photography you are doing?
I mean if you sum up the features of a D3x (live view, multiple point af, high iso, high frame rate etc. etc.) it's a no brainer, no?

random thoughts...:
As to "IQ" I just don't see any advantage of the S2 over a P40+ or H40 (rather the contrary... except of maybe the S2 lens performance wide open at close and medium distances).
As to AF I think the recompose thing of Hasselblad is one of the most interessting recent "innovations" (in MFD and in general).
The S2 obviously has less shutter/mirror bounce so it might be a bit better for hand held shooting than other MFD cameras (of course not better than a D3x). Tethered shooting seems to be very slow with the S2. DBs can be mounted on tech cameras. Actually with an Arca Swiss M-Line 2 or so you can also mount the D3x on such a camera (however I don't know about the flexibilty of such a kit... i.e. real usable movements with a given lens). There are also T/S lenses for the Nikon (though in this regard the Canon T/S lenses are obviously more interessting). The S2 lacks a software that deals with certain artifacts (CAs, purple fringing, moiré).
And so on...
I don't know how all these things translate into a "price".
I think of the S2 as a very expensive, oversized but poor equipped high rez DSLR ... but that's just my personal view (and only based on second hand information).

[telyt]

"usabilty" and "features" with regard to the kind of photography you are doing?
I mean if you sum up the features of a D3x (live view, multiple point af, high iso, high frame rate etc. etc.) it's a no brainer, no?

I don't use any of these features so their advantages are meaningless to me.  No brainer.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, those are good points.

On the other hand, different ways of shooting make different requirements. I mostly shooting landscapes , so I almost always shoot single shot and mostly use center point AF with focus and recompose. I guess that modern DSLRs are pretty good "jacks of every trade". If you are willing to spend like 300 kUSD on a body and couple of lenses I guess you are going for the ultimate image quality and are willing to accept some some inconveniences.

The Leica M8/M9 is an interesting parallel. Both cameras use the same technology, the M8 had a lot of issues. The M9 has a decent IR filter and a full size sensor and now it is quite popular. That said, the M9 has still quite a few issues much related to focusing. The reason the Leica is popular is probably mostly that it offers high performance in a small package. That said, the red dot certainly helps...

Best regards
Erik Kaffehr

"usabilty" and "features" with regard to the kind of photography you are doing?
I mean if you sum up the features of a D3x (live view, multiple point af, high iso, high frame rate etc. etc.) it's a no brainer, no?

random thoughts...:
As to "IQ" I just don't see any advantage of the S2 over a P40+ or H40 (rather the contrary... except of maybe the S2 lens performance wide open at close and medium distances).
As to AF I think the recompose thing of Hasselblad is one of the most interessting recent "innovations" (in MFD and in general).
The S2 obviously has less shutter/mirror bounce so it might be a bit better for hand held shooting than other MFD cameras (of course not better than a D3x). Tethered shooting seems to be very slow with the S2. DBs can be mounted on tech cameras. Actually with an Arca Swiss M-Line 2 or so you can also mount the D3x on such a camera (however I don't know about the flexibilty of such a kit... i.e. real usable movements with a given lens). There are also T/S lenses for the Nikon (though in this regard the Canon T/S lenses are obviously more interessting). The S2 lacks a software that deals with certain artifacts (CAs, purple fringing, moiré).
And so on...
I don't know how all these things translate into a "price".
I think of the S2 as a very expensive, oversized but poor equipped high rez DSLR ... but that's just my personal view (and only based on second hand information).