Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: MTF graphs for the first 4 Leica S2 lenses !!!!  (Read 22620 times)
markowich
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 119


WWW
« Reply #80 on: December 30, 2008, 09:34:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Guy Mancuso
Thanks Peter i have yet to take a look at this yet. With some Zeiss glass i bet you get a nice look too.

even with the nikon 14-24mm it does look great...p
Logged
Gigi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #81 on: December 30, 2008, 10:48:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.

If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so, and recently, a bit behind electronically. Well, software too, but they have caught up to that, and now with the M8.2, they are where they should have been .

I have no doubt that the same trend will continue - its in their genes, their design approach, and their manufacturing capabilities. So....

Imagine an S2, amazing lenses (drop dead quality), a reasonable sensor (current type), reasonable software, and great machined hefty product. Enough bells, whistles to keep you happy, but not so many they can't figure out how to make them all work well. Methinks this product is quite feasible, and likely.

The issue (to me) seems to be the cost and market penetration: it is almost unheard of for anyone to introduce a new camera and lenses, and a new format, at high prices not for a  specific technical use (Sinar Arc-tec) but for the general professional use. Hassy did it, but they did a slow multi-year transition from an open-back system with new lenses, to now a closed system. But their lenses have been around now for what? 5-8 years?

Rollei/Sinar/Leaf have done some parts of this, but used old lens base to build on, and applied known backs.

Canon/Nikon do it, but stick wthin known parameters, both lenses and sensor dimensions.

So: new camera, lenses, format, high cost, general superior quality. Seems likely to be price dependent on getting market penetration.

One exception: there may be a sizeable local (European) market awaiting this camera that is sufficient to put it into production. No ideas on the size of that market, but 2,000 examples would seem readily absorbable, maybe even 5,000? My guess is the 10-20,000 size market is not likely.

Just to summarize - it'll be great and expensive, and unique. Tough times to introduce such a product. Like Edmund said, one way is to get it out early at a low introductory price point and get some penetration into the market. Otherwise, it could be a long road....
Logged

Geoff
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


WWW
« Reply #82 on: December 30, 2008, 12:04:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Geoffreyg
Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.

If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so, and recently, a bit behind electronically. Well, software too, but they have caught up to that, and now with the M8.2, they are where they should have been .

I have no doubt that the same trend will continue - its in their genes, their design approach, and their manufacturing capabilities. So....

Imagine an S2, amazing lenses (drop dead quality), a reasonable sensor (current type), reasonable software, and great machined hefty product. Enough bells, whistles to keep you happy, but not so many they can't figure out how to make them all work well. Methinks this product is quite feasible, and likely.

The issue (to me) seems to be the cost and market penetration: it is almost unheard of for anyone to introduce a new camera and lenses, and a new format, at high prices not for a  specific technical use (Sinar Arc-tec) but for the general professional use. Hassy did it, but they did a slow multi-year transition from an open-back system with new lenses, to now a closed system. But their lenses have been around now for what? 5-8 years?

Rollei/Sinar/Leaf have done some parts of this, but used old lens base to build on, and applied known backs.


 I was one of the first to get a DMR and the M8 but i will not be this time around unless that price is within something that i can manage. This is not a 5k unit there is much more at risk here and they need to make this a less risky purchase because if we put up 30k than we need assurance we will get most of our money back if it don't work out. I figure that is 6 times the risk of getting the M8. How many of us want to take that shot at it. This is just simple common sense for shooters to look at, we know if we went Hassy, Phase, Sinar or leaf we at least know it is well established in the market this is not in MF.
Canon/Nikon do it, but stick wthin known parameters, both lenses and sensor dimensions.

So: new camera, lenses, format, high cost, general superior quality. Seems likely to be price dependent on getting market penetration.

One exception: there may be a sizeable local (European) market awaiting this camera that is sufficient to put it into production. No ideas on the size of that market, but 2,000 examples would seem readily absorbable, maybe even 5,000? My guess is the 10-20,000 size market is not likely.

Just to summarize - it'll be great and expensive, and unique. Tough times to introduce such a product. Like Edmund said, one way is to get it out early at a low introductory price point and get some penetration into the market. Otherwise, it could be a long road....


Well I totally agree , I am not worried about the product what i am worried about is the cost of entry and honestly being ALL new than i would love to see the first 2500 units go out the door at 10 percent above costs. Get the market rolling get the penetration than do the gradual rising of prices after a set number is sold. The only real way to get anyones attention to buy it in the first place is reputation of the new unit and actually getting it into peoples hands without killing it right out of the gate because of costs. Now move the numbers around anyway you want the point is it has to get in peoples hands and your not going to do that pricing it out the gate without a real service record behind it. So come in at some point that makes some real market sense and make it attractive to buy.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 12:11:19 PM by Guy Mancuso » Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4058



« Reply #83 on: December 30, 2008, 12:19:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Guy Mancuso
Well I totally agree , I am not worried about the product what i am worried about is the cost of entry and honestly being ALL new than i would love to see the first 2500 units go out the door at 10 percent above costs. Get the market rolling get the penetration than do the gradual rising of prices after a set number is sold. The only real way to get anyones attention to buy it in the first place is reputation of the new unit and actually getting it into peoples hands without killing it right out of the gate because of costs. Now move the numbers around anyway you want the point is it has to get in peoples hands and your not going to do that pricing it out the gate without a real service record behind it. So come in at some point that makes some real market sense and make it attractive to buy.

i think production costs go down so dramatically after the first units that there is no need to readjust pricing to make a profit. And then there is the lens markup ...

Edmund
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #84 on: December 30, 2008, 12:23:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Geoffreyg
Forgive me - but I think we are missing the point here.

If the past is any record, the S2 will be technically a superior product. Leicas have always been that, traditionally optically and mechanically so,


Since we're talking about a camera that isn't close to shipping yet, this is all theoretical.

Yes, maybe on a monitor at 200% this or any larger than 35mm sensor camera will offer more detail but I don't think you can buy the S2 or any new european system with a few lenses for under $30,000.

For 30k you can take your photography a step further just with a parabolic umbrella, or HMI's or better post production and by the time the S2 is on the shelf does anyone really believe that Canon and Nikon won't have something out there in the 30mpx area as well.

This is a pixel peeping crowd and there is nothing wrong with that in theory, but in the real world where portfolios and websites are viewed at about 1 second a photo and every photograph goes through 4 rounds of retouching, pixel peeping becomes irrelevant.

Even if the economy hadn't dipped downward Hasselblad changed the larger than 35mm world just by dropping their prices.  You see it here with topics like what does a p21+ sell for.  In theory it should probably sell for 10 grand but in reality $6,500 is probably the going price and I've worked with few ADs or clients that knows or cares about  the difference between an 18mpx image and a 33mpx image.

If the economy continues and this is a year of slowdowns every photographer needs to step back and decide where to put their resources.  Under these conditions this is the best time to expand your body or work and though photographer's seem more pre disposed to spend money on cameras and lenses the best investment is in better stylists, talent, locations, retouching and promotion.

Photography at any level has never been about 20x loupes and the ability to enlarge 40ft. high, at least not photography that moves you forward.  Photography is about showing a unique vision and when it comes to digital cameras, the formats of 35mm to almost 645 there just isn't that great of a difference.

If cameras are the goal and you want to offer something different, then probably stepping back into the world of film will get you closer than anything in digital.  There is a difference between a 6x7, 4x5 or 8x10 format vs. 35mm but in the history of photography, film or digital it's all about what you shoot, not necessarilly what you shoot it with.

I'd feel different, and a lot more predisposed to cough up 50 grand if the sensors were larger, or if a Canon, Leica, Phase, Hasselblad, Nikon, Sony, Leaf . . . . produce a much different look, but the differrence is in very small percentages in comparision to what photography is really about.

Let's face it our "films" are now down to just a few choices.  Dalsa, Kodak, Canon, Nikon/Sony.  That's it,  all a bunch of wafers cut from the same 4 makers and we can wrap any aluminium and plastic body around them but the difference just isn't that great anymore.

If the leica was the format of a pentax 6x7 then I'd understand it, or if it offered the same moveable iso as the Canons and Nikons then just the bling factor alone may be worth extra $20,000 but for close to the same image quality and a more limited system, to me this is a camera that probably sounds good talking trash at the country club, but in the world of producing art for commerce, or your den, it will probably make little difference.

Regardless, go through these sites and tell me if format, pixel peeping, ca, dr, file size is important.

http://www.helmutnewton.com/current_exhibi.../gallery.html#5

http://www.artkane.com/fullsize/lyrics/fzlady.html

http://www.guybourdin.org/

http://www.peterlindbergh.com/

http://www.paoloroversi.com/diaporama/photographs.html

http://www.nadavkander.com/#

and I could make the list 1000 times longer and it wouldn't change a thing other than to know that the technical attributes of an image are much less important than subject, lighting, talent (both behind and in front of the camera) and budget.

Now saying this, I hope I'm wrong and this is the greatest camera ever.   I dig Leica's love the way they feel and like driving a porsche, you just know it's something special, but like the porsche it better perform or it's just a waste of resource.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4058



« Reply #85 on: December 30, 2008, 12:28:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm printing my G10 images 44" wide, but they do look stretched a bit. I think the S2 is probably just about dimensioned right for the crowd who want to print big. I made some very nice M8 images, but the M8 is basically an A3+ camera in my opinion. The big Canons and the backs can be cropped with comfort and print larger more easily.

Edmund

Quote from: bcooter
and I could make the list 1000 times longer and it wouldn't change a thing other than to know that the technical attributes of an image are much less important than subject, lighting, talent (both behind and in front of the camera) and budget.

Now saying this, I hope I'm wrong and this is the greatest camera ever.   I dig Leica's love the way they feel and like driving a porsche, you just know it's something special, but like the porsche it better perform or it's just a waste of resource.
Logged
jing q
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 594


WWW
« Reply #86 on: December 30, 2008, 12:50:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: eronald
I'm printing my G10 images 44" wide, but they do look stretched a bit. I think the S2 is probably just about dimensioned right for the crowd who want to print big. I made some very nice M8 images, but the M8 is basically an A3+ camera in my opinion. The big Canons and the backs can be cropped with comfort and print larger more easily.

Edmund

you printing landscapes?
If you were going for maximum quality you would be better off with a 60mp back yes?
Logged
Guy Mancuso
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1112


WWW
« Reply #87 on: December 30, 2008, 12:50:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Well let's not forget what we can sell to our clients. I have been selling this big gun theory and it's working. I have clients that make stuff so big i have to take a car to get far enough back. LOL

Seriously though if you can sell the MF system to clients to get anything they want done without a lump in your throat when you say it . Than it's all good. I have been burned by clients printing wall size stuff that just falls apart and it is embarrassing. Not any more
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4058



« Reply #88 on: December 30, 2008, 01:35:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: jing q
you printing landscapes?
If you were going for maximum quality you would be better off with a 60mp back yes?


Actually I'm printing macros from the G10. Just *snap* and go. I have a P45+ which I tried to use to do the same stuff -urban architecture details -  but in city environments it's impossible to get rid of the vibration enough to get the necessary depth of field, even with a good tripod. S I got the G10. Because of the stabiliser and the huge depth of field, the G10 provides surprisingly good images. I guess the Sony might be an interesting alternative, with its stabiliser. My respect for Michael's reviews is growing over time, now that I've learnt to read them in context.

Edmund
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 01:38:46 PM by eronald » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7500


WWW
« Reply #89 on: December 30, 2008, 04:16:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm working with a  Sony Alpha 900 right now. It can achieve very sharp images, but only with very careful work. Before spending 30k on a camera I'd suggest we need to spend 1k on a tripod and use it consequently.

Best regards
Erik
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 4058



« Reply #90 on: December 30, 2008, 04:34:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

I'm working with a  Sony Alpha 900 right now. It can achieve very sharp images, but only with very careful work. Before spending 30k on a camera I'd suggest we need to spend 1k on a tripod and use it consequently.

Best regards
Erik

I think the Sony allows one to save money on the tripod
Although someone should run a low speed test (1s).

Edmund
Logged
Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #91 on: December 31, 2008, 09:49:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Several improvements we can expect in the coming months in sensor technology and optics:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...-keeping-t.html

R.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2008, 10:13:28 AM by Nemo » Logged
Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #92 on: December 31, 2008, 10:40:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Software corrections can face difficulties in dealing with image problems, depending on resolution:

Quote
The move from 10 megapixels to 15 megapixels really does make those nasty lens aberrations significantly more difficult to deal with.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml
Logged
carstenw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581



« Reply #93 on: January 01, 2009, 08:47:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nemo
Software corrections can face difficulties in dealing with image problems, depending on resolution:

True, but in MF, I think that Hasselblad and everyone else is clever enough to carefully design "flaws" into their lenses which are easy to correct with high quality results. I am sure that the distortion in the 28mm which Hasselblad corrects is very straight-forward, and not moustache distortion like the 21mm Distagon. The same with other problems, like CA.
Logged

Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370


« Reply #94 on: January 01, 2009, 09:41:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Use some of the HC lenses before making blanket statements. In particular the HC28 and than let us know what you think about your statement. On my 39MP the 28 becomes a very good lens after corrections. Your statement perhaps theoretically true but for the moment the reality is proofing differently.

I avoid using the term excellent because I am pretty sure that term will be reserved for the Rodenstock 28 but for my taste/use the HC28 is a phenomenal lens.

Maybe when going higher in resolution this will become a problem...
« Last Edit: January 01, 2009, 09:45:23 AM by Dustbak » Logged
Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #95 on: January 01, 2009, 12:14:45 PM »
ReplyReply

A question.
How good is the HC28 before corrections?
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370


« Reply #96 on: January 01, 2009, 01:02:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nemo
A question.
How good is the HC28 before corrections?


Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.


Logged
carstenw
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 581



« Reply #97 on: January 01, 2009, 01:37:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.

Someone claimed it was quite acceptable even without corrections, but I have not seen the difference, so cannot comment personally.
Logged

Nemo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 276



« Reply #98 on: January 01, 2009, 02:13:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
Have a search on it on this forum. I think several weeks ago David Grover posted images showing the difference between images with and without correction. It shows the differences quite good.


Thank you.

Here it is:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....t=0&start=0

R.
Logged
brianc1959
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #99 on: January 04, 2009, 05:08:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nemo
Several improvements we can expect in the coming months in sensor technology and optics:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/t...-keeping-t.html

R.

Gradient Index optics?  Trust me, you can forget this one for large scale lenses.  Ditto diffractives, except for specialized applications.  Optics will improve significantly, but primarily due to replacing SLR viewfinders with electronic ones (eliminates BFL restrictions).
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad