Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Reconsidering the Leica S2 ?  (Read 5261 times)
fredjeang
Guest
« on: April 01, 2010, 07:22:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.

If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...

Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=

page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4

Cheers,

Fred.
Logged
SeanBK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 494


« Reply #1 on: April 01, 2010, 09:51:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.

If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...

Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=

page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4

Cheers,

Fred.

I must say I am impressed with sample file. Reminds me of Leaf files - smooth. Excellent & thanks for posting.
Logged
roanjohn
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2010, 10:39:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Amazing details!!  ISO 1250 is also pretty good.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2010, 11:01:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Aside from the 100% crops, these 8 bit jpegs on the web could have been taken with almost any quality dslr.  Since most work ends up on the web or printed on a web press, what is the point?  Are S2 owners making 44" prints on 9900's all day, just to see the detail?  Or are they just looking on screen at the glorious detail?  

I've looked at some S2 tiffs, and am impressed, but dude, very little of that goodness translates into a magazine page or a web site.

I ask this seriously with no intent to offend:  what is this camera for?  Who is it for?  I think the few remaining areas that larger than 35mm still holds an advantage is using the back on a view camera/tech camera.  better lenses, better wides, movements, etc.  But the S2 is like a D3x with better lenses, correct?  So where is the utility?

As an aside, it is one of the best feeling cameras ever, has that Nikon F4, Leica M sturdiness to it.

Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #4 on: April 01, 2010, 11:09:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TMARK
Aside from the 100% crops, these 8 bit jpegs on the web could have been taken with almost any quality dslr.  Since most work ends up on the web or printed on a web press, what is the point?  Are S2 owners making 44" prints on 9900's all day, just to see the detail?  Or are they just looking on screen at the glorious detail?  

I've looked at some S2 tiffs, and am impressed, but dude, very little of that goodness translates into a magazine page or a web site.

I ask this seriously with no intent to offend:  what is this camera for?  Who is it for?  I think the few remaining areas that larger than 35mm still holds an advantage is using the back on a view camera/tech camera.  better lenses, better wides, movements, etc.  But the S2 is like a D3x with better lenses, correct?  So where is the utility?

As an aside, it is one of the best feeling cameras ever, has that Nikon F4, Leica M sturdiness to it.
But then your question concerns also MFD if not tech or view cams, not only the S2.
I think that the big boys (CaNikon) will soon play in the mfd field, and mfd brands will have to cut-down their prices...he he  

Fred.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #5 on: April 01, 2010, 11:25:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
But then your question concerns also MFD if not tech or view cams, not only the S2.

Absolutely.
Logged
John R Smith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


Still crazy, after all these years


« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2010, 11:42:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, this thread is about the S2, so it should not really mutate into a "why MFD?" thread, perhaps. When I look at the S2 samples, my first reaction is that I love the colour and the "look". And I think, perhaps fancifully and you may mock, that the pictures look European rather than Japanese or American. That is precisely the quality that Leica lenses (and Zeiss and Schneider lenses) have always had, and somehow the S2 has kept that look. Maybe there are enough people who appreciate the difference, and who love a well-crafted instrument, to make it a success. I hope so.

John
Logged

Hasselblad 500 C/M, SWC and CFV-39 DB
and a case full of (very old) lenses and other bits
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #7 on: April 01, 2010, 12:14:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: John R Smith
Well, this thread is about the S2, so it should not really mutate into a "why MFD?" thread, perhaps. When I look at the S2 samples, my first reaction is that I love the colour and the "look". And I think, perhaps fancifully and you may mock, that the pictures look European rather than Japanese or American. That is precisely the quality that Leica lenses (and Zeiss and Schneider lenses) have always had, and somehow the S2 has kept that look. Maybe there are enough people who appreciate the difference, and who love a well-crafted instrument, to make it a success. I hope so.

John
Well, the S2 is one of the most beautifull camera I've ever seen, and the iQ is at the top.
But it is a very special product that I'm not sure their efforts will be rewarded by the sales.

What I still do not understand is:

1) Why Leica did not concentrate first on a R9 successor ? And we would have a european FF 35mm with sales guarantees.

2) When they decided to take this path, why they did not developped a similar system to the Ricoh GRX, a modular gear with separate sensor unit?
Because then, onces you buy the camera and lenses, you just have to upgrade your sensor unit.

My questions make no sense because what's done is done.
Now just wish the best to the S2.
Honestly, if I was wealthy enough now, I would have probably purchased one.

Fred.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 12:47:06 PM by fredjeang » Logged
LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 788


« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2010, 02:16:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice sharp images from those Leica lenses.  We shall see if the Pentax 645D meets up with this image quality for a third of the price.  Same Kodak sensor, isn't it, the one that goes for $1k/ea in modest quantities?

I think Leica has sullied its name.  To me it means pure predatory pricing now.

Not that I'm bitter.
Logged

KevinA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 898


WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2010, 02:26:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: roanjohn
Amazing details!!  ISO 1250 is also pretty good.

I can not see the point in high iso samples converted to B&W. I want to see full colour under difficult dim and contrasty light to judge it's worth.
I do think all the images look very good and it looks like it could be an excellent machine.

Kevin.
Logged

Kevin.
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2010, 02:37:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm not that impressed by the samples. Why?

1) I don't know if they are 1:1 samples, partly because I don't speak french
2) If they are JPEG I don't know how they had been processed
3) It's not obvious to me that the images are better than what I can achieve with my Sony Alpha 900. They may be better but it is not obvious to me.

But,

1) The samples may be great! I'm just not able to judge
2) No reason whatsoever to believe that the S2 images would not be superior, I just don't feel the samples demonstrate this

I my view Leica tries to create a new "class" of camera, essentially an MFDB sized DSLR with weather sealing . Pentax tries to do the same at a more reasonable price point. Will Leica succeed? I don't know.

Some people are willing to pay for the ultimate edge in image quality. If you make your living printing at large size it actually makes sense. For smaller prints it may just not matter.

I'd say that our host Michael Reichmann is at one end of the spectrum, in search of ultimate quality. James Russel, another frequent poster on this forums, seems to feel that does it matter little for the client what equipment has been used as long as it is good enough. My guess is that if you print large enough, any improvement in image quality is welcome.

Finally, I'd suggest that utility is as important as quality. If you don't have the lens you need, it won't help that the lenses you don't need are as good as they could be.

BR
Erik Kaffehr


Quote from: fredjeang
Hi,
I've been barking against Leica S2, I would have like them to make a digital successor of the R9 more than this risky and "unfinished" S2.
But I do have a more contrasted opinion after examinating some files from a place that I know in Madrid.
There is also an interesting link in french (use google traductor) with some 100% details from images, well if it is 8bits jpegs for the web,
the IQ is nothing less than exceptional.

If they fix the tethered issues it might really be a serious alternative to Phase and Hassy etc...

Here is the link: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/?pg=92&c=4&lg=

page 2 with samples: http://www.revoirfoto.com/pr/index.php?lg=&pg=93&c=4

Cheers,

Fred.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 02:38:54 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2010, 03:15:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

I'm not that impressed by the samples. Why?

1) I don't know if they are 1:1 samples, partly because I don't speak french
2) If they are JPEG I don't know how they had been processed
3) It's not obvious to me that the images are better than what I can achieve with my Sony Alpha 900. They may be better but it is not obvious to me.

But,

1) The samples may be great! I'm just not able to judge
2) No reason whatsoever to believe that the S2 images would not be superior, I just don't feel the samples demonstrate this

I my view Leica tries to create a new "class" of camera, essentially an MFDB sized DSLR with weather sealing . Pentax tries to do the same at a more reasonable price point. Will Leica succeed? I don't know.

Some people are willing to pay for the ultimate edge in image quality. If you make your living printing at large size it actually makes sense. For smaller prints it may just not matter.

I'd say that our host Michael Reichmann is at one end of the spectrum, in search of ultimate quality. James Russel, another frequent poster on this forums, seems to feel that does it matter little for the client what equipment has been used as long as it is good enough. My guess is that if you print large enough, any improvement in image quality is welcome.

Finally, I'd suggest that utility is as important as quality. If you don't have the lens you need, it won't help that the lenses you don't need are as good as they could be.

BR
Erik Kaffehr
Hi Erik,

They did use for DNG Camera Raw, Capture one 5 and Lightroom beta 64, then 16 bits converted to 8 for the web, and test being compared to the Nikon D3x.

About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.

Fred.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 03:20:25 PM by fredjeang » Logged
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2010, 03:30:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.
my understanding is that's exactly what he does: shooting 135 cameras. The Contax' only for fun... and in fact shooting a Contax is fun.
Too, a direct comparison of the Contax with a P31+ or P40+ with the S2 would certainly be interessting. I bet the difference (in IQ) is almost indiscernible.

As to the S2 ... boiled down to IQ only... I am simply not able to find something special in the files.
The (very) few samples available online that show 100% crops of the edges (stopped down) are rather disappointing.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 03:36:02 PM by tho_mas » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2010, 03:34:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
... and in fact shooting a Contax is fun.
I completly agree with the Contax. I've been trying this week and it is a joy!!!

Cheers,

Fred.
Logged
ddk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 274


WWW
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2010, 03:35:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
Hi Erik,

They did use for DNG Camera Raw, Capture one 5 and Lightroom beta 64, then 16 bits converted to 8 for the web, and test being compared to the Nikon D3x.

About James Russel, I honestly do not know why with his style and his famous claims about speed and workflow he 's still using a Contax and do not exclusively work with 35mm. But that's just my humble opinion.

Its simple Fred, use a Contax 645 for a day or two and you'll see why!

Let's not forget insignificant things like a great set of lenses along with many from Hasselblad, many useful accessories, then there's the small matter of price, you can pick up mint backup bodies and glass for very little investment today. Things that are seriously lacking with the S2. I wonder if anyone would even bother with the S2 if Pentax came out with a Leica to Pentax mount adapter?
Logged

david
-----------------------
www.pbase.com/ddk
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2010, 03:39:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
I completly agree with the Contax. I've been trying this week and it is a joy!!!
especially after many, many, many weeks as this camera simply never fails. It just works...
(on the other hand there is not that much that could fail... as it is so reduced to basic features. then again exactly that is the beauty of the Contax)
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 03:40:31 PM by tho_mas » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3878



WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2010, 04:02:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Might as well hijack this thread properly.
I like my P45+ files, but I hate using the Mamiya AFD II, in particular the focus is a pest, never really quite where I want it and metering isn't always that good either. Camera shake is a nuisance in available light.
I have a free mount change on my Phase back.
I don't use the MF for anything that moves fast, but like imaging people. I have a D3x that is faster than anything that moves

Do you guys think switching to Contax might make sense?

Edmund
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 04:04:17 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
tho_mas
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1696


« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2010, 04:25:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: eronald
Do you guys think switching to Contax might make sense?
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.

edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 04:50:49 PM by tho_mas » Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3878



WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2010, 04:59:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.

edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.

I guess the alternative would be to move to H4D50 or just dump MF - the Phase P65 looks nice filewise, but the DF camera is just more of the Mamiya, and I am developing a real allergy to that thing. I guess I should try a Contax for a few days.
Edmund
« Last Edit: April 01, 2010, 05:01:39 PM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2010, 05:01:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tho_mas
difficult question.
IMO the vertical grip, the waist level finder and the simplicity of the camera alone are worth switching.
AF is probably a bit dated as it is not trouble-free in difficult light... IMHO.
Then again shooting portraits you wouldn't necessarily use AF? ...
Mirror/shutter shake: down from 1/60'' there is some degredation in ultimate sharpness. But it does not destroy the image (it's just not uber sharp).
1/15'' is definitely impossible in my experience. So 1/60'' and even 1/30'' might work quite good... but I am not good in handheld shooting so my keepers at these shutter speeds are not more than 50% (rather 30% or so).
I only know the 35, 45, 80 and 120 macro lenses. The 35 and 120 are outstanding. The 45 is good (or maybe my copy is not that good). The 80mm is the weakest link but "weak" only in relation to the other Contax lenses... because even the 80mm is a nice lens (maybe not at f2.0 but at f2.8 it's totally usable... IMHO).
If you don't don't shoot MFD that much but want to keep your P45+ for special purposes... why not take a camera that is nice to use?
The Contax is...
My favorite camera of all times was the Pentax LX (used it about 20 years). The Contax somehow gave me back that simplicity... without the feeling to miss something. Somehow a strange comparision... however.

edit: oh... and your P45+ and the Contax are a perfect fit. Plug & play. Totally trouble-free.
I have a look on one in Madrid, body + 80/2 planar + prism finder all in mint conditions=1200 euros.

Well, the Leica is also very simple...but much much more expensive  

Fred.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad