The Leica S2 System and Image Quality

[gdwhalen]

I think that market share has always been the black hole of corporate strategy. Profits are what matter, not market share.

I don't believe Leica is set up for a market share battle from a production standpoint. I think they are designed to make a small quantity of "typically" very good lenses and cameras. Given that situation, they are better off selling high (like Porsche) and simply making money on everything they sell rather than have a loss leader (body) that they sell under cost to introduce their profit center (lenses) into the market when they don't even have the production capabilities to produce 1.1x amount anyway.

This way they have a manageable production situation and a profitable bottom line. There are plenty of people that will buy into the S2 when it comes out. The real test will be a year down the road. After the camera is out and after the competition has seen the products capabilities. If the competition can't match the quality they will try to lower their prices. If they can match the quality they will introduce better functional capabilities. My issue with Leica has always been the same one. They are too slow to get their products out and by the time they are out (not talking about the M's here as that is a pretty much Leica proprietary market) they are almost obsolete - technically.

 

[fotografz]

Nothing arrogant about it. Different markets.

Not to mention different creative personalities in general.

 

[GMB]

Prints can hide many problems, but that is not a good definition for the quality of a lens. Maybe you don't care, but one lens can still be better than the other in real ways.

I don't get that. If the final product is the print, and if the print does not show the difference between two lenses, why should one care whether one lens is "better" (in the sense of optical qualities, not handling) than the other? In fact, how do you even want to determine which is "better"?

 

[Bob]

market share is a loose defintion, the key factor is the definition of market.
I favor definitions such as
TAM : total available market
SAM : served available market (a % of TAM)
SOM: share of market (a % of SAM)
If the definition of TAM is digital cameras (excluding industrial and specialty)
then Leica's SAM might be defined as the sum (with eliminations for overlap) of annual camera purchases by:
1) Leica brand loyalists with adequate means
2) That portion of DSLR buyers with adequate means who are dissatisfied with current and anticipated quality of such systems
3) That portion of MF buyers who are dissatisfied with the handling of their gear
4) Some portion of those who might be defined as luxury goods buyers
5) Some portion of those who might be defined as collectors
6) some segment that I may have omitted.

It is always a bit dicey to define a new SAM, so it is obvious that the M9 stealth introduction into a known SAM which Leica dominates was a necessary component of the total strategy.

The S2 is clearly an R&D budget constrained camera, with its choice of sensor. its limited lens line-up, the "commonality" approach to lens design, and its extended development cycle. It is also a "tween" camera, which adds a bit of risk as its space is squeezed by introductions from above and below.

The gamble Leica is taking is that of its SAM definition, its actual size over time, and whether or not it is capable of achieving adequate SOM of that SAM to reach a revenue level that would make ongoing S2 operations profitable.

New SAMS are risky and often elusive. I can recall the "mini-super" computer as one example that deluded investors.

Should Leica have bet that the S2 would sell to the same SAM as say a high end Nikon or Canon, then it might have deluded itself into needing a much larger manufacturing capability and over-invested. The level of automation to reach those quantities, and incidentally its more consistent quality, is probably several times the cost of the actual development cost of the S2 with Leica's manufacturing technology levels. I am familiar with large scale manufacturing technologies and have seen what Nikon can do. It takes a "generational" commitment to achieve. Leica does not have the resources to risk.
-bob

 

[fotografz]

Something seems amiss. But lets be honest, with MF cameras like this no one ever really used film beyond 800ISO. Well, maybe the occasional doco photographer would, but it seems that's were the current high res 35mm systems deliver now. This is a serious low ISO MF camera built for the studio and location where high detail and precision is the main priority. Not an ISO demon. Still looks like an attractive camera for me but pity I'll never be able to afford it!

This is where I fall off the choo-choo train.

The very form of the S2 suggests quickness and more portable functionality. A DSLR on steroids. However, I personally question a "Studio" positioning for the S2.

The S2 isn't modular ... so practical studio applications are narrowed down quite a bit ... like shooting from ground level with a big, bright waist level finder. Or on a view camera for max DOF and corrections doing table top. Or high up on a shooting stand using live view on the computer screen so assistants can help compose the subject and focus. Unless the layout calls for shooting in the rain, weather proofing isn't a "studio" requirement or commercial location need very often.

You would have to be a very specialized commercial shooter to make this your go to "studio" system IMO.

Plus, unlike many on this forum (including me), commercial shooters tend to far more conservative about gear acquisitions then you may think.
At commercial shoots that I supervised as an ad executive (hundreds of national ads), I almost always had better gear at home then the photographer did.

Folks like Peter A can get a S2 and use it any way he wants, because he can do it without wiping the bucket of perspiration off his hands at the thought of the price.

I also think there are some commercial shooters that are prospects for the S2 ... and one of them is Guy. Guy has made no secret of his desire for one high resolution system for his applications.

I'm a prospect also, not because of ROI for my business ... that would be an immediate NO WAY! NOT IN A MILLION YEARS!

I'm a prospect because I am at the point in life where I CAN afford to mix business and pleasure. Like the non-sequitur of a $10K M lens for shooting weddings

-Marc

 

[Guy Mancuso]

It really is a camera that fits me well. One reason I want to test it too. But I have a lot of checkmarks to X out before my pocket starts to shake the last bit of dust out of it to get one. It's not so much will it work, i already know it will in a lot of ways. Let's face it a sensor is a sensor is a sensor. Very little difference between them and the lenses will obviously be good. I already know it will most likely be better than my current 31mpx back in SOME ways. I do need a VERY clean ISO 800 and if I can get a clean 1250 and maybe a push to 1600 than it will be equal too or better than my P30+ which is probably the best at high ISO currently. Speed issues are solved it is a faster shooting cam than mine and some of the features are world class in MF land , Like 2 cards to shoot too is more important to me than weather sealing. It rains most likely my shoot is cancelled anyway and same for many Pro shooters, certainly nice to have but not my main purchase decision and let's face it after all these years without weather sealing not much has changed or will it.

The real question marks and may have nothing whatsoever to do with the hobbyist but everything to do with the Pro. Service , support, long lasting history of this unit. Plus some really important one which gets sidetracked here is the lenses are MADE for this sensor size, what about the future if Leica went bigger am I screwed like the R series and BTW folks that is long dead and gone. Wishing on the stars will never bring that back. IT's OVER

This is the stuff I need to think about is 2 years down the road what's happening can make this a extremely bad idea and lose my house over it or will the success of it continue and get my money back if I bail on it. As Peter said it is a niche product , I totally agree but question is do Pro's buy niche products or do we stay mainstream with rental houses and market saturation on products like Hassy and Phase which is a totally flooded market with used gear and camera options not to mention lens options. The S2 you immediately paint yourself kneeling in front of the Leica Gods and praying for a different type lens or firmware or accessory that you desperately need and may not come out for a year. Let's be honest Leica is a little slow on product development which is fine they are small and that is okay if you have everything you need but if you need something badly there is no other source. In Hassy and Phase we can cheat around with modular stuff that has been built up over the years to find some solutions. Does Leica intend to make a 1.4 converter, a extension tube, a magnifier eyepiece etc. etc. Now don't get me wrong maybe they will in time. Key word is time and how much sitting on our hands do we wait it out. Admittedly I am waiting for a new Phase body and the new DF is a major welcome to me but does not serve all of my desires either, so some waiting is unfortunate and understandable .

This is the stuff and I just hit a very small part of it and Marc hit some of them that i have to seriously decide on one way or the other. These are real concerns to working shooters that many folks don't understand. Hell just a replacement tethered cable could be hell to get one. Not saying it can't happen but with a new system like this it is a concern on buying decision. For the hobbyist most of them could give a rats *** about half of this stuff because it will never be a issue. For that I envy them that they can freely walk into a store buy whatever they want with not a care about it. Good for them, bad for guy's like me. As Marc said it is not so much about the ROI i already would lose my shirt on that one with almost any system at least going by a year or two investment, 5 years maybe. LOL

I think this is part of the battle here some could care less while others their whole existence is based on these type of buying decisions. Than throw the Leica whatever they make has to be great folks in their it all gets so screwed up you can't breath a bad Leica comment. Folks I am a Leica fan boy so I don't even want to hear that denial. But I have to take a much more realistic approach on this more than I did on the DMR and M system. If this is a mistake it is a **** load of money to take a bath on and that is NOT recoverable. The M system will also sell second hand and frankly I did very well their and even the DMR i did okay, what about this 50 K investment is the question mark. Will I recover comfortable in 2 years?

Obviously i could go on for days on all this but I know for a fact their are guys like me sitting here chewing very heavily on some of these things that some folks have no idea what is going on in our heads from a Pro's seat. Bottom line i can't turn to my other profession and make money, there is none. This is it, end of story roll the casket out the old lady is putting a camera in my box because this is what i do. LOL

 

[markowich]

It really is a camera that fits me well. One reason I want to test it too. But I have a lot of checkmarks to X out before my pocket starts to shake the last bit of dust out of it to get one. It's not so much will it work, i already know it will in a lot of ways. Let's face it a sensor is a sensor is a sensor. Very little difference between them and the lenses will obviously be good. I already know it will most likely be better than my current 31mpx back in SOME ways. I do need a VERY clean ISO 800 and if I can get a clean 1250 and maybe a push to 1600 than it will be equal too or better than my P30+ which is probably the best at high ISO currently. Speed issues are solved it is a faster shooting cam than mine and some of the features are world class in MF land , Like 2 cards to shoot too is more important to me than weather sealing. It rains most likely my shoot is cancelled anyway and same for many Pro shooters, certainly nice to have but not my main purchase decision and let's face it after all these years without weather sealing not much has changed or will it.

The real question marks and may have nothing whatsoever to do with the hobbyist but everything to do with the Pro. Service , support, long lasting history of this unit. Plus some really important one which gets sidetracked here is the lenses are MADE for this sensor size, what about the future if Leica went bigger am I screwed like the R series and BTW folks that is long dead and gone. Wishing on the stars will never bring that back. IT's OVER

This is the stuff I need to think about is 2 years down the road what's happening can make this a extremely bad idea and lose my house over it or will the success of it continue and get my money back if I bail on it. As Peter said it is a niche product , I totally agree but question is do Pro's buy niche products or do we stay mainstream with rental houses and market saturation on products like Hassy and Phase which is a totally flooded market with used gear and camera options not to mention lens options. The S2 you immediately paint yourself kneeling in front of the Leica Gods and praying for a different type lens or firmware or accessory that you desperately need and may not come out for a year. Let's be honest Leica is a little slow on product development which is fine they are small and that is okay if you have everything you need but if you need something badly there is no other source. In Hassy and Phase we can cheat around with modular stuff that has been built up over the years to find some solutions. Does Leica intend to make a 1.4 converter, a extension tube, a magnifier eyepiece etc. etc. Now don't get me wrong maybe they will in time. Key word is time and how much sitting on our hands do we wait it out. Admittedly I am waiting for a new Phase body and the new DF is a major welcome to me but does not serve all of my desires either, so some waiting is unfortunate and understandable .

This is the stuff and I just hit a very small part of it and Marc hit some of them that i have to seriously decide on one way or the other. These are real concerns to working shooters that many folks don't understand. Hell just a replacement tethered cable could be hell to get one. Not saying it can't happen but with a new system like this it is a concern on buying decision. For the hobbyist most of them could give a rats *** about half of this stuff because it will never be a issue. For that I envy them that they can freely walk into a store buy whatever they want with not a care about it. Good for them, bad for guy's like me. As Marc said it is not so much about the ROI i already would lose my shirt on that one with almost any system at least going by a year or two investment, 5 years maybe. LOL

I think this is part of the battle here some could care less while others their whole existence is based on these type of buying decisions. Than throw the Leica whatever they make has to be great folks in their it all gets so screwed up you can't breath a bad Leica comment. Folks I am a Leica fan boy so I don't even want to hear that denial. But I have to take a much more realistic approach on this more than I did on the DMR and M system. If this is a mistake it is a **** load of money to take a bath on and that is NOT recoverable. The M system will also sell second hand and frankly I did very well their and even the DMR i did okay, what about this 50 K investment is the question mark. Will I recover comfortable in 2 years?

Obviously i could go on for days on all this but I know for a fact their are guys like me sitting here chewing very heavily on some of these things that some folks have no idea what is going on in our heads from a Pro's seat. Bottom line i can't turn to my other profession and make money, there is none. This is it, end of story roll the casket out the old lady is putting a camera in my box because this is what i do. LOL

guy,
i bet you (it is an unfair bet actually....) that you will not get clean 640 iso out of the S2. it will be at least one stop worse than the M9 on a per-pixel noise level.
I am afraid that this is where MF will remain unless a big player decides to enter and ups the MF sensor technology. until then we shall be stuck with incremental CCD improvements.
peter

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I won't argue that Peter for sure and very aware of CCD technology versus noise. Mainly one reason the P30+ is as good as it is mainly because of C1 and the profiles for the P30+. It is going to be interesting to see how leica attacks this, the M9 looked pretty good when I tested it at just under 1250. How this will translate over to the S2 is something to be seen. Certainly a test Jack and I will do come December 9th between the S2 and the P30+ and P40+.

 

[vieri]

I won't argue that Peter for sure and very aware of CCD technology versus noise. Mainly one reason the P30+ is as good as it is mainly because of C1 and the profiles for the P30+. It is going to be interesting to see how leica attacks this, the M9 looked pretty good when I tested it at just under 1250. How this will translate over to the S2 is something to be seen. Certainly a test Jack and I will do come December 9th between the S2 and the P30+ and P40+.

Now that (high ISO) is something else already - if MF would be even close to competitive with DSLR on this one, as well as general camera operational speed, I would be as happy as I could be. Would just give up my Nikon gear altogether and stick with DMF only. Thing is, I do lot of low light work (concerts & such) and - though I am still new in the digital MF arena, and haven't tried it yet - I think that I would be in serious troubles trying and using my P1 for that.

Shot-to-shot speed, while good for people in the studio (barely) and for landscape/product/everything-that-doesn't-move work, is abysmally slow for concert & stage work; shutter lag is even worse... But, if the DF will be good enough there, and the P65+ in high-ISO mode will give me something like good enough ISO 800 and usable ISO 1600 at least, then I would be all set. The jump from the P45+ to the P65+, selling the former and quite a bit of Nikon gear, would be painless enough on the wallet, and I would get the P65+ high resolution mode as well for the studio, for the technical camera, etc.

Still, my two digital kits (P1 + 28, 80, 150 / D3 + 17-35, 24-70, 70-200) are way more flexible and less expensive together than a S2 kit covering the same focals will be...

I am with Guy on this one - having to make money with the gear, or to put it better, having to have gear that makes you money, put everything into a very different perspective... wish I was just rich! :wtf:

 

[ddk]

Speaking from the hobbyist camp Guy, you'll be surprised how much of what you said is considered in a purchase for me. Currently without a medium wa lens, S2 has only limited appeal for me, I DON'T WANT A ZOOM! The other issue is backup, unlike a modular system that I can easily have more than one body, multiple S2s isn't realistic in my case. 3rd, the lack of dedicated software is a turn off when I see how much I lose with my Leaf, Fuji, Kodak files using ACR, C1, SP or any of the other converters compared to their dedicated software. Of course there's always the issue of what will I get if I want to sell...with 3 Leaf backs, its a harsh reality!

As far as high ISO goes, I don't see how Leica can do any better than others with the same chip, so I'm not deluding myself there, but the weatherproofing is something that I actually do need.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks David and i may have put the hobbyist in the i don't care or not looking beyond category. Obviously not my intention for sure but more a point of reference. The ISO stuff is going to be interesting and one thing i actually do like is the Sensor Plus stuff but missing on the S2 for now at least. I agree on the raw processing I like C1 and we all know that and my hope is the S2 will work in it, if not that is not going to be easy for me to switch if I decided on the S2.

 

[Jack]

Still, my two digital kits (P1 + 28, 80, 150 / D3 + 17-35, 24-70, 70-200) are way more flexible and less expensive together than a S2 kit covering the same focals will be...

I think this is the exact "practical decision point" that most buyers aside from the very affluent will face. Simple fact is that for what a basic three-lens S2 system will cost, one can buy a complete MF system which is more modular than the S2 PLUS a complete DSLR system that is more flexible than the S2 as respects ISO and handling speed.

OTOH, just like Peter A has been saying, it's about the target market: if you are one of the very affluent, you can own all three (or six, or eight) systems and not care about the costs or even faults, so this is an irrelevant conversation...

 

[carstenw]

Christopher, it isn't about the red dot, only fools look at that. There are duds in the Leica lineup too. I had the old green-stripe Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro and it thoroughly failed to impress me. I didn't like the look particularly and there was something about the micro-contrast which I didn't like. Maybe your copy is better. The new could be better, I haven't tested it, but I would be surprised if it is fully, optically as good as the Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO Macro, to be honest. For example, Canons often show CA in certain situations where the Leica just wouldn't.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I think this is the exact "practical decision point" that most buyers aside from the very affluent will face. Simple fact is that for what a basic three-lens S2 system will cost, one can buy a complete MF system which is more modular than the S2 PLUS a complete DSLR system that is more flexible than the S2 as respects ISO and handling speed.

OTOH, just like Peter A has been saying, it's about the target market: if you are one of the very affluent, you can own all three (or six, or eight) systems and not care about the costs or even faults, so this is an irrelevant conversation...

Great point Jack and you know I am fighting this one with a P40+ and spending the 8k or so for that or just go buy a Nikon D700 and a couple lenses for the grunt stuff and higher ISO work. This is a constant head battle for me.

I know Marc is smiling as he reads this. LOL
But it is about being smart on your needs but your wants maybe totally different. :talk028::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[carstenw]

I don't get that. If the final product is the print, and if the print does not show the difference between two lenses, why should one care whether one lens is "better" (in the sense of optical qualities, not handling) than the other? In fact, how do you even want to determine which is "better"?

Well, there are two "ifs" in your statement, so either one of those could swing it. I think it is prudent to 1) know how good your equipment is, even if it goes beyond your current needs, and 2) have a bit in reserve, in case you one day need to do something different, and hit some of the existing problems which previously didn't matter.

It is like Guy and his P30+. Most of his customers don't need the resolution or DR that an MFDB gives, but he has been bitten in the past, and now he keeps his reserves, just in case.

My feeling is the same about top equipment. Most people start with equipment with visible limitations, and then gradually move up. At some point, there are no more visible limitations in the current workflow, but the customers might be more demanding in the future. At some point, there is are enough reserves for reasonable scenarios, and that is where I stop. I do not want to have a lens which produces obvious CA, for example, even if I cannot see it in a print. Maybe an order will come through for a print twice as large, and then I need to sit around all night and make that CA go away.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

It is like Guy and his P30+. Most of his customers don't need the resolution or DR that an MFDB gives, but he has been bitten in the past, and now he keeps his reserves, just in case.

Hit the nail on the head Carsten and I have been burned by this. I want the no excuses file. I'm doing it this morning shot a job yesterday that certainly don't need 31 mpx and processing nice decent size jpegs but someday or maybe never get that call, any chance we can put this on the side of a building. No is not a word you want to use with clients. It bugs me to no end to say no.

 

[Bob]

I have to admit that I have the instincts of a fish in some regards
I LIKE NEW SHINY THINGS.
but there are a whole lot of others out there
There is also the bit about the assimilation time for a new system.
I might be a slow learner, but it takes me a few months before I really feel comfortable with new gear. What I mean by comfortable is that all settings are set up just right and as shooting conditions change, the necessary changes in camera settings seem to just happen without thought.
The one system I have owned that required considerably less than "months" was the M8 as far as familiarity, but then "months" changed into "many months" as each lens and camera needed a trip to the repair shop, sometimes more than once before it behaved correctly.
Part of my reservations about the S2 is linked to this past experience with the M8.
So in this way (and maybe in one more) I resemble an elephant a bit more than a fish.:ROTFL:
Maybe I am just being unfair, but because of this, I will wait and see how this stuff is in real terms over a few months of real production shipments. My days of being the guinea-pig on Leica gear are over.
-bob

 

[fotografz]

guy,
i bet you (it is an unfair bet actually....) that you will not get clean 640 iso out of the S2. it will be at least one stop worse than the M9 on a per-pixel noise level.
I am afraid that this is where MF will remain unless a big player decides to enter and ups the MF sensor technology. until then we shall be stuck with incremental CCD improvements.
peter

This presupposes that the overriding criteria is some pre-conceived notion of what "clean" is and how important that is to commercial applications.

My H3D-II/39 does a decent ISO 800, so did the Leaf Aptus 75s ... and what I mean by decent is that print-size to print-size as good as or better than my Canon 1DsMKIII @ 800. For paying work I've used ISO 800 exactly zero times in studio. 90% of the time it's the native ISO 50 used with 4800 w/s of pure, clean repeatable Profoto light. Location work was rarely over that ... maybe ISO 200 or 400 to move up the DOF a bit for some industrial stuff when using my smaller Hensel location lighting kit.

No question that all these MFD cameras are excellent performers with fat studio strobe lighting and perfect location conditions ... and I'd speculate that 95% of commercial applications are exactly that. It's why there is weather day insurance. I've done some location stuff for a horse back riding rain gear manufacturer, and even they shot during golden hour ... demoing the product by galloping in a river.

Guy's higher ISO needs aren't all that common because he shoots really diverse stuff ... which is probably why he's still in business unlike a ton of other shooters today ...

Like Guy, I am interested in what I can do with the S2 out of the studio ... except based on my criteria. It doesn't have to beat a 35mm DSLR on their turf, just be close enough for the way I shoot and my end expectations. In the studio there is no question it'll win compared to my 35mm DSLRs (portraits and group shots etc.) and be just as easy to handle. Which is why I need a "hands on" with it.

I agree with Guy, the service and follow through is a critical element ... if not THE critical element.

-Marc

 

[carstenw]

I think that is prudent behaviour in any case, Bob. I would not recommend to anyone that they gamble on the S2. If someone is wealthy and independent enough that it doesn't impact their bottom line or their budget if the S2 is flaky for the first six months, then go for it, but otherwise, wait a little and see how it works out. I do believe that even if there are problems, and I am sure that there will be *something*, in the end Leica will make it right, as they did with the M8. It might take some time though. As it did with the M8.

 

[ddk]

I guess everyone's high iso needs are different Marc and maybe some of the reasons for preferring certain equipment. While I mostly shoot outside on location and usually have enough lights, depending on the grain pattern of the sensor, I prefer to shoot at higher iso settings, usually at least at 400 and preferably 600, I find camera's base iso results too clean for my tastes most of the time, useable high iso for me simply means pleasant noise pattern with little smearing.