douglasf13
New member
+1 ?
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
S2 in the "Real World"
- Thread starter fotografz
- Start date
Well Shelby, being a M9 and A900 user, I just happen to know exactly what you are saying. Part of it may have to do with initial processing and viewing jpgs (which I was leery about doing) ... but I doubt it's so far off that the over-all S2 character will change dramatically.
Ideally, I'd like to avoid any comparisons.
I think it may come down to different feelings about pictorial aesthetics. The way that the Zeiss ZA lenses from Sony consistently produce a 3D quality is becoming something of hallmark for users, and we seem to miss it when absent. However, it may not be the over-riding aspect of IQ that others may deem as important.
There are aspects of the S2 experience others will uncover with more intense use against their criteria. I wasn't looking for things like distortion or sharpness across the frame ... which the specs on these lenses promise to be some of the best ever. Landscape shooters may have a whole other set of criteria differing from mine ... or for that matter, yours.
Personally, I accept different pictorial looks from different cameras ... however from a lifestyle angle my biggest concern would be AF speed and versatility. While using manual focus and stopping down can nail action shots ... that is somewhat true for any camera with a decent manual focus feel to it. These lenses may lend themselves to that sort of manual control better than others, but (IMO) it remains that the AF may well be a shock to those using most any DSLR, and a bit disappointing for those expecting an marked improvement over the later models of MFD cameras.
-Marc
Ideally, I'd like to avoid any comparisons.
I think it may come down to different feelings about pictorial aesthetics. The way that the Zeiss ZA lenses from Sony consistently produce a 3D quality is becoming something of hallmark for users, and we seem to miss it when absent. However, it may not be the over-riding aspect of IQ that others may deem as important.
There are aspects of the S2 experience others will uncover with more intense use against their criteria. I wasn't looking for things like distortion or sharpness across the frame ... which the specs on these lenses promise to be some of the best ever. Landscape shooters may have a whole other set of criteria differing from mine ... or for that matter, yours.
Personally, I accept different pictorial looks from different cameras ... however from a lifestyle angle my biggest concern would be AF speed and versatility. While using manual focus and stopping down can nail action shots ... that is somewhat true for any camera with a decent manual focus feel to it. These lenses may lend themselves to that sort of manual control better than others, but (IMO) it remains that the AF may well be a shock to those using most any DSLR, and a bit disappointing for those expecting an marked improvement over the later models of MFD cameras.
-Marc
Last edited:
LOL! Not really, just all bunched up into a ball ... not happy about being thrust up in the air that way.
-Marc
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Marc,
there are several things I struggle with:
1) The review which D. Farkas posted said, that the S2 AF is pretty fast and accurate. This is assumed to be due to the special information stored in the lenses so the AF does not start hunting. This is totally contra dictionary to what you found.
Does that mean that you had a bad sample of an S2?
2) Fast AF and what DSLR users are expecting ..... If you had a bad sample, then a good sample would be faster, because no AF hunting or what so ever.
And further one needs to understand that in a MF camera system you are moving much larger masses as in a 35 mm DSLR system, so actually no serious user should wonder that DSLRs are faster.
There remains the question if any DSLR AF is more accurate than the single point S2 AF ????
Where also remains the issue that a DSLR user questioning all this should simply stay out of MF as long as they do NOT understand the issues you have to deal with in MF world.
Sorry to say this as harsh, but we are dealing with MF and who does not understand simply should stay out of these comparisons and not waste our time here.
And finally - thanks for your efforts and posting your findings here, I find this extremely helpful on my final MF decision process :thumbs:
markowich
New member
marc, thanks for your report. it confirms my fears: the S2 is not a 35mm replacement, just a medium MPX smaller-than-usual MF type system. also, i am not convinced by the bokeh, it seems much more nervous than the M lens bokeh. the weatersealing is nice but i have used my H3DII 50 in bad weather in patagonia and elsewhere without failure.
i for my turn shall be waiting for the H4D 60, being now fully convinced that the S2 is not for me.
peter
i for my turn shall be waiting for the H4D 60, being now fully convinced that the S2 is not for me.
peter
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Not fighting for the S2 - but how can you make these serious decisions that fast?
Or just looking for arguments to stay with Hasselblad? Which is not a bad thing at all, but be honest - from the data we have so far one cannot tell that the H system is better or worse than the S System.
BTW . what do you think about Phase? This is a well known system and you obviously did choose Hasselblad over Phase - which must have had some reasons ....
markowich
New member
peter,
i concluded that the S2 is not for me since i was looking for a system, which could allow me to leave my nikons at home. meaning excellent AF and great iso 800. all the reports i have seen so far (except of course david farkas' one) find the AF rather under par.
as far as phaseone goes....the P65+ is wonderful. i have one and use it on alpa. couldn't be happier with it.
peter
douglasf13
New member
I'm not so sure, Peter. Marc is also a MFDB owner, and it seems reasonable for him to expect at least "near-35mm" AF from the S2, considering the "near-35mm" form factor is a major part of the appeal of this camera. Sure, the S2 lenses have more mass when compared to 24x36 lenses of the same focal length, but there are 24x36 lenses of equal size that are very quick as well. ie. the Leica 70 isn't bigger than a 135L.
markowich
New member
i do not think that lens weight is the main factor. it is AF algorithms. the very good ones (nikon, sony) are not available on the free market.
leica did not do its homework well when they brought the m8 to the market. i do not know what struck them when they concocted the S2. it seems 'in between' on all accounts.
peter
ps: they did their homework well with the m9, though.
leica did not do its homework well when they brought the m8 to the market. i do not know what struck them when they concocted the S2. it seems 'in between' on all accounts.
peter
ps: they did their homework well with the m9, though.
I'd love to see this camera in the hands of Bruce Weber who is used to shooting big MF cameras (Pentax 67) that shoot like 35mm.
No offence to anyone here or on LL, but seeing studio shots and snaps of friends don't encourage me to open up my wallet on $50K+ unproven system.
No offence to anyone here or on LL, but seeing studio shots and snaps of friends don't encourage me to open up my wallet on $50K+ unproven system.
It's the mass of the moving elements within the lens that matters most for AF-speed, not the size of the lens itself. The 70 uses all optical elements for focus (+ additional FE) which makes it really hard work for the motor.
AF-algorithms are important for follow focus, prediction and other high-speed work, not so much for "simple" focus & recompose. The S2-prototype I handled (with the 70 - no internal focussing) on Photokina was quite fast even under bad light conditions, definitely better than the other MF-systems - I'm wondering why we have different "speed-reports" from time to time!?
AF-algorithms are important for follow focus, prediction and other high-speed work, not so much for "simple" focus & recompose. The S2-prototype I handled (with the 70 - no internal focussing) on Photokina was quite fast even under bad light conditions, definitely better than the other MF-systems - I'm wondering why we have different "speed-reports" from time to time!?
Same camera and lenses as used by D. Farkas. No sample variation.
Take the time to carefully read what I wrote.
I DID NOT say the S2 AF was bad. I said those moving from 35mm DSLR should be aware this is MF and the all that implies, and those that think this is a MF camera that will focus considerably better than other MF cameras may be disappointed.
As to 35mm AF accuracy ... you may have issues with it ... I do not.
-Marc
How do you know it focuses "definitely better than any other MF system based on just this ... did you have all the other MF cameras right there to test in the same light on the same subject? Just curious.
FOR CLARIFICATION ... I did not say the S2 AF sucked or anything like that. It simply WASN"T some obvious quantum leap forward compared to CURRENT MFD offerings. In fact IMO, it isn't any sized leap forward in terms of MFD AF.
I will be trying the H4D's new AF system to see what that does to improve MFD AF performance, if anything.
-Marc
S
Shelby Lewis
Guest
Hey Douglas... I'm pretty sure Peter was asking me to keep my 35mm nose out of the debate... the considerable time I spent shooting film on the rz67II just doesn't count, lol. (Talk about bad AF.
)Marc... good points and I do appreciate them. It's difficult to be clear online, and I definitely was not attempting to compare the s2 with the m9 or a900 in any substantive form, and do agree that the look that I find endearing in those cameras isn't the standard by which good IQ should be judged... so apologies if that was not clear.
I do, however, stand be the idea that the s2 was/is marketed clearly as a camera with best-of-both-worlds attributes. It appears to do that to some extent... but IMO not well enough to warrant the hype (speaking in terms of AF). Oh well.
I still think the images I've seen lack a certain "something" regardless of what format I shoot. Especially coming from Leica.
Back to my 35mm ignorance.
D
ddk
Guest
You're not alone Shelby, I don't see any Leica magic (if there is such a thing) in any on line S2 images either, nor did I ever see it from the M8, though the M9 which I haven't tried for myself yet, seems to have some, though certainly nothing like the 35mm Ms.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I'm not seeing it yet either to be honest. I hope my 50 thousand mile long ago call on this is wrong that these lenses maybe to clinical looking. Bad thing is I maybe right, not seeing the mojo yet but holding final judgement on that for now.
Roger,
Any chance you can reprocess it or post the raw so a few others can take a shot at it? It really looked weird and not good...