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!
Leica S-E versus Sony A7R, or even A7RII
- Thread starter biglouis
- Start date
Personally, I've found the later developments of this thread of enormous value ... but for less than obvious reasons.
Firstly, as far as I can determine, the debate aspect of "this verses that" probably has little to no effect on current beliefs and preferences, and only serves to reinforce each side of the debate, perhaps even entrench them.
What strikes me here is the diversity of users, their backgrounds, motivation to make photos, and assumptions made about mindsets of other people who engage in making photos.
Admittedly, I'm not a photo-techno-geek but can fake it pretty well
. Yet, the value I glean from this thread, and many like it (including many image threads), is that the geek-factor is dominating people's relationship to photography. For me, it serves as a reminder to stop doing that, and start paying attention to exercising my creative muscles ... because everyone can benefit from putting their creative side to more use.
At the risk of being non-PC, there seems to be a predominance of rationalizations using the mind-set of a computer-geek rather than an artist. I think that is a creeping disease. It can infect anyone that allows it to affect their thinking to any creatively directional degree.
- Marc
And... Obviously, there are a good number of folks here with decent means to afford any of this stuff ... or ... those who have placed a high priority on certain gear, and are willing to forego other pleasures in the pursuit of their passion (a concept I totally get having skipped many a lunch in Art school to buy a tube of paint). Frankly, I've never related to the "investment" notion regarding camera gear ... the value is in the use. Once I buy something, I consider it financially worthless, but creatively invaluable ... because I'm not a banker, I'm a creative person. When shooting for money or pleasure I always felt it was an investment in myself, my creative growth, not an investment in a thing.
Firstly, as far as I can determine, the debate aspect of "this verses that" probably has little to no effect on current beliefs and preferences, and only serves to reinforce each side of the debate, perhaps even entrench them.
What strikes me here is the diversity of users, their backgrounds, motivation to make photos, and assumptions made about mindsets of other people who engage in making photos.
Admittedly, I'm not a photo-techno-geek but can fake it pretty well
. Yet, the value I glean from this thread, and many like it (including many image threads), is that the geek-factor is dominating people's relationship to photography. For me, it serves as a reminder to stop doing that, and start paying attention to exercising my creative muscles ... because everyone can benefit from putting their creative side to more use. At the risk of being non-PC, there seems to be a predominance of rationalizations using the mind-set of a computer-geek rather than an artist. I think that is a creeping disease. It can infect anyone that allows it to affect their thinking to any creatively directional degree.
- Marc
And... Obviously, there are a good number of folks here with decent means to afford any of this stuff ... or ... those who have placed a high priority on certain gear, and are willing to forego other pleasures in the pursuit of their passion (a concept I totally get having skipped many a lunch in Art school to buy a tube of paint). Frankly, I've never related to the "investment" notion regarding camera gear ... the value is in the use. Once I buy something, I consider it financially worthless, but creatively invaluable ... because I'm not a banker, I'm a creative person. When shooting for money or pleasure I always felt it was an investment in myself, my creative growth, not an investment in a thing.
Michiel Schierbeek
Well-known member
So true Marc! As soon as you drive your car out of the showroom it's worth half of the price :loco:, but you can at least drive 5 times around the globe with it.
It is not much better with camera gear except some Leica lenses and some rare lenses but you can fill up your harddrive with masterpieces and try to get them into a showroom.
You shouldn't have sold all your beautifull gear in the past for to less money and could have instead a small museum with beautifull vitrines full of the history of Photographic gear from the last century. :ROTFL:
M
mjr
Guest
Afternoon
There are as many opinions as there are people to express them, unlikely anyone has the exact requirements as someone else, that's why it's good there are so many manufacturers and products available, the best feeling in the world is knowing you have exactly what you need!
Leica is not infallible, issues were mentioned earlier in the thread, I have definitely had issues with lenses and bodies, I definitely don't feel though that an expensive camera should be automatically free of issues! I remember a couple of years ago when I hit 40 I did the ridiculous thing of buying a Porsche 911 turbo, a year old, almost £70k, it broke 4 times in the first week, spent 1 month in the workshop and broke down on the day I got it back, price is no indication of reliability! Not only did I look a complete mid-life crisis dick driving it, I looked even more of a dick waiting for a recovery truck in the car park of the local supermarket! Sold it after 2 months and went back to accepting rough arsed people like me shouldn't drive Porsches!
One thing I will say about Leica is that when things do go wrong, their reaction is pretty faultless, I received a 24mm with poor performance, sent them a couple of files and also a couple from the 35mm to show how much better it was, they immediately sent me a new body, 24mm and 35mm and took all 3 of mine back to check everything, that's pretty good service although obviously I'd rather nothing went wrong I am a realist. A decent dealer is key, I had replacement kit in 48hrs, only because I live in a pretty remote place, 3 weeks later everything is on the way back to me, repaired, adjusted and ready to go with no charge, I can't ask for more than that.
When I used Nikon, despite having a large kit I couldn't join NPS because most of my lenses were Zeiss not Nikon so I was not regarded as a Pro because I didn't own enough Nikon kit, ridiculous!
Anyway, we should all be happy using whatever we want to use, anyone find themselves in the North of Sweden then let me know and we can celebrate our differences by joining in out similarities and head out to take some beautiful photographs.
Mat
There are as many opinions as there are people to express them, unlikely anyone has the exact requirements as someone else, that's why it's good there are so many manufacturers and products available, the best feeling in the world is knowing you have exactly what you need!
Leica is not infallible, issues were mentioned earlier in the thread, I have definitely had issues with lenses and bodies, I definitely don't feel though that an expensive camera should be automatically free of issues! I remember a couple of years ago when I hit 40 I did the ridiculous thing of buying a Porsche 911 turbo, a year old, almost £70k, it broke 4 times in the first week, spent 1 month in the workshop and broke down on the day I got it back, price is no indication of reliability! Not only did I look a complete mid-life crisis dick driving it, I looked even more of a dick waiting for a recovery truck in the car park of the local supermarket! Sold it after 2 months and went back to accepting rough arsed people like me shouldn't drive Porsches!
One thing I will say about Leica is that when things do go wrong, their reaction is pretty faultless, I received a 24mm with poor performance, sent them a couple of files and also a couple from the 35mm to show how much better it was, they immediately sent me a new body, 24mm and 35mm and took all 3 of mine back to check everything, that's pretty good service although obviously I'd rather nothing went wrong I am a realist. A decent dealer is key, I had replacement kit in 48hrs, only because I live in a pretty remote place, 3 weeks later everything is on the way back to me, repaired, adjusted and ready to go with no charge, I can't ask for more than that.
When I used Nikon, despite having a large kit I couldn't join NPS because most of my lenses were Zeiss not Nikon so I was not regarded as a Pro because I didn't own enough Nikon kit, ridiculous!
Anyway, we should all be happy using whatever we want to use, anyone find themselves in the North of Sweden then let me know and we can celebrate our differences by joining in out similarities and head out to take some beautiful photographs.
Mat
Stuart Richardson
Active member
When they did the passport warranty for M bodies. It was 5 years, and the typical one was one year.
I've recently been going through a similar decision as the OP, so I feel like my experience may be relevant; I apologize in advance if this is too long winded. I'd moved away from my Nikon system when the A7rII came out, and I've been shooting it with a Canon 24 TS, the Sony 35 1.4 and 90 macro. Great lenses, no doubt about that, and there's no question in my mind that EVFs are the future. Having continuous eye tracking autofocus that nails focus almost every time is a game changer, and it allowed me to not worry about chimping like I would have shooting a fast prime on my Nikon.
Having said that, I haven't loved the A7rII. It's usability is not great, and I have concerns about how it'd work for me once winter comes around since I live in the upper peninsula of Michigan and it gets pretty cold and snowy. The battery issue is frustrating, mainly because it's something that I have to be aware of when I'm shooting; I almost never even gave the battery of my D800 a second thought because I'd have to heap a ton of long exposure abuse on it in the cold to run it down.
I also was never quite happy with the color that the camera put out, even with making custom profiles with an X-rite. I'm not a post processing or color management expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I felt like the colors take a quick turn towards unrealistic when you start trying to push the files around a little bit. That eventually made me turn towards trying Capture 1, and I found that I was most happy with using the Phase IQ250 camera profiles for most situations.
Let me take a step back and provide a little context here. I'm not doing photography for a living; I'm relatively young and own a hotel and restaurant which takes up a boatload of my time, and I don't make a lot of money. Photography is my favorite hobby, and I realized that I was spending time making color profiles and trying to learn new post processing software that was IN NO WAY ENJOYABLE rather than being out shooting.
Landscapes and nature are what I mainly enjoy shooting, although I do enjoy photographing people now and then, so I started considering other options that would address the shortcomings of the Sony. The 645z was at the top of the list, and while I couldn't afford a new one and a couple of new lenses, I was cautiously optimistic about the performance of older used lenses. When I found a screaming deal on a used 645z body, I impulsively purchased it along with a 35 A, 55 DFA and 120 FA. It's big. The AF coverage sucks, and the 120 sounds like a drill in a dentist's office when it focuses. The lenses are comparatively slow. Mirror slap is clearly an issue. Having said that, I LOVE using it. It seems durable, should be easy to use in cold/inclement weather, and the quality of the files truly blows me away even when using these older legacy lenses. The button layout makes sense to me, and I have to think far less about what I'm doing with the camera.
Most importantly, I ENJOY using this camera and I ENJOY the output from it. Maybe renting the Leica system along with the Sony would be the best option to see what really jives with you. I'm loathe to give up the compact size and phenomenally useful AF and EVF, along with a boundless pool of lenses to adapt, but if it's not giving me joy, then it's not worth fighting with.
Having said that, I haven't loved the A7rII. It's usability is not great, and I have concerns about how it'd work for me once winter comes around since I live in the upper peninsula of Michigan and it gets pretty cold and snowy. The battery issue is frustrating, mainly because it's something that I have to be aware of when I'm shooting; I almost never even gave the battery of my D800 a second thought because I'd have to heap a ton of long exposure abuse on it in the cold to run it down.
I also was never quite happy with the color that the camera put out, even with making custom profiles with an X-rite. I'm not a post processing or color management expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I felt like the colors take a quick turn towards unrealistic when you start trying to push the files around a little bit. That eventually made me turn towards trying Capture 1, and I found that I was most happy with using the Phase IQ250 camera profiles for most situations.
Let me take a step back and provide a little context here. I'm not doing photography for a living; I'm relatively young and own a hotel and restaurant which takes up a boatload of my time, and I don't make a lot of money. Photography is my favorite hobby, and I realized that I was spending time making color profiles and trying to learn new post processing software that was IN NO WAY ENJOYABLE rather than being out shooting.
Landscapes and nature are what I mainly enjoy shooting, although I do enjoy photographing people now and then, so I started considering other options that would address the shortcomings of the Sony. The 645z was at the top of the list, and while I couldn't afford a new one and a couple of new lenses, I was cautiously optimistic about the performance of older used lenses. When I found a screaming deal on a used 645z body, I impulsively purchased it along with a 35 A, 55 DFA and 120 FA. It's big. The AF coverage sucks, and the 120 sounds like a drill in a dentist's office when it focuses. The lenses are comparatively slow. Mirror slap is clearly an issue. Having said that, I LOVE using it. It seems durable, should be easy to use in cold/inclement weather, and the quality of the files truly blows me away even when using these older legacy lenses. The button layout makes sense to me, and I have to think far less about what I'm doing with the camera.
Most importantly, I ENJOY using this camera and I ENJOY the output from it. Maybe renting the Leica system along with the Sony would be the best option to see what really jives with you. I'm loathe to give up the compact size and phenomenally useful AF and EVF, along with a boundless pool of lenses to adapt, but if it's not giving me joy, then it's not worth fighting with.
Erik should get a factory contraption to mount both his 24TS and that wonderful back to fully enjoy his spending.
Eduardo
Eduardo
Erik,
Looking at the lower left corner of your comparison image, I feel that "Quite close" is putting it generously.
Now imagine if that P45+ file was in C1P, let alone shot on a system with more up to date lenses.
ErikKaffehr
Well-known member
Hi,
I don't really understand your point. It was my ambition to buy a Hartblei HCam B1 for the P45+, that would allow me to use the Canon T&S lenses with the P45+ and also give T&S with the Hasselblad lenses I already own.
The images I posted were shot with the Sony SAL 24-70/2.8 ZA lens at 45 mm.
I don't really understand Synn's comment. He refers to the lower left of my samples. If he means the full image, that part is just water reflektion. The lower left in my crop is from the center of the images.
The link here shows the crop that Synn may refer to, upsized 200% in Photoshop CC. I can in no way say that the P45+ image is better than the Sony, rather the other way. Synn is probably right in saying that Capture One would do a better job on the P45+ image, but that would also apply to the Sony image, and Capture One does not support the Leica S system. The Sony is on the left and the P45+ on the right this time.
The Distagon 60/3.5 CF is not a bad lens, BTW. I would say the Hasselblad HC 50 is an excellent lens (at least according to MTF data from Zeiss) and so is the Leica.
Must be said, the Leica S-lenses are really excellent, at least according to the MTF data published by Leica. So, that would really speak for the Leica S.
Best regards
Erik
I don't really understand your point. It was my ambition to buy a Hartblei HCam B1 for the P45+, that would allow me to use the Canon T&S lenses with the P45+ and also give T&S with the Hasselblad lenses I already own.
The images I posted were shot with the Sony SAL 24-70/2.8 ZA lens at 45 mm.
I don't really understand Synn's comment. He refers to the lower left of my samples. If he means the full image, that part is just water reflektion. The lower left in my crop is from the center of the images.
The link here shows the crop that Synn may refer to, upsized 200% in Photoshop CC. I can in no way say that the P45+ image is better than the Sony, rather the other way. Synn is probably right in saying that Capture One would do a better job on the P45+ image, but that would also apply to the Sony image, and Capture One does not support the Leica S system. The Sony is on the left and the P45+ on the right this time.
The Distagon 60/3.5 CF is not a bad lens, BTW. I would say the Hasselblad HC 50 is an excellent lens (at least according to MTF data from Zeiss) and so is the Leica.
Must be said, the Leica S-lenses are really excellent, at least according to the MTF data published by Leica. So, that would really speak for the Leica S.
Best regards
Erik
Re: Leica S-E versus Sony A7R, or even A7RI
Ui have a sony A7r and contax 645 with old sinar 54 lv.
Previously owned Alpa TC and swa with P 65+ and Leaf 75s
Also Canon 5d2 and Nikon D3x. Also M6.
Ranking by fun :
1. alpa swa - P65+ Fantastic
2. TC - P65+ Great
3. M6
4. D3x - what an object
5. Contax - P65+ - waist finder - great viewfinder, not thaat big
6. Sony . Light an small but NO fun
7. Contax - Sinar - very heavy, big, 50 iso only. Great vf.
I shoul add the iphone 6+ in rank 3 : great videos, family pictures in my pocket ...
Rankink by image quality - my tastes ie natural rich colors, not artificial contrast, 3D look and great.textures. Resolution is secondary for me as I don't print big.
1. Alpa 12 TC - Sinar for landscapes / contax - sinar for portraits. Both are fantastic.
2. Same with P65+. Higher resolution and hit rate, hugher DR by far, but colors are not so wow
3. Sony - jpegs are awfull, uggly colors. But after treatment quite good. You add a great DR and high iso, the most versatile camera with highest hit rate. The 55 mm is a bit too technical for portraits compared to to the fabulous contax lenses.
4. M6
4. Nikon
5. Canon
I can imagine different Categories of taste :
- professional-technical willing to pay for fun/inspiration with the camera : MF
- professional-technical, need for a technical tool : Sony as it works without fun
- professional-fine art : MF for colors
- non professionnal : sony for pragmatic persons, MF for wealthy epicurians
This is the opinion of a not-so-wealthy-but-ok-epicurian-and-geek. Would LOVE to get fun and similar great results with the sony, but still FAR from that (very good but not magic). MK2 is apparently quite better, I cannot comment.
Regards
Marc Oliver
Ui have a sony A7r and contax 645 with old sinar 54 lv.
Previously owned Alpa TC and swa with P 65+ and Leaf 75s
Also Canon 5d2 and Nikon D3x. Also M6.
Ranking by fun :
1. alpa swa - P65+ Fantastic
2. TC - P65+ Great
3. M6
4. D3x - what an object
5. Contax - P65+ - waist finder - great viewfinder, not thaat big
6. Sony . Light an small but NO fun
7. Contax - Sinar - very heavy, big, 50 iso only. Great vf.
I shoul add the iphone 6+ in rank 3 : great videos, family pictures in my pocket ...
Rankink by image quality - my tastes ie natural rich colors, not artificial contrast, 3D look and great.textures. Resolution is secondary for me as I don't print big.
1. Alpa 12 TC - Sinar for landscapes / contax - sinar for portraits. Both are fantastic.
2. Same with P65+. Higher resolution and hit rate, hugher DR by far, but colors are not so wow
3. Sony - jpegs are awfull, uggly colors. But after treatment quite good. You add a great DR and high iso, the most versatile camera with highest hit rate. The 55 mm is a bit too technical for portraits compared to to the fabulous contax lenses.
4. M6
4. Nikon
5. Canon
I can imagine different Categories of taste :
- professional-technical willing to pay for fun/inspiration with the camera : MF
- professional-technical, need for a technical tool : Sony as it works without fun
- professional-fine art : MF for colors
- non professionnal : sony for pragmatic persons, MF for wealthy epicurians
This is the opinion of a not-so-wealthy-but-ok-epicurian-and-geek. Would LOVE to get fun and similar great results with the sony, but still FAR from that (very good but not magic). MK2 is apparently quite better, I cannot comment.
Regards
Marc Oliver
At 2x-3x the normal prices and 5x times the failure rate, I expect 5x the normal warranty at a minimum. That would be a start.
Actually wait...I think Leica read my mind and realized just how s^^&&* their AF mechanism on the S lenses is: they are now offering to repair the AF module for free, no matter how old the lens. So that IS a start. Ask them to call me when they offer the same on S cameras.
I hope they will refund folks who shelled out $$s earlier to get the AF repaired.
https://en.leica-camera.com/World-of-Leica/Leica-News/About-Leica-News/Global/2015/Goodwill-arrangement-for-Leica-S-Lenses
'nuff said, don't want to hijack this thread.
Last edited:
Hi Erik, I meant something like the Hartblei Hcam you just mentioned (contraption-wise). Based on your results and comparisons, I tend to believe and if I recall well, some other fellows have suggested that maybe your CF glass it's not up to the task. Or maybe it is and just perhaps that Sony is kicking *** olympicly.
Whatever the truth is, every year I find the justification to move to DMF harder and harder to achieve.
That Sony turned their sensor fabrication an independent company is somehow encouraging. I think there will be more chances now for "Sony Sensor Inc" to really pursue the leadership of MF sensor making too and therefore ignite the digital medium format world.
Best,
Eduardo
Whatever the truth is, every year I find the justification to move to DMF harder and harder to achieve.
That Sony turned their sensor fabrication an independent company is somehow encouraging. I think there will be more chances now for "Sony Sensor Inc" to really pursue the leadership of MF sensor making too and therefore ignite the digital medium format world.
Best,
Eduardo
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
:thumbs: Not much to add. I love my almost state of the art gear but I enjoy shooting and the results more. With any camera btw. Given the choice though it's my Alpa and Phase IQ & tech camera lenses. Today though it's darned close with my Actus DB, in fact almost more so. I have an Actus for my Sony A7RII coming soon and it'll be interesting to see how well that stands up as the ultimate system (for me).
My "favorite" system - probably my full Xpan II. But for completely different reasons.
Last edited:
biglouis
Well-known member
Wow! This has been a great thread to read through.
A couple of points in response to questions above.
I mainly shoot urban landscapes. For most of my recent life work has meant that I shoot early morning or late afternoon on my way to work. If you follow my links below you'll see what I do.
I am happy with the output of the Sony system. I just don't enjoy the ergonomics. I don't get the same buzz I did with my idiosyncratic Leica M8 or the simple Hasselblad 500CM and 50 distagon. I do however get a lot more keepers.
Anyway, thanks again for all the information. It hasn't made me want to rush out and take advantage of the offer I talked about in the original post but that isn't a criticism of the responses only my own lack of decisiveness!
Thanks
LouisB
A couple of points in response to questions above.
I mainly shoot urban landscapes. For most of my recent life work has meant that I shoot early morning or late afternoon on my way to work. If you follow my links below you'll see what I do.
I am happy with the output of the Sony system. I just don't enjoy the ergonomics. I don't get the same buzz I did with my idiosyncratic Leica M8 or the simple Hasselblad 500CM and 50 distagon. I do however get a lot more keepers.
Anyway, thanks again for all the information. It hasn't made me want to rush out and take advantage of the offer I talked about in the original post but that isn't a criticism of the responses only my own lack of decisiveness!
Thanks
LouisB
Thanks for information, good to know this.. I have AF failed on S-35 and S-120 so this would be a good time
to send them to Solms for repair
fmueller
Active member
I've got the Sony A7R2. I also have a Credo 60 on a Cambo with a couple of the modern Rodenstock's.
I've also got more stuff too. Too much. The simple insight that I pass along is that all my cameras are capable of producing very sharp imaging and while sharp can be nice it is not what sets the cameras (imaging systems) apart.
The A7R2 is the all around most used right now. A Ricoh GR is an amazing little camera that finds its way into a coat pocket when I don't carry more but the Credo gives me the deepest and most satisfying file but at the cost of being more cumbersome and, um, well cost.
I've also got more stuff too. Too much. The simple insight that I pass along is that all my cameras are capable of producing very sharp imaging and while sharp can be nice it is not what sets the cameras (imaging systems) apart.
The A7R2 is the all around most used right now. A Ricoh GR is an amazing little camera that finds its way into a coat pocket when I don't carry more but the Credo gives me the deepest and most satisfying file but at the cost of being more cumbersome and, um, well cost.