S2 and my impressions.

[JanRSmit]

Guy, Keep the info on the S2 coming, i like your way of covering it, like i do the Farkas covering.:thumbup:

The S2 will be presented here in The Netherlands on Tuesday March 10 during a professional imaging show, and yes i will be there.


Jan R.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Actually, just to clarify, we do rent gear like Nikon, Canon, Avenger, Elincrhom, Profoto, etc. We also have Leica test drive gear.

We don't have as much rental inventory as a large studio in NYC or even here in Miami, but we do a pretty steady rental business to local pros and amateurs.

I do plan on renting the S2 and S-system lenses. We are in a major fashion and advertising market, so if the three or four major rental studios don't carry it (which I'm sure they will), then we will fill the gap. So, Forrest, if you were shooting here in Miami, I'd have you covered. In fact, I'd drive to your shoot to hand deliver you a replacement myself within an hour.

In any of the major photo markets there should be solid representation and support from larger dealers and rental studios alike. Most rental houses don't offer support and actually buy their gear from dealers, not direct. When a Phase back breaks, they call up their dealer. I expect the same situation with the S2.

David

Thanks David for reminding me on your rental business. Was trying to separate this out to some degree but bottom line any rental house that wants to buy the S2 and use that for rentals can do that. They would buy from the Leica sales reps usually in that case.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

So, Guy, in your handling of the S2, you talk a bit about its focus and shutter lag. What about over all responsiveness? Were you able to shoot things and look at them on something other than the LCD? Was anything other than ISO 100 available yet? What did that look like?

Did Leica talk about how their (Metz) flash will work with the S2? How accurate is the TTL part, or is it TTL-like?

On the lenses, what are their estimates of CS v. CS without the shutter availabilities? Did they have anything other than the earlier prototypes available to test out? The size and handling descriptions sound nice, but it is the optics and how that looks that most of us are more curious about.

Sorry to pepper with all the questions. Your impressions and recollections of some of this stuff does play into the vicarious experience for some ;-)

LJ

No nothing outside the normal LCD and i will start a new post of the rest here so I can transfer that to the LUF as well. I am having major MBP battery issue and lost 4 posts already and waiting for the Apple store to open to replace the battery. It's almost 2 years old and pretty well shot

 

[David K]

Thanks for your impressions Guy... sounds like a winner for my non-professional needs. Great news for me that David F will be renting them locally so I can get a chance to try before I buy...

 

[carstenw]

Who cares if H1/2 Phase One users are pissed? Not me. Not Hasselblad I'll bet ... because they did nothing for Hasselbald's survival or prosperity.

I think you just made my point. Hasselblad doesn't care that they screwed over H1/H2 users, because they only bought cameras from Hasselblad, not backs. I am sorry, but a camera is also a product. They should have thought this out ahead of time.

I'm sorry, but it's a ludicrous argument wracked with emotional vagueness.

Sure, but such is the human condition. Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, can't get fooled again Or even better, once burned, twice shy. I am sure there are a number of people in the Mamiya or Phase camps who would never return to Hasselblad because their trust was reamed once over by Hasselblad.

I also wonder at the reference to over-priced CF backs since they have always been the same price or less than any comparable Phase One unit, and can be used on any camera you wish without the unit going bye-bye or paying a mount change fee. Now, it's for sure that the CF-II is less expensive.

Here I have to plead ignorance. Whenever I have looked for CF/CFII prices, they have been very high. Where should I look to get a better idea? Let's say I am in the market for a 39MP back. Where can I fairly compare Phase One P45+, H3DII-39 and CFII-39 prices?

RE: the S2 redefining "closed" ... Canon and Nikon are not Medium Format systems ... just in case you didn't realize that ... it's an apples to watermelons analogy

I am aware of that. Leica is positioning themselves on the threshold between the two camps, and by not selling backs and bodies separately (which is sure to save a lot of development cost; maybe even enough to cover the difference in cost between a back and an S-system body upgrade...), they default to the closed camp. Whatever. I have no problem with someone being open or closed. It is just the going from open to closed case which stings.

 

[LJL]

No nothing outside the normal LCD and i will start a new post of the rest here so I can transfer that to the LUF as well. I am having major MBP battery issue and lost 4 posts already and waiting for the Apple store to open to replace the battery. It's almost 2 years old and pretty well shot

Thanks, Guy. Looking forward to your other comments and stuff.

Sorry to hear about your MBP battery issues. Rest assured, you are not alone there. I too am on my way to replace the battery for mine. Charge meter says 100%, pull the plug and instant shutdown in 10 minutes or less. Not good. There is a whole ugly community of threads about this on the Apple Discussion Forum.....nasty issue. Whatever battery you buy, it will NOT last very long, regardless of how careful you are with cycling it (weekly in some cases), and other tricks many of us have learned from camera gear. The batteries for these older MBPs just suck :thumbdown:

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Lenses and this is the post I lost. At release there are 3 CS lenses ( central shutter/Leaf shutter) that will hit the streets the 70,120 macro and 180 than shortly a 35mm CS lens than they will start with release of the FP lenses ( focal Plane) which without the CS shutter will be a little less costly to us. So the 24 and 30mm shift will be FP lenses and than a interesting twist here and great idea. Leica say with the 180CS lens will also come out with a 180mm FP lens . So the buyer will have a choice of either going CS or FP lenses on what there needs maybe. Thisis a great way to save money. Some folks may only 1 or 2 CS lenses in there kits and the rest FP lenses so this will save them some money on purchase. Leica has thought through on the cost savings issue. Sapphire glass and non Sapphire glass for example. Also there was a working 180mm at the demo and I did play with that and it was very sharp on the LCD screen.

Also another note. It is at least figured to do a good ISO 800 and a great chance at 1600 as well with full resolution of the sensor. Leica like the Phase P65 Plus with sensor plus can bin down the resolution to give a smaller file and better ISO levels. Same here with the S2 and that is a 9.3 mpx binning and estimates are ISO 3200 or better . Now don't get all excited because until the final firmware and files are seen and tested this is still a question mark on true ISO values and what is great and what is noisy. Now being a MF shooter and also CCD sensors for the last 5 or 6 years pushing a CCD sensor over 1600 is a wet dream. Cmos different story but CCD and Kodak this one is tough. The only CCD Kodak is the P30 plus at 1600 and the Hassy H31 which just got upgraded to 1600. Now getting past 1600 or a amazing 1600 is a tall order. This is where i say show me the money. Not that I doubt Leica i doubt the technology to get there and also we all have a different what is a great looking ISO 1600 in our heads. This is the reality check

 

[robsteve]

I am having major MBP battery issue and lost 4 posts already and waiting for the Apple store to open to replace the battery. It's almost 2 years old and pretty well shot

With all those lights in Vegas, there isn't a place to plug into AC

Keep up the posting and post some pictures if you get a chance.

Robert

 

[dfarkas]

RE: the S2 redefining "closed" ... Canon and Nikon are not Medium Format systems ... just in case you didn't realize that ... it's an apples to watermelons analogy

But maybe we should be asking why we treat MF differently than 35mm DSLRs. I think this is what Leica started asking.

The idea of a digital back came about because there was a large installed base of MF shooters with extensive (and expensive) Hassy V, Mamiya 645, Contax 645, etc. systems. The very first backs were scanning backs like Better Light, then tethered only backs with no LCD like the Phase H series. Progress in this realm has been historically slow versus the relatively quick rise of the DSLR. Even an early DSLR like the Kodak DCS 620 (c. 1996) had internal processing, instant capture, on-board storage, and an LCD. Sure, it was a 6MP 1.5x crop camera that cost $30K at the time, but the technology that supported the sensor was more cutting edge than scanning backs that could only shoot still life with constant light sources. Players like Imacon, Phase One, Leaf, and Jenoptik did start to step it up and offer more of the DSLR-like convenience over time. How long did it take Imacon to offer CF storage instead of the Image Bank HD? Or why are we only getting half-usable LCD screens only in the last year? Why do some of the latest backs show hourglasses instead of images when you zoom in? Excuses are made all the time for lack of features or speed on these systems that cost in excess of $30K.

Without a doubt, MF backs have always offered a quality advantage over DX and FX DSLRs with larger sensors. But this came with a sacrifice in speed, simplicity, convenience, and ISO range. Why does it have to? The Hassy H3D tries to address this, but only gets some of the way there.

Ok so here's my question:

Do we need separate backs if one integrated system can do what we need it to do? Yes, I get the tech camera argument. Maybe we have a disproportionate amount of tech camera shooters here on this forum, but look at the professional market as a whole. 95%+ of pro shooters these days will never touch a tech camera. To say that the S2 is "non-starter" because it can't be mounted on a tech camera for 5% of the market is a bit odd to me. Does having a removable back protect your investment? The camera is the least expensive part of any of these systems today. And, the back is what becomes obsolete and depreciates the most. With a removable digital back, weather sealing is an impossibility. So many here complained that the M8 wasn't weather sealed, as this was a "pro requirement." So, Leica makes the first sealed MF camera and everyone complains that you can't remove the back, without wondering why this was never a "requirement" for MF. The S2 image processing/review is as fast as a 1DsIII or D3x. Why aren't other MF systems of the same resolution as fast? Why should the UI be so clunky on some of these systems, like not being able to set a preset WB in K before you shoot? Or easily set custom camera functions?

By making a closed system, or shall we say an fully integrated system, Leica is able to offer real advantages to what exists in the marketplace. They can make a camera that is smaller, faster, and (wait for it) higher quality than what exists today. As an optics company they will continually push the bounds of what is possible or "normal" in MF lenses. There aren't any of these excuses that are thrown around so casually like "Who cares if it sucks wide-open, or even stopped down two stops. It's MF, so you're going to shoot at f/11 anyway," or "Who cares if it has ghastly distortion through the viewfinder. The software will fix most of that." At the demo yesterday morning, Stephan had to repeat a few times that any program that can read DNG can convert the RAW files because Leica corrects the image in the lens, not in dedicated software. As it should be! And with a closed system, you don't have interface or communication issues as I've personally witnessed at demo road shows on more than one occasion. No separate camera and back f/w updates and compatibility issues. And, the camera is just simple to use. You turn it on and less than a third of a second later you shoot. That's it. Why is simple bad?

Sorry for the long oration here, but I just don't get it. If something is better, it just is. Maybe it's time to move forward from the digital back paradigm.

David

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks, Guy. Looking forward to your other comments and stuff.

Sorry to hear about your MBP battery issues. Rest assured, you are not alone there. I too am on my way to replace the battery for mine. Charge meter says 100%, pull the plug and instant shutdown in 10 minutes or less. Not good. There is a whole ugly community of threads about this on the Apple Discussion Forum.....nasty issue. Whatever battery you buy, it will NOT last very long, regardless of how careful you are with cycling it (weekly in some cases), and other tricks many of us have learned from camera gear. The batteries for these older MBPs just suck :thumbdown:

LJ

Exactly the issue LJ. Not real happy but I am about 300 yards from a new battery in a 1/2 hour Sometimes you just don't screw around and just get a new one. Love to update the laptop itself but not right now

 

[cmb_]

Sometimes you just don't screw around and just get a new one.

Hi my friend, will this be your motto when the S2 becomes available for purchase, hopefully this summer?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

But maybe we should be asking why we treat MF differently than 35mm DSLRs. I think this is what Leica started asking.

The idea of a digital back came about because there was a large installed base of MF shooters with extensive (and expensive) Hassy V, Mamiya 645, Contax 645, etc. systems. The very first backs were scanning backs like Better Light, then tethered only backs with no LCD like the Phase H series. Progress in this realm has been historically slow versus the relatively quick rise of the DSLR. Even an early DSLR like the Kodak DCS 620 (c. 1996) had internal processing, instant capture, on-board storage, and an LCD. Sure, it was a 6MP 1.5x crop camera that cost $30K at the time, but the technology that supported the sensor was more cutting edge than scanning backs that could only shoot still life with constant light sources. Players like Imacon, Phase One, Leaf, and Jenoptik did start to step it up and offer more of the DSLR-like convenience over time. How long did it take Imacon to offer CF storage instead of the Image Bank HD? Or why are we only getting half-usable LCD screens only in the last year? Why do some of the latest backs show hourglasses instead of images when you zoom in? Excuses are made all the time for lack of features or speed on these systems that cost in excess of $30K.

Without a doubt, MF backs have always offered a quality advantage over DX and FX DSLRs with larger sensors. But this came with a sacrifice in speed, simplicity, convenience, and ISO range. Why does it have to? The Hassy H3D tries to address this, but only gets some of the way there.

Ok so here's my question:

Do we need separate backs if one integrated system can do what we need it to do? Yes, I get the tech camera argument. Maybe we have a disproportionate amount of tech camera shooters here on this forum, but look at the professional market as a whole. 95%+ of pro shooters these days will never touch a tech camera. To say that the S2 is "non-starter" because it can't be mounted on a tech camera for 5% of the market is a bit odd to me. Does having a removable back protect your investment? The camera is the least expensive part of any of these systems today. And, the back is what becomes obsolete and depreciates the most. With a removable digital back, weather sealing is an impossibility. So many here complained that the M8 wasn't weather sealed, as this was a "pro requirement." So, Leica makes the first sealed MF camera and everyone complains that you can't remove the back, without wondering why this was never a "requirement" for MF. The S2 image processing/review is as fast as a 1DsIII or D3x. Why aren't other MF systems of the same resolution as fast? Why should the UI be so clunky on some of these systems, like not being able to set a preset WB in K before you shoot? Or easily set custom camera functions?

By making a closed system, or shall we say an fully integrated system, Leica is able to offer real advantages to what exists in the marketplace. They can make a camera that is smaller, faster, and (wait for it) higher quality than what exists today. As an optics company they will continually push the bounds of what is possible or "normal" in MF lenses. There aren't any of these excuses that are thrown around so casually like "Who cares if it sucks wide-open, or even stopped down two stops. It's MF, so you're going to shoot at f/11 anyway," or "Who cares if it has ghastly distortion through the viewfinder. The software will fix most of that." At the demo yesterday morning, Stephan had to repeat a few times that any program that can read DNG can convert the RAW files because Leica corrects the image in the lens, not in dedicated software. As it should be! And with a closed system, you don't have interface or communication issues as I've personally witnessed at demo road shows on more than one occasion. No separate camera and back f/w updates and compatibility issues. And, the camera is just simple to use. You turn it on and less than a third of a second later you shoot. That's it. Why is simple bad?

Sorry for the long oration here, but I just don't get it. If something is better, it just is. Maybe it's time to move forward from the digital back paradigm.

David

This one is like a tennis match. And the ball will bounce back and forth all day long until the skin falls off. I see both sides of this match all too clearly and both sides have great serves as they say. I tend to look at this in a way that I am buying a bigger D3X and it is what it is and no way to take it apart and do something different with it. The separate back has two advantages that we can't take away from it either. It is a integrated system and a detachable one as well . Plus the the fact you can take for example all 4 phase backs and use it on one body for different types of shooting. The P30 plus is the fashion back as well as the P21 plus. The P65 is the landscape back with great amount of detail. The P45plus can go up to a hour with exposure and so on, so this is a very powerful setup in it's own right. Not to mention I can take my P25 Plus ( had to put this in somewhere. LOL) and put it on any tech camera i have and they fall into view camera and shifting camera's. The S2 or Nikon/Canon DSLR style cannot do this . Let's also remember the S2 is the overgrown DSLR style which is great. And certainly from what I saw a great speed advantage over what i shoot today. BTW just using the Phase as a example same applies to Leaf/Sinar and Hassy backs as well. Just easier for me to talk Phase because I know all the backs, anyway all this is important to you as the shooter and comes right down to the bottom line . It is what you shoot that will determine this , plain and simple and no getting around it either way. The S2 has it's place but can't do this or that and vise versa on the MF backs.

This unfortunately turns us into a either or situation and not a combined one. As of this writing i cannot keep up with the speed of the S2 or D3X ( I simply am using the D3 as a DSLR style in there like the S2 for better understanding) with my MF system but in a lot of ways I may need to or don't need to have that speed. We come down to choice . It is obvious that you have to analyze both types and make a cal with your buying dollars and your needs. I really think it just gets down to this and the S2 does bring in some fresh air and that is good. The whole idea here is to figure out through our talks on this what will work the best and also knowing exactly what is out there to make good buying decisions. I clearly see a black and white and than some grey area too and that is what we need to figure out in our heads. .

 

[Dale Allyn]

Do you have AppleCare, Guy? I get my batteries replaced under the warranty when they act up. That won't help you until you get home and want to fuss with it, so buying a new one now becomes a spare. But if you're having problems with your original and it's covered by AppleCare you may get a new one.

Apple also has some additional guidelines for replacing batteries out of warranty which is affected by number of cycles / charge capacity ratio or similar. (Though two years may be a reach for one with an ordinary warranty.)

Just a thought.

Good luck.

 

[robmac]

Regardless of which way the S2's fate falls, the longer it is a presence (or worst case an intended presence) in the market, as a truly 'clean slate' kit, the more it will hopefully push other MFDB and (to a degree) DSLR makers to truly innovate beyond the more MPs dogma.

As in Dale's very good comments - there is NO reason why current MFDBs, the kits that could use them the most (and given their snack bracket) should have some of the worst (in body) review interfaces among various upper-end digital solutions. Easy choice of FL or CS shutter capability, true weather proofing, down-sizing of form factors, etc., etc.

 

[jonoslack]

Sorry for the long oration here, but I just don't get it. If something is better, it just is. Maybe it's time to move forward from the digital back paradigm.

David

Thank you David - I excellent post . . . .
But then, I'm not professional and I havent invested $xx,000 on an MF system either. (so what would I know)

I was very sceptical about the S2 when the rumours started, but I'm impressed now.

One thing I'm pretty sure of, is that if the S2 does come up with the goods from an IQ point of view, and it's reasonably reliable, then it will sell, however grumpy everyone might be about it.

It won't hurt it that it's comprehensible - I don't suppose it'll be much damaged by being so beautifully designed either.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Heading home and will continue on but this one will take a lot of thought and consideration. Honestly I am extremely worried on how this will be priced out, other than that it seems very solid as it is today but there are many factors that one has to consider. It's not like going mail order on a 5 body and I think we really have to keep that in mind. This is a major system purchase and will be the primary tool, so it has to make a whole bunch of sense. I am glad though this is a option given what has been going on lately in MF and in 35mm. Just needs to fit in like anything else in your kit

 

[atanabe]

I would like to hear from the others that previewed the S2 as well. It was very nice of Leica to extend an invitation to their everyday customers. They (Leica) have shown that they listen to their users and while most agree with their decisions, will always have detractors. This is not a platform for everyone, and I do not believe that they meant it to be the only platform that you will ever buy for your imaging needs. A look in my wife's closet proves that this concept also applies to handbags and shoes!

I for one, am interested in the S2 - more curious than serious about spending the money to get it.

 

[ptomsu]

Reading through all of this - and BTW many thanks to all of you who share their practical experience here - I still do not know if this S System is the right thing.

1) If I need real high quality and large sensor size there is MF - for me this is the Hasselblad H system - period. And you can get 50MP and 60MP already today.

2) Concentrating on landscapes and large printouts I need rather larger sensors and higher MP numbers - so I feel a bit limited with the slightly smaller S2 sensor.

3) If I really need speed I go with a 35mm DSLR either Nikon or Canon, no other vendor is coming close to high speed offered there

So I feel this S System is a bit limiting in terms of future evolution. No doubt the Leica glass will be top and will be better than many other vendor's lenses, but there are so many IFs and THENs - I am not sure what I really should think.

One thing is clear to me, as I am still before buying an MF system, I will look very carefully into what I buy and what vendor I rely on. And whic vendor will finally get my money. Leica has not such a great reputation in digital and in customer service built up over the last years (unfortunately one must say decades). On the other side Hasselblad has really developed a great reputation since they brought the H System to market some 4-5 years ago. Which I could already test is close to perfection today - I would say. And also their glass is perfect, no doubt. The system is perfectly rounded up and fitting together.

So we will see, but in any case I wish Leica all the best with that system. And never say never again - if the S System really convinces me and proves "enough" for my demands, it might still happen ....

 

[carstenw]

Well, if you have very high speed needs AND very high resolution needs, then I would say you are not the kind of customer Leica is looking for. They are looking for people who feel quality-constrained with 35mm and speed/flexibility-constrained with regular MF cameras. The S2 offers an interesting compromise for them.

 

[Mark Gowin]

Guy / David

Thank you for the info to date. Now I gotta ask, did you get to see any full resolution images (printed or on screen) from the S2? I presume the answer is no since there has been on discussion about it, but I figured I would wishfully ask anyway.

It is interesting to read everyone's thoughts, concerns, complaints, comparisons, what-ifs, etc. with regards to the S2 system and all of its trappings. I think the bottom line is image quality, performance, and price. The other stuff won't affect sales near as much.

Mark