What will the S2 actually DO?

[tashley]

Strictly speaking, they don't say that they don't use software correction for image artifacts, it just says they don't need to

But really, what it does imply is that no image artifacts, i.e. visible flaws, will be left in the image, nor will they be corrected by software. After that we can discuss if the lens is perfect, or if they use software to correct non-image-artifacts, in either case a less interesting issue.

The interesting issue is the verbal sparring with Hasselblad. The interesting comparison will eventually be the Hasselblad 28mm versus the Leica 24mm, and the battle will be fought in the corners.

My personal feeling is that the difference will be visible, but that the Hasselblad will be good enough, including its corrections, that very few people will care.

I'm not sure. I had sent to me a file from a Hassy 28 that was supposed to show how good it was and boy, was it not. I am quite, but not extraordinarily, fussy but I do think that some people just don't look carefully. It's like all these threads where people are posting shots to show how great their 28 Cron (or whatever) does on their G1 (or Pen or...) when they just haven't looked!

 

[tashley]

Rob Stevens once demonstrated that there was in camera correction for vignetting with the DMR (for the 19mm if I remember correctly) by shooting the same scene (his light table) with the ROM contacts masked and unmasked.

But as Thomas states, who cares - it is all nice if there is no degradation to the image file.

But there ALWAYS is. You may need to print large or look on a very big screen but then, if you weren't planning to do that you wouldn't buy the gear. Really.

 

[tashley]

As Leica claims so self-assured the very best IQ the comparision should include a 39MP back on a view camera with Rodenstock HRs and Schneider Digitars.

I will run that test when the time comes, if I do go for the S2, and I'll do it very soon after launch....

 

[thomas]

But there ALWAYS is. You may need to print large or look on a very big screen but then, if you weren't planning to do that you wouldn't buy the gear. Really.

correct... if there is software correction you'll see it.
If there is software correction it still begs the question if the (supposedly) better Leica lenses with less software corrections are still better than the (supposedly) worse lenses with some more software corrections.
We will see...
Frankly, even my Digitar 47XL needs (few) corrections (other than LCC)...

 

[carstenw]

I'm not sure. I had sent to me a file from a Hassy 28 that was supposed to show how good it was and boy, was it not.

I have seen a shot from the HCD28 which looked quite good in the corners. You could see that the resolution was not as high as in the center though, quite easily. So I wonder what the Leica 24mm can do? Time will show.

 

[tashley]

correct... if there is software correction you'll see it.
If there is software correction it still begs the question if the (supposedly) better Leica lenses with less software corrections are still better than the (supposedly) worse lenses with some more software corrections.
We will see...
Frankly, even my Digitar 47XL needs (few) corrections (other than LCC)...

And MAN am I bored with LCC. Careful note-taking I can do (about degrees of shift for each shot) but I will never, ever, feel like it's part of a creative process....

 

[thomas]

And MAN am I bored with LCC. Careful note-taking I can do (about degrees of shift for each shot) but I will never, ever, feel like it's part of a creative process....

understandable. It's a necessary evil (currently). And of course it's not part of the creatve process. On the other hand it's something you just repeat routinely.
I always shoot the white plate shots after I've finished the actual captures... so it doesn't really disrupt.

 

[dfarkas]

Maybe I am naive but to me this is blindingly obvious:

If they measure each lens for focus shift in the factory at every aperture, then have that lens tell any S2 body on which it is mounted how much it needs to tweak focus from what AF has told it, at the precise moment of stop-down for exposure, then there is nothing going on with the image file itself, at all. Consequently the there is no trade off between requirements in image processing.

This is my understanding from discussions with the S2 product managers.

Every lens, from every manufacturer, has some amount of focus shift due to manufacturing tolerances (no matter how tight). Some have wider tolerances (like Canon) and some have tighter ones. Focus shift due to aperture is not a lens imperfection, but rather a function of the physics of optics.

N/C/S allow for Micro-AF adjustment in-camera menus on a per lens basis (but do not account for focus shift or multiple focal lengths for zooms). This is very much akin to Tom Sawyer's famous "whitewashing the fence" scam. Have the customer measure the lens and do the adjustment as an added "benefit."

Leica is taking the time to measure, calibrate, and program each and every lens with this AF fine tuning data, as well as recording measured aperture info. The concept is that an S lens mounted on any S2 body will communicate its focus calibration info to the camera, making AF more accurate at all apertures and distances.

As far as I know, this is the full extent of the "lens corrections," which have more to do with mitigating manufacturing tolerance and normal aperture-based focus shift, than with fixing distortion, CA, corner softness, spherical aberation, coma, astigmatism, etc.

Seems like a good idea to me.

David

 

[Jack]

But there ALWAYS is. You may need to print large or look on a very big screen but then, if you weren't planning to do that you wouldn't buy the gear. Really.

Not so sure I agree that *falloff* correction during the raw conversion stage is ALWAYS visibly destructive... It may be visibly destructive with some lenses and may not be with others, depending on magnitude.

OTOH, *distortion* correction is always visibly destructive. Whether or not you can live with said result here is a different story...

 

[David Grover / Phase One]

Rob, I have a feeling that you are deliberately misunderstanding the real point: Leica does lens recognition, and focus tuning. Hasselblad deliberately designs lenses which contain certain optical flaws which are known to be easy to correct in software, such as distortion, to keep size and cost down.

There is a huge difference here. Hard to miss, really. Unless one tries to, of course.

I am not sure if it is mentioned elsewhere...

But focus tuning is nothing new. The H1 had aperture dependent focus corrections as did one of the high end Minolta SLRs I believe.

On the H1 there was only two corrections (ie A and B depending on aperture and distance).

It is a lot more finite now in the H3D.

I am sure we can argue until the cows come home about who does what and why, but there is no such thing as a perfect lens unless used at a single aperture and distance. Everything else is a compromise to some extent.

How you handle that compromise is the interesting part.

We are not 'designing in flaws' as wonderfully stated earlier, but more looking at what we can do from everything to optical design to the software side of things to bring lenses to the market which perform as the customer would expect.

Best,


David

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Focus shift correction is truly needed. Thing is that until you have more than one focus point, heck a decent spread of focus points unlike any DSLR on the market today, it's all academic the moment you have to recompose. When you have the resolution that requires focus shift correction you are going to seriously notice recompose focus error, especially with lenses touted for their wide apertures...

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

What about the law of dminishing returns? If S2 lenses are marginally better corrected than other good MF lenses, but the cost of that better corection is very high, you might get better value and just as good performance, so far as is visible on screen or in print, with software correction. I'm not talking about trying to make a rubbish lens good in software, but minor corrections that can be handled at or after capture, if it is more cost effective to do so. and lets not forget an S2 is in any event "limited" by its 39mp sensor. Hassy and Phase owners already have 60mp options that counterbalance alleged lens limitations. I speculate it will be a very long time indeed before Leica launch an S3 with a similar pixel count (by which time 35mm dslrs might be snipping at their heels).

Quentin

 

[ptomsu]

I bet the next generation high end DSLRs will be pretty close in terms of MP to the S2.

I also bet we will not see a S3 with maybe 50 or 60MP within the next 5 years - typical Leica product cycles. So whoever decides for the S System, will have to live with 37MP for the next years and only can hope for higher resolution.

By when the S3 may appear on the market, Phase and Hassi will already roll out their 100MP versions of backs

Just to make one thing clear upfront - I am not saying that everybody will need these high resolutions, but the S System will naturally limit itself - just because it is Leica

 

[georgl]

Highly-corrected lenses are already available today, the Schneider/Rodenstock-digital-lenses take the cover-glass into account and offer a similar MTF-performance. Combine a decent >39MP-back with them, make large prints and see for yourself. No software-correction in the world makes this advantage disappear.
Or just look for some Alpa-shots (forget the moire and JPG-artifacts):
http://www.alpa.ch/contactsheets/CS20080118/ALPA_CF000157_001.jpg
The digaron-w 70mm has a similar performance as the summarit.
It's not about 37,5 or 40 or 50MP, all of these sensors are limited by the lenses and shooting technique pretty quickly.

Software-correction has to be an option (and it will be for the S2, too) but not an excuse for cost-cutting. In the past, only very little improvements were achieved in the optical designs of the two systems left. Just recently the only aspherical design was introduced with the first usable zoom (although f5,6)! They don't want to pay for new radical designs and more advanced manufacturing/assembly-technologies.

Leica brings those more advanced technolgies to the high-end-slr-market. Never wondered why the 70mm-Summarit is the first standard-MF-lens (the most important focal length!) with radical design changes after over 30 years? (never wondered why basically all 2,8/80 are similar to the old Zeiss Planar?)
The lenses cost 30-80% more but still, the whole Leica-set costs less than a digital-back/body! While the lenses are long-time investments and improve the final results over the next 10-20 years the backs/bodies are replaced within every 2-4 years. So more advanced lens-techology with higher costs should be the last thing demanding photographers should worry about.

But wait, maybe the new lenses aren't that great at all! Maybe despite all the fancy technology, the MTFs and dozens of groundbreaking designs over the last two decades these lenses are just mediocre and don't reach the quality of Schneider/Rodenstock-lenses...

 

[tashley]

Focus shift correction is truly needed. Thing is that until you have more than one focus point, heck a decent spread of focus points unlike any DSLR on the market today, it's all academic the moment you have to recompose. When you have the resolution that requires focus shift correction you are going to seriously notice recompose focus error, especially with lenses touted for their wide apertures...

I agree 100% and that is why what I would really like, and don't kill me guys, is either a wide spread of selectable AF points on the S2, or some form of face (actually nearside eye) detection.

Heresy.

 

[thomas]

So whoever decides for the S System, will have to live with 37MP for the next years and only can hope for higher resolution

I think people that care seriously about resolution (i.e. the highest resolution possible) are not really interessted in the S2.
On the other hand 37MP is lots of resolution and it will be enough for a lifetime... at least for the target group the S2 is aimed at (according to Leica).

 

[tashley]

But wait, maybe the new lenses aren't that great at all! Maybe despite all the fancy technology, the MTFs and dozens of groundbreaking designs over the last two decades these lenses are just mediocre and don't reach the quality of Schneider/Rodenstock-lenses...

My issue is this: I shoot mainly with a 35XL and a Phamiya 80D when using my P45+ and neither of those lenses has any character. They are both very very accurate but they are accountants and not artists. A good Leica lens like the 50 Lux is both, which is why it is still the single best lens I've ever used.

 

[LJL]

Tim,
Actually, the wide spread of selectable AF points for the S2 is a much needed consideration. The face detection is not something I would care about nor use, but if it came along for the ride with the selectable AF points, no problem ;-)

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

My issue is this: I shoot mainly with a 35XL and a Phamiya 80D when using my P45+ and neither of those lenses has any character. They are both very very accurate but they are accountants and not artists. A good Leica lens like the 50 Lux is both, which is why it is still the single best lens I've ever used.

Tim the S lenses will NOT have any 80 lux character to them . There just like the M summarits. Same basic design principle's and no old lens designs to reach back for. This is one issue with the S it's all new for resolution and not so much a character lens. I'm sure they will have nice bokeh but no Mandler look

All the digitars are the same built for resolution and not that warm fuzzy Mandler look that was made back in the 60's. There simple is nothing to go back too here. Now some old Hassy and Mamiya lens you can find lenses loaded with aberrations which is what that look is .

Your looking for a Lux which is not the case here

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Now since I am on the subject we have to remember we are not buying Leica M lenses that go back in time quite a few years here. There are no Noctiluxes or Luxes in the S lens line or a old Elmar sitting around for fifty years and finds a new home on a M8. You want those kinds of looks than you will have to hold onto your M8. The one hope a S buyer may have is the adapter for maybe a Hassy V lens and bolting on a 110mm on it or some old dog that was made awhile back. Basically we need to realize that the new S lenses will most likely in the whole line have the same look to them. Not saying there bad or anything like that but it will be a lot like the Hassy and Phase D lenses as well. The Phase and Hassy folks have some options though with bolting on older Hassy lenses and Mamiya lenses to them. There are a lot of options on this with Hassy and Phase and right now none on the S2 unless we see a 3rd party adapter for the S.