tashley
Subscriber Member
diglloyd.com blog - 36 Megapixel Shootout: Nikon D800 vs Leica S2
Discuss, as they used to say at school...
Discuss, as they used to say at school...
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!
Diglloyd d800 vs S2 shoot out
- Thread starter tashley
- Start date
TimothyHyde
Subscriber Member
For those of us who are not subscribers, can you give us a clue?
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
I had no trouble replicating the AF issues that Lloyd produced . The AF point measured by the S2 is pretty large and it will catch the edge with the greatest contrast inside the circle . Got these right from the start with the 35mm . Shot a umbrella on the beach,the support pillars on the pier . Lloyd shot the golden gate bridge where you can see it in a second if you miss.
If the camera to subject distance is say less than 20-30FT its pretty easy to master the technique and place the measurement so that you get accurate focus points . But at distance as in a landscape I frequently have to check focus point (not so easy at dawn) .
I found the AF once it locks on a focus point to be exceptional ..its the missing the focus point you intended that makes it questionable.
His point about focus accuracy is dead on ..if you miss at all you lose the IQ that the system can produce . The AF system on my D3S is as good as it gets (I can track a polo ball and keep the ball in focus for a dozen shots ). But DL is correct the wide angles (24/35 ) will catch a high contrast element and front focus on occasion. The conclusion is that for optium IQ you need to go with live view and thus whats the advantage of AF ?
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
This is the best test out so far on the D800 . It focuses squarely on the benchmark of the Leica S2 . DL uses the superb Zeiss 100/2.0 ZF.2 and compares it to the Leica S 120/2.5 . This is a test of pure IQ and he does a good job of holding the variables constant in post processing . Even the color is amazingly consistent .
When the S2 came out I did the same type of tests using the D3X and the Zeiss glass verse the S2 . Both were superb but the S2 had much better color tone separation and color depth . This was apparent in photographs of the ocean or the beach . But if I shot a flat subject (like a building) all you could see was the resolution. Its in this area that I find most tests lacking .
When the S2 came out I did the same type of tests using the D3X and the Zeiss glass verse the S2 . Both were superb but the S2 had much better color tone separation and color depth . This was apparent in photographs of the ocean or the beach . But if I shot a flat subject (like a building) all you could see was the resolution. Its in this area that I find most tests lacking .
Understood. I still can't replicate it. I do shoot at 30' and under usually ... but have shot at distance also without issue. Maybe I'm better at placing the AF sensor or something
It going to be nice here today, maybe I'll play around shooting more at distance and learn a thing or three.
Don't disagree that focus accuracy is key to extracting max IQ ... who would?
-Marc
V
Vivek
Guest
The S2 killer. :ROTFL:
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
The test is easy to understand. On the blog he shows the target ... a building with great detail . He shoots the same crop factor at essentially the same time with as close to the same process as possible . Even the color matching was excellent .
The results are hard to tell apart .
The test does not show in anyway the subtle tone separation and color saturation normally associated with MF .
The results are hard to tell apart .
The test does not show in anyway the subtle tone separation and color saturation normally associated with MF .
Tim - It is, but anything of interest tends to go straight to the subscription site leaving little but a blog teaser for subscription articles. Inevitably, the blog is much less interesting these days.
........... Chris
V
Vivek
Guest
What do the other pay-per-view sites say?
Krockwell has a more detailed comparison (open site) starting from D1 on, I heard.
Krockwell has a more detailed comparison (open site) starting from D1 on, I heard.
I am not sure but is this test about one image with 1 lens at 1 distance and 1 f-stop? I found it interesting and impressive how good the resolution of the D800 and also of the Zeiss lens is, but drawing final conclusion is very early.
What I would be interested are 10 real world images shot with both cameras.
Including some portrait to see skin tones, including some subjects with subtile colors and tones, and some in "flat light" and some in harsh light.
I still dont believe in the "MF-killer-theory" but I get more and more interested in the D800 and maybe I will want one just to find out myself how/if it compares.
What I would be interested are 10 real world images shot with both cameras.
Including some portrait to see skin tones, including some subjects with subtile colors and tones, and some in "flat light" and some in harsh light.
I still dont believe in the "MF-killer-theory" but I get more and more interested in the D800 and maybe I will want one just to find out myself how/if it compares.
tashley
Subscriber Member
My guess, having owned an S2, is that with the best glass the two will be so closely matched in most lower ISO situations that any differences will be trivial but that the smaller sensor will make it easier for good glass to give sharper corners (I was very, but not hugely, impressed with the lenses I tried on the s2). However in a tight corner the D800 will have better DR. At higher ISO the D800 will win more clearly. If I was in the market for about this number of pixels I'd rather have a D800 (probably E but yet to be proven) than anything else. But if you want the absolute best and you have the right technique, obviously an IQ 180 wins. Just on pure resolution.
My guess is that even the D800(E) is a substantial step forward we can read a lot of wishful thinking nowadays. Does the difference in IQ, which gets smaller and smaller, still justifies the price difference - a very personal question.
I dont believe in (technical) wonders.
I dont believe in (technical) wonders.
Exactly, and an important consideration when comparing overall image look and feel IMHO. :thumbup:
danielmoore
New member
I'm apologetic to even want to ask this at this point, but given the full realm of both 35mm format D800 and ~36 megapixel medium format capabilities, do the tonal gradations and color qualities still hold one above the other? NB, I'm trying to draw a fair line at this resolution level - no IQ80 you can't be a contender. Medium format has meant many things prior to your existence.
Daniel,
That is the $64,000 question (almost literally!) that each individual needs to answer for themselves.
The reality is there is a difference. But just like with high-end stereo gear and audiophiles, not everybody can justify the geometric increase in expense for the diminishing percentage of gains in that pursuit of perfection.
I would add that my experience in photography is that superior image content and composition trumps technical perfection nearly every time. Yet at the same time, content and composition when combined with high technical acuity is always the slam-dunk winner.
Very well put Jack.
Once you have pretty much mastered the technical aspects as applied to the content you want to convey, (the "art" so to speak), the steep upward curve of technical acuity starts flattening ... and it takes a combination of smaller incremental improvements all along the image chain to push on ... of course, depending on what your artistic objectives actually are.
I think the D800 is proving to be an outstanding technical achievement especially at the surprising price point. I'd hazard a guess that Nikon could have priced the camera higher and still captured a hugh market share.
This specific test holds little interest for me not because of the technical aspects, which seem from reports to be well done, but because the content has no relevance to my work ... i.e., the subject matter, nor approach to the subject matter (at least, the subject matter indicated on the non-paid blog post).
The D800 verses 5D-III shoot-out video was of more interest to me because it concentrated on portraiture. The results where such that there wasn't a compelling reason to swap systems from Canon to Nikon (also an expensive proposition). The end results were very similar, yet, there were visible differences between the D800 gradations and shadow detail at most used print sizes ... noticeable only when placed side-by-side.
One relevant question that came to my mind when all these head-to-head comparison's begin emerging is:
"would I buy the S2 NOW?",
That is a tough question ... but one I contemplated prior to purchase knowing full well that either Sony or someone would break the 30 meg FF barrier with the next gen sensor technology.
The most honest answer is that if it were earlier in my photo trek, NO!. I didn't have that kind of money to indulge in such extravagances, and would have been grateful for something like the D800 to accomplish the work at hand. However, at this stage, I can indulge most anything photographic, and prefer Leica products for their design, aesthetic appeal, and general look and feel of the images ... specifically being attracted to the S2 form factor and ergonomics, large bright viewfinder and speed of use ... as it applies to my artistic focus. At this point in life, I want to love the camera in hand, not just what it can do (which is a given). In that regard, nothing is a S2 Killer
So, the S2 is an indulgence, pure and simple. I never saw it as anything else ... my H4D/60 can murder it for IQ, and the 60's Dalsa sensor is killer for skin tones ... not to mention the back can be put on a tech camera with full movements using lens IQ unavailable for a D800 or S2.
-Marc
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Why I have my tech cam and IQ 160 than I have my Nikon for work. Nothing is going to kill my tech cam , back and lenses. All I wanted to do in this Nikon purchase was to get close enough. What makes me laugh in all this is I already ran over 1k in images and tested it against the 160 and now cause it topples a S2 in one test it's now a S2 killer. Sorry Im not biting so hard here. I have worked the files enough to know better from the S2 , Nikon and just about every MF there is. You won't see me making statements with killer in it . It's damn good but I go right back to what Jack just said and here is my analogy the D800 for the pixel peeping folks is a wow at 67 percent image size but my 160 is a wow at 100 percent. It's really that simple