Hasselblad X2D and Leica S3 - Update 2: A difficult focus

[jng]

(Continued from part 1)

What's next? The Leica S 180/3.5 APO - a great and underused (by me, anyway) lens. ISO 100, 1/2000 sec, f/3.5

My God - AF that almost doesn't suck! Why didn't I use live view AF? Because I couldn't hold the camera still enough.
It says APO, and there's a lot less color fringing, but not none.

And MF with the same assists as before:

Good. And not just because I unfairly brightened the image to subtly influence the readership. Muahahah ... oh, damn. I'm not supposed to say that part out loud. Never mind.

Back to the X2D and the XCD 135/2.8+1.7x So f/4.8, 1/1150 sec ISO 100

Still can't do it. Have you noticed that neither camera with any lens can focus on this stupid bunch of leaves? I bet the Z9 could do it!

But MF:

Pretty darn good - because we can magnify enough to see what we're doing!

And finally, the X2D + Zeiss 350/5.6 SA ISO 100, 1/290 sec. IBIS FTW!


And the S3 + same, but 1/125 sec, which means I was very lucky.


Both successful Zeiss SA type images (Leica might be a tad sharper?). You'll note the total lack of color fringing. Now MF on the X2D was aided by IBIS. Without focus peaking (or a tripod), I could never have focused the S3.

That's it for now. For my WA work, nothing has changed, but once I started trying to get that damned clump of leaves in focus, I had to try (almost) everything.

Matt

Matt this is kinda cool but I think you need to get out more...

John

P.S. Did you use a tripod with the X2D + 350 SA?

 

[MGrayson]

Matt this is kinda cool but I think you need to get out more...

John

P.S. Did you use a tripod with the X2D + 350 SA?

John,

I am too well aware (and ashamed) of my sedentary inclinations. I'm going to Brooklyn tomorrow. I'll take a camera.

Matt

(All hand held. That one COULD focus it on both cameras says something amazing. I mean, the S3 has no stabilization.)

 

[jng]

(All hand held. That one COULD focus it on both cameras says something amazing. I mean, the S3 has no stabilization.)

I am impressed that you could even hold the contraption at eye level to shoot - the 350 SA is a beast!

 

[MGrayson]

I am impressed that you could even hold the contraption at eye level to shoot - the 350 SA is a beast!

Now you've done it. <insert Crocodile Dundee's most famous line> The Pentax 67 400/4 ED-IF (on the left). It weighs a bit more than twice the 350/5.6 (on the right).



One hand-held shot and a ruptured biceps tendon later,
X2D, ISO 100, 1/800 sec, f/4


I am NEVER hand-holding that thing again. Wide open, there is fringing. Stop it down to f/5.6 and it's comparable to the modern XCD or Leica S lenses. I *did* put it on a tripod, and the images were softer. I think it has to do with heat turbulence from the open window and how close my tripod could get. I also don't know why I own this lens. It is too heavy, optically not in the same league as the 350 SA, and ... too heavy. The Pentax 67 300/4 ED-IF is tiny in comparison, and optically about the same. Of course, "why do I have this lens" is a stupid question here.

Matt

 

[Godfrey]

I have a Sigma 600mm mirror lens in Nikon mount that I ask the same questions of all the time... Here it is fitted to a Panasonic GX9:

I've used it very infrequently mounted on Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, and Leica cameras. It's a piece of junk, cost me $85... unwieldy, not incredibly sharp at edges or corners, etc etc. Have to use it on a tripod for any decent results. But it occasionally makes a nice photograph...

Foliage #2 - Santa Clara 2022
Leica M10 Monochrom + Sigma 600mm f/8 Mirror Lens
Orange filter
ISO 250 @ f/8 @ 1/125​

G

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Matt, should you find time, would be cool to see the micro-contrast of the SA350 when you hit focus when using a tripod ... I am not sure using these optical "bazookas" hand-held does them justice!

 

[Paratom]

Interesting comparisons...seems like the AF of the S (and Hassy as well) kind of sucks. At least for tele at longer distances and certain subjects.
I believe trees, branches and leaves are difficult for AF-systems.

 

[MGrayson]

Matt, should you find time, would be cool to see the micro-contrast of the SA350 when you hit focus when using a tripod ... I am not sure using these optical "bazookas" hand-held does them justice!

Oh, this is totally unfair to all the equipment. But it's closer to how I use them. I like to know what works ok, what works well, and what works terribly. Testing under perfect conditions is nice to know, but I'm after something different. Having said that, I'll certainly try to get a good SA350 image with the X2D.

Interesting comparisons...seems like the AF of the S (and Hassy as well) kind of sucks. At least for tele at longer distances and certain subjects.
I believe trees, branches and leaves are difficult for AF-systems.

Yup. This surprised me as this bunch of leaves was isolated and in front of the other scene elements. I expected AF to nail it every time!

 

[MGrayson]

More my cuppa - new development in Brooklyn. Positive space, negative space, yawn ... (thud).
X2D, XCD 21/4 f/5.6 ISO 100 1/750 sec.


I'll try to get some decent light and stable air. I just singularly failed to get a sharp image ON a tripod with the X2D and SA350. Undoubtedly operator error, but something is not right.

 

[Paratom]

Busy background seems to be difficult for AF.

 

[FloatingLens]

For us humans, the color ball may be an easy target. Our visual system makes it out.
But for AF, I am not surprised to see the algorithms get totally confused with all those contrasty structures in the scene. AI and neural link to the rescue

 

[MGrayson]

Yes, I deliberately chose a difficult focus target. But you knew THIS was going to happen. Fuji X-H1. A five yer old camera (with a pixel pitch very close to the X2D's) and the concisely named FUJIFILM XF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR (lens, in case that wasn't clear.) Both the body and the lens have stabilization, so everything is hand-held. AF only!

100mm f/4.5, ISO 200, 1/160 sec


400mm f/5.6 ISO 200 1/140 sec

No color fringing. None!

And just in case it's this morning's lighting,... nope. I'll spare you. AF (on both the X2D and S3) did better than their previous attempts, but nowhere near as sharp as the Fuji. Note that I am not mounting the S3 on a tripod. Then I could try the LCD magnified AF - a thing the X2D refuses to do. It's slow on the S3, but usually quite accurate. Next time, when I bring out the SA350/5.6.

BTW, I'm cropping the same size chunks of sensor in ALL the images in this plot arc, so 400mm is 400mm and f/5.6 is f/5.6. No sensor size adjustments to be made.

Sigh

 

[Paratom]

Just today took some images with S007 and x2d...and to be honest I find the good old S still keeps up pretty well.
The S70 seems to render nicer bokeh than the Hassy xcd65...But then the 80/1.9 beats the 70S
IBIS and accurate focusing for the x2d, analog feel and short shutter delay for the S.
If you put the S80 on the x2d the size advantage is gone...
I am looking forward to check out the 55 xcd. The 45 xcd is not up to the Leica S 45 IMO.

 

[MGrayson]

Just today took some images with S007 and x2d...and to be honest I find the good old S still keeps up pretty well.
The S70 seems to render nicer bokeh than the Hassy xcd65...But then the 80/1.9 beats the 70S
IBIS and accurate focusing for the x2d, analog feel and short shutter delay for the S.
If you put the S80 on the x2d the size advantage is gone...
I am looking forward to check out the 55 xcd. The 45 xcd is not up to the Leica S 45 IMO.

Well, the S 45 is also 6 times the size of the XCD 45 (I exaggerate, but not by much...) I really do like the rendering of the S 70, and it's the smallest lens in the system.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

As these posts are written, Leica is designing the new lens line-up for the S4.

Be reminded that the S lenses are mirror-based designs and you are comparing these lenses - which still arguably outshine current lenses - against mirrorless lenses. It is significantly easier to design high performing lenses if you reduce the distance between exit pupil and sensor area.

The next gen Leica S lenses will be marvellous and the task for Leica is to bridge the gap between clinical SL type lenses and cinematic S vintage lenses.

Unfortunately, we are talking 2024 here, at least, but I hear from Leica sources that the aim is again to create class leading optics with benchmark quality.

Think APO, 2.0, with maybe one 1.4 lens; I hope they do an APO 1.4 65mm which would mimic the look of the 105 2.4 on 6x7 (Pentax Takumar) to create magnificent 3d environmental portraits.

This is all to say that it will be very interesting to see the next gen medium format lenses from them …

 

[MGrayson]

As these posts are written, Leica is designing the new lens line-up for the S4.

Be reminded that the S lenses are mirror-based designs and you are comparing these lenses - which still arguably outshine current lenses - against mirrorless lenses. It is significantly easier to design high performing lenses if you reduce the distance between exit pupil and sensor area.

The next gen Leica S lenses will be marvellous and the task for Leica is to bridge the gap between clinical SL type lenses and cinematic S vintage lenses.

Unfortunately, we are talking 2024 here, at least, but I hear from Leica sources that the aim is again to create class leading optics with benchmark quality.

Think APO, 2.0, with maybe one 1.4 lens; I hope they do an APO 1.4 65mm which would mimic the look of the 105 2.4 on 6x7 (Pentax Takumar) to create magnificent 3d environmental portraits.

This is all to say that it will be very interesting to see the next gen medium format lenses from them …

I hope that they do not simply make scaled up SL lenses, but retain the character of the current S line. I am not optimistic.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I hope that they do not simply make scaled up SL lenses, but retain the character of the current S line. I am not optimistic.

They are looking into this. It won't be scaled up SL, they want to bridge both worlds I hear. There's something beautiful about the OOF tint in the S glass – it is a result of the glass types and by design ...

 

[Paratom]

Will be interesting what Leica S4+new lenses can offer over Hasselblad (or others) and for what price.
And which lens line up they can deliver. I am not interested in a system where I can buy 2 lenses and have to wait years for other lenses to show up, without any plan communicated.
I love Leica products and the S lenses, but I have been really disappointed how slow they developed new bodies. I mean the S2 was very innovative when it came up, very IMO.
But later they just gave us new sensors and improved small details. And Fuji and Hassy developed much more much faster.
If I see how much I paid for these S lenses....
I might rather buy a used S3 from someone switching to S4, than buying into a new system with uncertain future for high price.
On the other side... if the existing S lenses also work fine on new S4 body, ...
Who knows, but competition is strong nowadays in small medium format.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

S4 will accept S lenses, and by extension M, SL etc. I hope they do the M AF adapter.

Leica just followed the market by applying its limited resources to develop the SL and Q Lines as well as working on phone camera technology with the Asian partners.

Look where Phase is now. Not a single cent flows into photography as the marked is difficult and they need to generate money for investors. All the other MFD manufacturers started the MF development before the pandemic. We are lucky in a way that a company like Leica ist still taking on the risk and developing new large chip camera systems from scratch - it is by no means a given as one could also just focus on smartphones, some image processing software and mass market products.

I think they never made a lot of money, if anything with the S, as it is not easy to produce this quality of optics at a low number. For example - the S24 is still a revelation every time I use it. 0 vignetting and distortion, beautiful bokeh, edge to edge sharp.

That’s a lens design with a huge mirror in-between which outclasses a lot of other optics still. The last 5% are exceedingly expensive to make always and Leica always also catered to the uncompromising crowd. I think from that perspective it doesn’t make too much sense to complain about price as this is precisely the point of Leica - although price is a consideration, they do engage in flagship products which they sell at a premium. It is not exactly like the 75 Noctilux flies off the shelves - but it exists and is made and is fantastic. I am glad they make these lenses and bitching about them being slow, or not producing fast enough bodies or being overly expensive is somehow missing the point. If you buy a Ferrari you don’t complain about the tire replacement costs being “overpriced” or the sound system being not the latest as found in a Tesla, etc.

For some this is ok, for some not, and this is also ok.

I think the S lenses are a bargain right now and one should snap them up before the S4 arrives as they will be compatible. They confirmed publicly or at least I was told in person at the Leica summit in Berne that it will be compatible as they respect Leica user’s investments.

 

[Paratom]

I just never understood that they pack so much r&d cost in a new system like the S and all those nice S lenses, but then forget to improve the body for many years.
Even the Pentax 645 has more advanced AF as far as I understand. I also spent thousands of money for T-lenses, and now...no further DX sensor camera any more.
And the SL was class leading once upon a time, but today Canon and Nikon have much more advanced AF, and the SL lens line up is still incomplete. Not even a 70200, or a Macro lens, or a 21mm prime. But then we see all those special editions, vintage M lenses, etc.
The one system I trust Leica is the M system. The others...I still own them, but I would prefer just 2 or 3 systems in stead of 5, but with more consistency.
They are often innovative in the first step introducing a new system (so was the S, also the SL, and also the T, as well as the x1) , but afterwards forget to let the system grow.