Sorry but there are actually 4 not only 3 lenses out...... this could make some sense as the S2 owner or buyer can fill the gaps of the current three lenses out today.
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!
Sorry but there are actually 4 not only 3 lenses out...... this could make some sense as the S2 owner or buyer can fill the gaps of the current three lenses out today.
WIth all due respect, horsefeathers. Broadening the range of usable lenses is in general always a positive move. Thats true for almost any platform. Think 4x5, Leica M or thread mounts, etc. This is even more so with the S2, with its presently limited lens selection.Misguided. What makes the S2 special, if anything, is the glass not the sensor. And now with the 645D being weatherproof, having better high iso results and selling at less than half the price (with a lot more available lenses)... what's the point unless you're looking to make the fashion statement that a red dot somehow sets you apart?
R.I.P Leica
It sounds like all the lenses that will have adapters are mechanical ... like the Hasselblad lenses are V lenses not HC = stop down metering and shooting.Either do I Bob, my point was I do hope they try and make these auto coupled. That would be very beneficial to the system if they can pull that off. The stop down road I have been through and it is tough. When I had my Canons I had a lot of Leica lenses and it just made more sense to buy a DMR for them and be coupled.
Okay back to football. LOL
Oh Boy, another S2 thread
I agree in general terms. Both I will say some sports shooters are high end profetionals. I will say the same about Steve McCurry, even when I don't picture him with a crew. So is not just the level of the photographer It's the application.But the point of the example isn't really about ISO as much as it is about how the definition of what is a professional standard can be vastly different depending on context and status of the photographer (or his aspiration to status) within the industry.
But what is a very good and what is a very bad tethering...?It used to be very bad at tethering etc.
+1Some are angry because they wanted an R10 instead of an S2.
In my experience anything longer than 2 seconds is a serious buzz kill to photographer and client on set. Worse it can destroy a whole shoot when working with people in front of the cam. as the flow and mood can get lost.But what is a very good and what is a very bad tethering...?
This is great news for people that want to upgrade to the Leica but don't have the funds switch over their entire system at once. Lens adapters afford them the opportunity to use their current lenses on the S2 body while waiting to get the funds together to upgrade to Leica lenses at a later date.
Most of the bashing has to do with a lack of understanding of the S2 in terms of use-value. When people don't understand how it can be used as a tool within certain professional contexts then the only thing they have to measure it by is it's associated cost, which of course makes little sense since they don't understand it's use-value in the first place.
The S2 is marketed as a camera made for professionals. Many of the features that a lower or mid-level shooter might consider to be professional might not be the same as what a higher-end shooter might consider professional quality and this leads to huge misunderstandings. A photographer's status or his ambition to achieve a certain status will often color his definition of a word and his opinion of camera features. That might be elitist, but it's also the reality and truth of the photo industry.
For example, a low-end shooter might consider high ISO a professional feature since he's forced to work with available light. But a photographer working with large budgets might consider high ISO a low quality feature since he has the capacity to light every scene with a crew. In this example, the low-end shooter might think that the S2 (in it's current form) isn't up to his definition of professional standards since the high ISO isn't useful for his work. Meanwhile, the higher-end photographer considers high ISO to be a feature that only lower-end photographers worry about. In fact, the high end shooter might actually consider reliance on high ISO to be a sign of low quality work that doesn't match his professional standard. I'm just using ISO as an example because it's one of the common criticisms encountered online in discussions about the S2. But the point of the example isn't really about ISO as much as it is about how the definition of what is a professional standard can be vastly different depending on context and status of the photographer (or his aspiration to status) within the industry.
Just read this. Interesting. I won't debate the Pro status of the S2 ... that is yet to be determined. That it is very expensive is not up for debate IMO. It just is.Finally, someone who has the balls to say it like it is, thank you Mike.
The problems arise when people start taking marketing material at face value. Leica's marketing guys really had no choice but to position the S2 as a "serious professional camera". What were the alternatives - "frivoulous professional camera", "serious amateur camera", "specialist niche camera"??
You see the problem....
So, having gone out there with that positioning, they have some credibility issues when you look at the package and what it can actually deliver in terms of functionality, versatility, durability, availability, image quality, user friendliness, software maturity and a dozen other selection criteria that one might apply to a purchasing decision for a system in this price range. We are talking about a sum that will buy you a luxury car!
I am fortunate enough to fall into that category referred to as a "high-end professional". I have the client base and income stream to both justify and afford any camera system I choose. Over the course of my 25+ years as an international ad shooter, I have owned and relied on Rollei, Hasselblad, Sinar, Horseman, Canon, Nikon, Mamiya/Phase One, Fuji and Linhof products to make the images my clients pay for. Notice the absence of the Leica brand?
Despite the phenomenal quality of Leica products, the company has for decades been out of step with the needs of the majority of photographers. This aloofness has allowed them the luxury of being able to market "exclusive" niche product, and good luck to them. The problem arises when you release some exotic piece of glass, but it is so specialized that you expect to sell perhaps 50 units a year, you have to charge extraordinary amounts to recoup the development/manufacturing costs. This problem is magnified exponentially when you are talking about the R&D costs of developing MF product, especially if your elitist culture leads you down the road of developing your own sensor, a new "game changing" platform and a new range of lenses.
So, what do we have? A very cool camera with what by todays MF standards is a "middle of the road" sensor, a VERY limited range of lenses (and therefore system versatility), a dealer network who can't get their hands on stock to sell, a software system that can only be described as immature ("but it will improve with time" is not what I want to hear when I buy a camera system to gamble my livelihood on) and a strong reliance on the brand recognition to persuade me that all will be okay. Yeah, right!
What I'm saying is that despite the PR spin, this is a nice camera but NOT a serious pro contender. Before all the Leica fans start wailing, let me say that there are a few examples of pro use of this camera but is it a serious contender for the title of pro camera system, sorry, no. Can it ever be? Sure, if Leica can invest enough to round out the system, create a way to upgrade the sensor without having to buy a new camera each time, add heaps of useful lenses, etc. Barring evidence to the contrary, I doubt it.
One last thing - how many pros want to be tagged with the unspoken death-label that often goes through photographer's (and clients) minds when someone shows up with a Leica - (rich) Guy With Camera. EWWWWW!!!
So endeth the rant.
Not only polite ... I also was their almighty ad agency client :ROTFL: However, more than one top cinematographer bought a M8 or M9 once they handled mine on set. Some had dormant M lenses languishing in their vault, and didn't even know Leica made a digital M. Interest was mostly for their personal work, or to document a shoot.Mark, I was expecting a bite, but not one so polite nor well credentialled. Kudos to you!
I agree that top shooters are rarely equipped with bleeding edge gear. They are running businesses and ROI is one of the factors they keep an eye on. Generally, the update cycle on MF digital backs is 3-4 years, so one is only up to date that often. This can be exacerbated by the fact that photographers are generally a conservative lot and tend to stick to the tools they are comfortable with. C'est la vie. If anything, this tendency is going to make it even harder for Leica to legitimately make the case that the S2 is a full blooded pro outfit.
On the "EWWWWW" thing - Yes, perhaps I exaggerate, but remember, people are polite.....