This begs the question. We know absolutely nothing of what has already transpired. Or are you privy to knowledge that the rest of us don't have?
Carsten,
You are correct....I am not privy to knowledge of what has transpired. I am going by what has been published and discussed on this forum and others, in magazines and through interviews, etc. The S2 was not in production phase until very recently. That does not provide a whole bunch of time for lots of shakedown testing, especially if most of the lenses are not even going to be available for several more months from now. So most cameras and lenses would be pre-production models. Fair enough, but those may still be undergoing changes, as Leica had commented on. Also, as I recall, there were only 20 or so prototypes out there, not 40, and many of those were being used in demos and marketing events. Folks talked about these events being held all over the place. None of those models were allowing anything other than ISO 100 shooting, from what others also said.
So, using that sort of information, plus comments from folks like Guy who just recently got an offer to submit his name for beta testing, the window of open beta testing may just be starting. Do you think all or any of the possible glitches will be quickly found in time to fix before release in a few months? That seems optimistic to me, but what do I know
Again, I, and some others that are getting accused of "bashing" here are not hammering on the performance stuff of the S2, as nobody has really seen it or tested that part....at least not that has been publicly shared by anybody. The issue is the proposed cost of this new system, which as far as we know remains untested on a broad scale, is closer to a 35mm DSLR (good and bad for some folks), but is being priced at the higher end or above the supposed competitive offerings from Phase and Hasselblad. In other words, that "Leica premium" seems quite high, even for seasoned Leica folks, and especially in the present economy.
Please do not get me wrong....I think the concept is great. I myself had been wishing and saving and planning for this new beast. However, at this point, I feel that the pricing and lack of other important info and testing have taken this off my radar at this point. Had Leica come in at a much more competitive level for at least the body, the taste may not be as sour as they have made it now. I fully expected it to be expensive, just not nearly as expensive as they are now making it. It still is NOT a full-blown MF solution, AND it is not the top flight 35mm DSLR sort of solution either. It is a tweener.....yet it priced higher than what even seems reasonable in the market and for whatever niche it is supposed to fill. That is my opinion, but seemingly shared by a lot of others also. What is wrong with that? Why should I and others not feel disappointed, or even disenfranchised a bit from Leica, whom many of us have been loyal users and proponents for a long time? I shot Nikon for 25 years, but when they could not field a decent professional DSLR until the D2x at least, I was glad I switched to Canon. Now Canon is getting long in the tooth with its 1-series machines. That is the consumer/user in me, and that is what Leica, Phase, Hasselblad, Nikon, Canon and anybody else has to contend with, but I know I am not alone in this group of shooters, pro or not.
LJ