Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Since there are first reports out from the new "S" I wondered who of you S2 owners is planning to upgrade?
    Improved higher ISO and even better color compared to S2 are the factors which I would be interested in.
    Higher speed, better display, gps would be nice to have for me but nothing I really need.

    The main problems seems used prices for S2 being lower than I had hoped for.

    I even wonder if the used S2 prices will go up a little after the first bunch of cameras from "Upgraders" have been sold.

    So who will upgrade or not and what are your reasons?

  2. #2
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Since there are first reports out from the new "S" I wondered who of you S2 owners is planning to upgrade?
    Improved higher ISO and even better color compared to S2 are the factors which I would be interested in.
    Higher speed, better display, gps would be nice to have for me but nothing I really need.

    The main problems seems used prices for S2 being lower than I had hoped for.

    I even wonder if the used S2 prices will go up a little after the first bunch of cameras from "Upgraders" have been sold.

    So who will upgrade or not and what are your reasons?
    I upgraded for a few reason's.new base ISO,better LCD with joystick which makes viewing easier,bigger buffer as well and a GPS module built in..also the leaf shutters sync at 1/1000th sec on the S and I believe a stop less on the S2..

    And the AF is reworked and faster and I believe better in low light..
    Last edited by RVB; 2nd January 2013 at 07:14.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by RVB View Post
    I upgraded for a few reason's.new base ISO,better LCD with joystick which makes viewing easier,bigger buffer as well and a GPS module built in..also the leaf shutters sync at 1/1000th sec on the S and I believe a stop less on the S2..

    And the AF is reworked and faster and I believe better in low light..
    So does the new camera fulfil your expectations/ how do you find the improvements?

  4. #4
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    So does the new camera fulfil your expectations/ how do you find the improvements?
    It's in the UK right now,I hope to have it in my hands sometime next week..and can give you some real feedback then...

    It arrived at the dealer before xmas (with a CS lens)but I haven't had a chance to collect it,I will probably have to have it fedexed over to me..
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Member Petster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    83
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    I do not see a real reason to upgrade. All the new features are nice to have.

    • I really like the GPS stuff but do I need it?
    • The S, old or new wasn't and isn't a camera you should work with when you need higher ISO. You need a good bunch of available or artificial light, if thats not available you should use a different camera.
    • The same applies for the Autofocus. I never had any trouble with the AF and if you need a really fast AF, you need a different camera.
    • The CS lenses will work the same way on the S2.
    • The only thing I need the rear screen for is to have a look at the histogram, therefore no better LCD is needed. Framing happens in the viewfinder, AF is reliable.
    • I'm used to the menu and I like the simplicity, I do not need a joystick.


    Not speaking about the price. This makes an upgrade even more senseless, unless you just want to have it.

    As stated earlier these are all good improvements and I hope that much more people going to use the S in the future, but for the folks out there already having a S2 it makes much more sense to wait for the next update.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    254
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Agree with Petster.

    I have a S2, which I bought a very nice price and I was already offered an increase amount of money over the price I paid for it.

    So I tinkered with the idea of selling it and getting the new S.

    but in the end, nothing really justifies the price I would end paying - bar having a new camera with a warranty much longer than the one I have.

    I've seen a couple of 1600 shots and its better than my S2 current 1250, no doubt. But not earth shattering clean baby bottom good. Better ? yes.

    AF is supposed to be faster, but I dont see the S2 ( or even the new S ) as a sport-sport"ish" camera.

    So in the end of the day, if you need really high iso or fast AF, neither the S2 or the new S is the camera to use.

    Maybe with the S3 or S4 things will change - but to honest, S2 AF is so nice and precise, ISO is quite good up to 320, 640 really usable that I'm not looking to upgrade unless they impement really wide DR and or really high ISO or Vibration Reduction in camera.

    S2 is that good.

    GPS is a nice thing to have - if the S2 had it , I would like it, but not having not really making a difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Petster View Post
    I do not see a real reason to upgrade. All the new features are nice to have.

    • I really like the GPS stuff but do I need it?
    • The S, old or new wasn't and isn't a camera you should work with when you need higher ISO. You need a good bunch of available or artificial light, if thats not available you should use a different camera.
    • The same applies for the Autofocus. I never had any trouble with the AF and if you need a really fast AF, you need a different camera.
    • The CS lenses will work the same way on the S2.
    • The only thing I need the rear screen for is to have a look at the histogram, therefore no better LCD is needed. Framing happens in the viewfinder, AF is reliable.
    • I'm used to the menu and I like the simplicity, I do not need a joystick.


    Not speaking about the price. This makes an upgrade even more senseless, unless you just want to have it.

    As stated earlier these are all good improvements and I hope that much more people going to use the S in the future, but for the folks out there already having a S2 it makes much more sense to wait for the next update.
    Leica M9 | 50mm Summilux ASPH | www.proenca.eu

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    I agree with you guys that even with good ISO1600 and faster AF it wont be a sports or available light camera-and yes, the AF of the S2 is very precise already.
    On the other side I find 1-1,5 f-stops can make a difference even in so&so light.
    With ISO 640 indoors with f2.5 I often come in the 1/60 or even longer exp range. And I am often forced to shoot very shallow DOF even if I dont allways want too.
    gps and more buffer and joystick I really dont miss.
    My problem is that since getting the 5dIII I am so spoiled with flexibility regarding ISO that the 5diii is used way too often compared to the S2.

    I would be really interested how many people use their S2 as main camera. Do you still see this system as a medium format camera for good light?
    Once on is spoiled by the IQ I want to use it for everything I can use it. But I am afraid that even with the higher ISO of the new "S" there is still one other factor which doesnt change...the S2 and specially the lenses will allways be considerably bigger than a DSLR or a Leica M and draw more attention....does it or is it a "problem" in the mind of the user/photographer/(me).
    Last edited by Paratom; 3rd January 2013 at 06:07.

  8. #8
    Member Petster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    83
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Once one is spoiled by the IQ I want to use it for everything I can use it.
    Totally understand what you mean and for me it was kind of a hard way to accept the limitations. I was coming from a DSLR as well and I have learned that you can not use the S2 as you would use a DSLR. Every system has its limitations. The S2 is in my opinion not a 24/7 camera.

    The IQ of the S2 is marvelous but this comes amongst other things from the huge sensor. A huge sensor is very sensitive in regards of movement, therefore time and so on and here we are. Limitations.

    Really nothing can compete with the IQ of the S2, but you will not get in every situation the IQ the camera can give. So coming back to your question, the Leica S2 can not be your main camera except you are always shooting in good light conditions.

    Cheers,
    Pete

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    I would be really interested how many people use their S2 as main camera. Do you still see this system as a medium format camera for good light?
    Well, not an S2, but a Pentax 645D, and it is my main camera. Even for available light photography in "bad" light, handheld. But the 645D is really good all the way up to ISO1600. If the S has the equivalent, then I would say an S could be that all around camera. Kurt, a GetDPI member, seems to use his S2 in all kinds of conditions. I don't understand why the S2 is a fair weather friend--it was not that long ago I was limited to 400 speed film for available light with my medium-format cameras and I got along fine with that even with the slow lenses.
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    +1. I was pleasantly surprised to find Pentax 645D files with extremely low noise at ISO 1000 and with careful exposure with a wide variety of subjects and lighting senarios, ISO 1600 can often be particular good. Whether one requires an ISO higher than 640 is dependent on so many factors which varies greatly between photographers.

    As for the original S2 body which I was kindly provided to shoot with on three seperate occasions, I found it a remarkable performer and can only imagine for those that require the improvements in the new S model, that it could be a wothwhile upgrade, but again depending on how one intends to primarily use the camera.

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 3rd January 2013 at 12:30.

  11. #11
    Member Petster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    83
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Well, not an S2, but a Pentax 645D, and it is my main camera. Even for available light photography in "bad" light, handheld. But the 645D is really good all the way up to ISO1600. If the S has the equivalent, then I would say an S could be that all around camera. Kurt, a GetDPI member, seems to use his S2 in all kinds of conditions. I don't understand why the S2 is a fair weather friend--it was not that long ago I was limited to 400 speed film for available light with my medium-format cameras and I got along fine with that even with the slow lenses.
    Sashin, what is bad light? That could vary in ones perception massivly. What is good enough at ISO1600. Subjective too. About how many different situations we are talking here? Thousends? I think it is really hard to find the right words and not getting misinterpreted...

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    819
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Tom - for what a Leica S upgrade costs, buying the new M is cheaper. The Type 240 is an unknown quantity for now, but presumably it brings good ISO 1600+ and the niceties of Live View. For low-light and difficult shooting conditions, I think the Leica M Type 240 has more value. Here in the US, upgrading from the Leica S2 to the Leica S will take around $10,000 new cash (give or take). That same $10,000 buys the Type 240 and some M lenses.

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Petster View Post
    Sashin, what is bad light? That could vary in ones perception massivly. What is good enough at ISO1600. Subjective too. About how many different situations we are talking here? Thousends? I think it is really hard to find the right words and not getting misinterpreted...
    I routinely make exposures measured in the minutes. I hand hold down to 1/8s wide open in mixed lighting in city streets as well as fading light at dusk at ISO 1600 so that should give an idea of light levels. I also shoot under very flat natural lighting with extreme color temperatures--dusk in the forest type of thing. From long exposure night photography to street photography. I just made 36" x 24" prints from a file shot at ISO1600 with a minute exposure time. The print looks great--much better than I could have gotten with ISO400 medium-format film. Maybe even better than ISO 100 film. Certainly no worse then my D800, perhaps better. To me "good enough" means something you can print 3 feet or larger and hung in a gallery.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by John Black View Post
    That same $10,000 buys the Type 240 and some M lenses.
    Some? More than one?

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,670
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Petster View Post
    Sashin, what is bad light? That could vary in ones perception massivly. What is good enough at ISO1600. Subjective too. About how many different situations we are talking here? Thousends? I think it is really hard to find the right words and not getting misinterpreted...
    That's sort of what I was getting at in a very general way (in my post "above"). What is an acceptable image taken at high ISO (respective of noise levels) can be very subjective. There are also many additonal variables to consider and all one can do is relate to what their own parameters are and whether it works for them or not. It also depens on the kind of output one strives for, not to mention viewing distance....and so on and so forth.

    Sometimes generalizations are hard to make and even harder for someone else to extrapolate precisely how it may apply to their expectations. How many times do we find people arguing whether a camera's feature set and capabilities are adaquate for a certain phootgraphic task? Anyhow, I don't want to get off topic regarding upgrading the S2 camera.

    Dave (D&A)
    Last edited by D&A; 4th January 2013 at 06:09.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #16
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    I routinely make exposures measured in the minutes. I hand hold down to 1/8s wide open in mixed lighting in city streets as well as fading light at dusk at ISO 1600 so that should give an idea of light levels. I also shoot under very flat natural lighting with extreme color temperatures--dusk in the forest type of thing. From long exposure night photography to street photography. I just made 36" x 24" prints from a file shot at ISO1600 with a minute exposure time. The print looks great--much better than I could have gotten with ISO400 medium-format film. Maybe even better than ISO 100 film. Certainly no worse then my D800, perhaps better. To me "good enough" means something you can print 3 feet or larger and hung in a gallery.
    That type of performance is anything but normal . Sort of falls into the same class as asking Tiger Woods what driver I might use. I don t doubt for a minute that you are achieving such results ..just saving its not common ...so others should not take it as benchmark of performance .

    I have an S2 system and have used it enough ..from landscapes in Aspen ,to shooting both action and the crowd at the US Open Tennis . Done street shooting similar (not as good) as Kurt etc .

    The most common reason to invest in MF is to gain access to the superior IQ . This in general includes the ability to render fine detail,provides superior tone separation and realistic color . To gain this benefit generally it takes greater care in your technique. Using higher shutter speeds or a tripod to minimize loss of detail (which you can easily see in a MF file ) . I generally try to shoot static subjects (so its only me that is moving) at 1/2-3X focal length . Yes I can handhold the 70 /2.5 at 1/60 but I will lose some captures at anything less than 1/250 .

    Yes you can shoot at ISO 1600 just be sure to add in exposure compensation of 1/2 to 1 extra EV to keep those shadows open ....isn t that shooting at ISO800 when determining your shutter speed?

    Don t forget that in MF you have way less DOF ..so you get some really cool bokeh ..but when shooting 2-3 people in a group which one would you like in focus . One of the most difficult aspects of limited DOF is actually considering where to place that small wedge of sharpness.

    So if you are used to a 35MM DSLR you have some adjustment to do . I try to shoot street at f5.6 never less than 1/250 and landscape at f8 or f11 which requires a tripod .

    Sure I want higher ISO but generally I want ISO800 on the new S to look as good as ISO400 on the S2 . Beyond that you have to bring the "A" game and that requires not only ability but also plenty of practice .

    Now I can also compare this to a D800E using the best Leica R lenses I can find . This of course is a bad example of what I started the response with . I have good eyes and used Leica R lenses from the beginning shooting plenty of sports . I would not recommend this to most photographers as its just too hard to get acceptable hit ratios. But if you are speaking of night shooting ...the D800E is stunning up thru ISO3200 and excellent at ISO6400. Smaller faster lenses and its night verse day in available light and night photography .

    Generally I think of high ISO performance as ..whats the highest ISO you can routinely get excellent quality . If is 6400 is the limit ..then I look at 1600 as a pretty good indicator of what I would use . I like the S2 to about 800 but its better at 400 ....so any improvement in the S could make ISO800 a really good performer .
    Roger Dunham
    http://rogerdunham.com/
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Common Ground Fair. 645D, 35mm manual focus lens, f/5.6. 1/50 sec, ISO 1600. Mixed lighting.



    100% crop:



    Swift river under moonlight. ISO 800, 124 sec., f/8.



    Astrophotography on a tracking mount, 3-minute exposure:



    If the S is anything like the 645D, I would say it is a flexible system. No need for another DSLR.
    Last edited by Shashin; 3rd January 2013 at 18:28.

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,497
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    This is what I call bad light. Full frame and 100% crop. ISO1600 and 1/60sec and 55mm lens. Naturally, handheld.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    How is the long exposure performance? what is the longest you can go with no noise?
    Does it have long exposure Noise reduction on all the time or it is 'off and on" option?
    Is there an intervalometer for stacking?

    Amr

  20. #20
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Another small point that is that the S2 viewfinder is 96% coverage and the S is 98%

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    I guess it also comes down to the type of photography.

    For example it is quite a difference if you want to take images of someone sitting near still at a table vs. taking images of kids unpacking presents under the Christmas tree.

    The other thing is DOF and if you are forced to almost allways shoot wide open as soons as the light is not that bright.

    So I think I would allways own one additional camera for really low light, but I think the percentage how often I wouldcould use the S-system would benefit from 1-1.5 stop better ISO.
    I have had quite some situations (lets say during daylight but inside where I just got in the 1/30-1/60 range at f2.5 and only got part of the images due to those limitations.
    The more I think about the more I believe to would really benefit from the new S....but the cost for "updating" is steep.
    But then you also get the 3 year warranty and you also have a higher value, so in the end one doesnt "loose" the full update cost.
    At least I am not in a hurry.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    860
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    76

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Tom, in my opinion the sum of the 80+ improvements in the new S over the S2, the new S is worth serious consideration. If money were no object, I would have already put my S2 up for sale and bought the new S along with a 30-90mm zoom. As it is, I am still very happy with my S2 and will have to be patient about getting the new S - the 30-90mm zoom will be my next S related purchase.

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Since there are first reports out from the new "S" I wondered who of you S2 owners is planning to upgrade?
    Improved higher ISO and even better color compared to S2 are the factors which I would be interested in.
    Higher speed, better display, gps would be nice to have for me but nothing I really need.

    The main problems seems used prices for S2 being lower than I had hoped for.

    I even wonder if the used S2 prices will go up a little after the first bunch of cameras from "Upgraders" have been sold.

    So who will upgrade or not and what are your reasons?
    I think in actual practice, for most shots, people will be hard pressed to tell the difference.

    Since the sensor is the same in the end, I'd be curious how the RAW color results are better? How is that quantifiable?

    I'd need to see how improved the ISO is ... 1250 and 1600 are just a whisker different in reality.

    Medium Format Digital is a very expensive undertaking if you upgrade every time there are some incremental improvements. If the S had jumped to 50 meg, or did some other obvious improvement, like Hasselblad did for the H4D with True Focus, then there is a clearer cut reason to move to a newer model if you need those improvements.

    It may be that the actual upgrade cost will be more than most people think it will. Leica doesn't have a trade policy like Phase and Hassey, so owners are on their own, or have to deal with retail differences from a dealer. Cha-ching!

    One of the issues that will become apparent over time is that slight improvements tend to even out later in terms of resale returns between two similar MFD models.

    While my options may change, right now I see no compelling reason to pay so much money for "nice to have", but minor improvements. The value in these ultra expensive choices like the S2 is in the using against a need that justifies it, for as long as you can.

    In contrast, the expensive choice of a Leica M Mono was a no brainer for me, for what I shoot, and how different it is from what I have.

    -Marc
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Member Petster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    83
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Couldn't agree more.

  25. #25
    Senior Member GMB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    396
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Marc,
    That certainly is the rational and reasonable assessment, and I completely agree. And it is for the reasons set out by you that I don't intend to upgrade. (I rather spend the money on the zoom and/or the 24 mm.)

    But I can also see that some folks for whom the money is no object or who have extensively used the S2 so that it paid of decided to get the latest and newest.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Georg
    My new website (under construction) at Zenfolio

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by GMB View Post
    Marc,
    That certainly is the rational and reasonable assessment, and I completely agree. And it is for the reasons set out by you that I don't intend to upgrade. (I rather spend the money on the zoom and/or the 24 mm.)

    But I can also see that some folks for whom the money is no object or who have extensively used the S2 so that it paid off, decided to get the latest and newest.
    I would agree with that, and count myself as one who has gotten a lot of value from the S2 already ... which is why I leave my options open until any money designated for gear purchases is gone one way or the other.

    Frankly, I was hoping for a more substantial incursion into 35MM DSLR territory ... and have subjectively decided the new S wasn't there yet, so I secured a Sony A99 for use over the next few years.


    With the H5D, Hasselblad has presented me with an almost identical upgrade scenario. Lateral move with marginal real world advantages ... unless I go Multi-Shot.

    -Marc

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Marc,
    I understand you wont upgrade when you had hoped for more MP and a more 35mm-like handling.
    In my case 36MP is as much as I need (it is even a little more than I need).
    In regards to the 35mm handling I just dont believe that it is possible to make a system with such big and heavy lenses down to AF speed or handling of ff DSLRs.
    The one thing I was not sure is if the CMOS sensor of the new M does a good job, if they could use it in the "S" which probably would further improve the higher ISO and allow life-view.
    Regarding upgrade cost we should keep in mind that one does also get another 3 year warranty and also the resale value in 2-3 years of a "S" will be higher than that of a "S2".
    Still a lot of money though.

    I would be really interested to test-run a new S side by side with my S2 and see how much improvement is there.

  28. #28
    Senior Member GMB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Heart of Europe
    Posts
    396
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    In regards to the 35mm handling I just dont believe that it is possible to make a system with such big and heavy lenses down to AF speed or handling of ff DSLRs.
    Some DSLR lenses (such as 70-200 2.8 zooms) are heavier than most S lenses, so the reason must be a different one. Actually, when I was at Photokina the guy who showed me the new S (and who admitted that autofocus was only marginally improved) also stated the Canikon have years advantage of autofocus experience and technology. The interesting question is whether the current bottleneck for better autofocus is the cameral or the lenses.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Georg
    My new website (under construction) at Zenfolio

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Marc,
    I understand you wont upgrade when you had hoped for more MP and a more 35mm-like handling.
    In my case 36MP is as much as I need (it is even a little more than I need).
    In regards to the 35mm handling I just dont believe that it is possible to make a system with such big and heavy lenses down to AF speed or handling of ff DSLRs.
    The one thing I was not sure is if the CMOS sensor of the new M does a good job, if they could use it in the "S" which probably would further improve the higher ISO and allow life-view.
    Regarding upgrade cost we should keep in mind that one does also get another 3 year warranty and also the resale value in 2-3 years of a "S" will be higher than that of a "S2".
    Still a lot of money though.

    I would be really interested to test-run a new S side by side with my S2 and see how much improvement is there.
    I didn't say that I hoped for more MP ... I said more MP, or some other obvious difference, would make the upgrade value more apparent.

    Warranty means zip once it is gone on either a S2 or S. BTW, has Leica made it clear that the new S warranty is transferable like on the S2? Or is it like the M9, not transferable? I also wonder if a MACK warranty can be had for the S2 now?

    IMO, your last sentence is the one that really matters.

    -Marc

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by GMB View Post
    Some DSLR lenses (such as 70-200 2.8 zooms) are heavier than most S lenses, so the reason must be a different one. Actually, when I was at Photokina the guy who showed me the new S (and who admitted that autofocus was only marginally improved) also stated the Canikon have years advantage of autofocus experience and technology. The interesting question is whether the current bottleneck for better autofocus is the cameral or the lenses.
    Georg, if you look for example at the Canon 85/1.2II it is considerable slower than the lighter Canon 85/1.8 and many say its the weight of the glass inside the lens.

    I have to add one thing - even if Leica admits that Canikon have some years advantage - allready the AF of the S2 seems to be one of the most accurate AF I have experienced in any camera.

  31. #31
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    So what is a warranty extension worth ? Maybe less than when the S2 was introduced . When I bought my S2 almost exactly 2 years ago ..I bought an extra year of warranty (in this case a bad bet ) but others I know had more than one warranty claim . I decided ..no problems in the last two years so I am not getting a 3rd year on my warranty . A year of warranty was priced at $1700 .

    If I used my S2 as hard as I use my M s ..I would adjust the new purchase price to reflect the value of 3 years of warranty . So my calculation would be $22000 less less $5100 warranty less say $10000 trade in ...upgrade would be about $7000 ....but you still have to put out $12000 in cash for an evolution of the product . And as Marc points out would you buy the warranty at that price ?

    I am quite happy with Leica s approach to the new S ...logical improvements to a great product without ripping out the core .

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    So what is a warranty extension worth ? Maybe less than when the S2 was introduced . When I bought my S2 almost exactly 2 years ago ..I bought an extra year of warranty (in this case a bad bet ) but others I know had more than one warranty claim . I decided ..no problems in the last two years so I am not getting a 3rd year on my warranty . A year of warranty was priced at $1700 .

    If I used my S2 as hard as I use my M s ..I would adjust the new purchase price to reflect the value of 3 years of warranty . So my calculation would be $22000 less less $5100 warranty less say $10000 trade in ...upgrade would be about $7000 ....but you still have to put out $12000 in cash for an evolution of the product . And as Marc points out would you buy the warranty at that price ?

    I am quite happy with Leica s approach to the new S ...logical improvements to a great product without ripping out the core .
    If you dont run into any problems warranty is worth nothing, if you run into problems it can be worth a lot - so its hard to answer. Leica says the included warranty (and fast service) is worth 3k.

    ... and to be honest: When I bought my own S2 I bought it with just the 1 year standard warranty. So no-as a non-pro standard user I would not pay 3k for the extended warranty/service. As a pro I would buy it for sure.
    Last edited by Paratom; 7th January 2013 at 10:47.

  33. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    I would say there is another issue that is not often talked about -- the time and effort spent in getting a camera and lens setup that works flawlessly together. I find that Leica is spectacular when they are working, but they generally take some time to sort out their issues. Leica always stands behind their product, but I think they are so highly tweaked that it often takes some time to get them meshing perfectly together. For example, I am on my second S2 (the first did not AF properly from the start, so they replaced it), my second 70mm lens (it had a strange sharpness issue); my M9 had a CCD replacement under warranty, and many of my Leica lenses have been adjusted or serviced to match the camera. Don't get me started on the R9 and DMR...
    My experience has been that after a troublesome first few months, Leica products settle in and perform extremely well for a long time. At the moment, both my M9 and S2 perform extremely well, and the upgrade would need to be pretty dramatic to make me part with a well performing kit.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    MF makes me all nervous and jittery - shooting with my M9 or monochrome makes me feel happy - easy decision to just say no 'upgrade' for me .

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    MF makes me all nervous and jittery - shooting with my M9 or monochrome makes me feel happy - easy decision to just say no 'upgrade' for me .
    Hi Peter,
    but will you keep your S2? Or do you plan to get out of it?
    For my taste the S2 (lenses) are kind on the limit regarding drawing attention with the gear.
    On the other side the ratio of percentage of keepers (for me) from taken images with the S2 is very high. I think it is not so much the pure IQ but the big viewfinder of the S-System and also the precise focus.

    I am a long time M user but I think at least once a year I find out that another one of my lenses needs some focus calibration.
    It is a little bit of a love -hate story for me -Lots of love for the m-system, but occasional frustration.

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: The new "S" - worth to upgrade from S2?

    Hi Paratom,

    The S2 is a keeper for me - it is all about the glass and I love the way the S2 lenses draw - with strobe and with natural light. More a studio camera than walk around though - for walk around (and sometimes studio work too)

    ...I make a lot more photos with M9 and now Monochrome - than any other of my too many systems - Leica M kills MF and 35mm DSLRs - small / compact /best lenses / everything manual and in my control - simple perfection.

    I use a D800 for telephoto stuff.

    Cheers
    Pete

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •