Stuart Richardson
Active member
Sorry, this thread should not exist. Mods can delete!
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!
nevermind
- Thread starter Stuart Richardson
- Start date
Re: So...I guess I will be sticking with the S2!
The S-E seems a nice upgrade path option for the S2 owners.
It offers better iso performance, better lcd screen, better AF, better body (with the joystick), better processor & memory than the S2 and is cheaper than the S-006.
Weighting all those advantages with the cost difference between selling a second hand S2 and buying a new S-E is worth thinking about.
The S-E seems a nice upgrade path option for the S2 owners.
It offers better iso performance, better lcd screen, better AF, better body (with the joystick), better processor & memory than the S2 and is cheaper than the S-006.
Weighting all those advantages with the cost difference between selling a second hand S2 and buying a new S-E is worth thinking about.
RVB
Member
Re: So...I guess I will be sticking with the S2!
Definitely more interesting to S2 owners,the extra stop of DR is another bonus,but it will be very interesting to see how the files compare to the CCD files.
Price is not so bad when you look at the IQ and H5D.. Although the Pentax beats them all hands down if you like the Pentax glass and dont need/want leaf shutters.
Definitely more interesting to S2 owners,the extra stop of DR is another bonus,but it will be very interesting to see how the files compare to the CCD files.
Price is not so bad when you look at the IQ and H5D.. Although the Pentax beats them all hands down if you like the Pentax glass and dont need/want leaf shutters.
Stuart Richardson
Active member
Sorry I deleted the main text...I would rather not have it on record. Basically though, if you are confused, my point was that I was not all that pleased by the new S, in relation to my own needs. I suppose the camera is not really targeted at my work, and more at the fashion segment.
Don't get me wrong, I would still like some of the new things in the S...I am looking to incorporate video segments into my art work, and the leveling feature would be useful in the studio for photographing artwork, but overall, I am really surprised the resolution is not increasing. I know resolution is not everything, but I am already maxing out the resolution in my workflow (printing 1x1.5m), and the system is so clearly built for it...it has been 4 or 5 years without a change, and meanwhile 35mm has comparable resolution, and even the low end medium format like the Pentax have gone to 50mp. What is Leica doing with the highest resolution lenses around with the lowest resolution medium format body?
Don't get me wrong, I would still like some of the new things in the S...I am looking to incorporate video segments into my art work, and the leveling feature would be useful in the studio for photographing artwork, but overall, I am really surprised the resolution is not increasing. I know resolution is not everything, but I am already maxing out the resolution in my workflow (printing 1x1.5m), and the system is so clearly built for it...it has been 4 or 5 years without a change, and meanwhile 35mm has comparable resolution, and even the low end medium format like the Pentax have gone to 50mp. What is Leica doing with the highest resolution lenses around with the lowest resolution medium format body?
Valid points, Stuart, I guess the new S can not be to everybody's liking. Me, I just hope that my S2-P will hold out untill PK '20 :ROTFL: That should give me enough time to save for a new one ...
As for the 37,5 MP - again, I guess they had to make a compromise. Perhaps Cmosis is just not able to provide a signal/noise ratio that is in the ballpark of the Sony sensor everybody else is using, with smaller pixels. In order to come up with a useful high ISO, say 1600-3200, they couldn't make the pixel pitch smaller with Cmosis-tech.
Of course this is all wild speculation, but the fact that Leica went for a Cmosis chip really makes you wonder, is it because they had to sign a contract for a package deal when they needed the custom designed M sensor?
It'll be interesting to see some real world comparisons between the Cmosis and the Sony sensor, who knows?
As for the 37,5 MP - again, I guess they had to make a compromise. Perhaps Cmosis is just not able to provide a signal/noise ratio that is in the ballpark of the Sony sensor everybody else is using, with smaller pixels. In order to come up with a useful high ISO, say 1600-3200, they couldn't make the pixel pitch smaller with Cmosis-tech.
Of course this is all wild speculation, but the fact that Leica went for a Cmosis chip really makes you wonder, is it because they had to sign a contract for a package deal when they needed the custom designed M sensor?
It'll be interesting to see some real world comparisons between the Cmosis and the Sony sensor, who knows?
I suppose the new S Cmos sensor is the M sensor extended to 30X45mm (24 -> 37,5 MP).
So if the electronic part and signal treatment in the S are not that different from the M then the S-007 output should be close to the M, with more resolution. Or am I over simplifying things ?
S-007, his name is Bond...
So if the electronic part and signal treatment in the S are not that different from the M then the S-007 output should be close to the M, with more resolution. Or am I over simplifying things ?
S-007, his name is Bond...
Sounds likely and not all that encouraging (given my experience with output from the M). But I'd like to see pictures first and compare to my S2. If one can get really clean ISO 800-1600 from the camera and the OOC RAW colours and contrast at base ISO are like the S2; it would open new possibilities handheld with the 30-90 zoom in particular.
John Black
Active member
The 37.5 CMOS sensor is exactly the M-240 sensor with more real-estate, so the S-007 brings M-240 image quality with a larger sensor and the added pixels that go with that area. I think the S-007 will be a great camera - in about three years when they are $10,000 on the used market. Basically, for my needs a S-007 is no more than a super sized Big Mac meal. I've already got the taste and flavor in the M-240, so the S-007 isn't offering enough above the M-240 to justify plunking-down $25,400. Just my $.02 view on it.
I am afraid the new S 007 has just the same but larger CMOSIS sensor compared with the M. I just got the S2 in the used market, and find its image quality such a revelation compared with the M. If the new sensor is just an expanded sensor of the M, then it will be a disappointment. They need to be made better. That being said, I still love the M240, especially its highlight performance is better than any other digital camera that I have used.
Stuart, I think you should express your disappointment.
While I find the S system fits my needs just about to a T, and the S2P I have does most of what I need done these days, there is no reason that the S system cannot accommodate a higher resolution version, especially given the lenses. After all, the more users of the system, the more versatile and long term it becomes.
I used to work with two Hasselblads … a 1.3X 40 meg and a FF 60 meg. Two different applications/usage/disciplines that I really never mixed up very much. The S2P replaced the 40 meg H, and I no longer needed the 60 meg H4D after semi-retiring.
I think Leica are taking baby steps in expanding into CMOS sensors … so it may take awhile before we see a smaller pixel higher res S camera.
Frankly, what we all agree on are the S optics … which could've easily accommodated a cut down version of the 80 meg 645 sensor … seems like they could have done it now IF it was a Dalsa CCD.
IMO that is what the S-E should have been, with the S 007 being the foray into CMOS.
I'm crappy at math, so I wonder what resolution the Leica sensor size would produce out of a 80 meg 645?
Over-all, I'm happy to see the S-E as it is because it means the current S2/S-006 sensor and related parts remains in production, so I can keep shooting with the camera I like.
- Marc
While I find the S system fits my needs just about to a T, and the S2P I have does most of what I need done these days, there is no reason that the S system cannot accommodate a higher resolution version, especially given the lenses. After all, the more users of the system, the more versatile and long term it becomes.
I used to work with two Hasselblads … a 1.3X 40 meg and a FF 60 meg. Two different applications/usage/disciplines that I really never mixed up very much. The S2P replaced the 40 meg H, and I no longer needed the 60 meg H4D after semi-retiring.
I think Leica are taking baby steps in expanding into CMOS sensors … so it may take awhile before we see a smaller pixel higher res S camera.
Frankly, what we all agree on are the S optics … which could've easily accommodated a cut down version of the 80 meg 645 sensor … seems like they could have done it now IF it was a Dalsa CCD.
IMO that is what the S-E should have been, with the S 007 being the foray into CMOS.
I'm crappy at math, so I wonder what resolution the Leica sensor size would produce out of a 80 meg 645?
Over-all, I'm happy to see the S-E as it is because it means the current S2/S-006 sensor and related parts remains in production, so I can keep shooting with the camera I like.
- Marc
RVB
Member
I was actually going to write the very same comment..
I wonder if Leica would continue to offer at least two versions of the S,maybe next time they could have one aimed at handheld work with 37.5mp and a High res sensor like the Dalsa with its 5.2um pixels or even D810 sized pixels of 4.88um for Landscape etc.
Rob
Stuart Richardson
Active member
Thanks Marc. To be honest, I deleted the thread initially because I was just at the Leica factory two weeks ago, and they were incredibly kind to me. They were wonderful people and very proud of the work they are doing. They should be! I did not want to come off ungrateful by enjoying their hospitality and kindness, and then turning around and criticizing their latest product. I still think they get more right than any other camera manufacturer, which is why I use the M, S and now T series in the first place.
But as I said, I am quite disappointed with the route they went with this. I assumed they were going to go with CMOS (which I am very wary of, and said as much when I was there), but I assumed that would mean that it would allow them to advance in every major area of the camera...resolution, ISO, speed, long exposure time, live view etc. As it is, it seems like they have put features ahead of image quality, which is just about the only thing you can usually count on Leica NOT to do! That they are doing this on their flagship super-camera really surprises and disappoints me.
Thanks for the math … I was too lazy to figure it out.
Now had Leica done that, (50 meg Dalsa), I probably would have had to refigure my financials to get one. I've work with the Leaf 33 meg and Hasselbald 60meg Dalsa sensors and loved the rendering … would very much liked to have seen how the S lenses rendered using Dalsa capture.
Moot point I suppose.
- Marc
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Leica has developed a strong financial bias over the past few years . Prior to the M9 they were very product/production focused . Producing the very best products in the industry ,maintaining their core design,engineering and craft skills in Germany . While they are incredibly proud of their products ..they have bowed to both the financial and supply chain realities .
Video and cinema is a hugely profitable market segment and fits nicely with Leica s cost is not factor if the quality is unique . The retail stores to become financial viable need a lot of stuff to sell beyond the S and M lines . CMOS offers the potential to remain competitive .
Yet at the same time you can see that Leica gets the CCD verse CMOS issue . I ve never wanted much beyond the M9 except a 1 1/2 better high ISO performance . Not sure I need anything better from the s2/s(006) …...
Video and cinema is a hugely profitable market segment and fits nicely with Leica s cost is not factor if the quality is unique . The retail stores to become financial viable need a lot of stuff to sell beyond the S and M lines . CMOS offers the potential to remain competitive .
Yet at the same time you can see that Leica gets the CCD verse CMOS issue . I ve never wanted much beyond the M9 except a 1 1/2 better high ISO performance . Not sure I need anything better from the s2/s(006) …...
This is a serious issue. I am becoming less confident in Leica on this score across the board. They need to get back to focusing on beauty instead of technical prowess and checklists.
Just installed the new firmware for the S2, and tested autofocus on 120CS and 180mm. I have to judge by memory only, but it seems faster and more precise. Maybe a little noisier, too? When focus changes are big, it seems to go brrrrr-br, with a short fine correction after a very brief pause. Only one incident of hunting (to macro) on the 120CS, otherwise precise and fast.
Curious to hear impressions from other users, would be very happy if AF is improved also on the S2, or am I just dreaming?
Curious to hear impressions from other users, would be very happy if AF is improved also on the S2, or am I just dreaming?
doug
Well-known member
There's a very fine line between having too many popular features and falling behind the market. Leica barely skirted disaster when the company was slow to adopt AF and digital.