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!

Phase One LS vs Leica S glass comparisons

David K

Workshop Member
Without getting caught up in terminology I think we'd all agree that the glass is a major part of what can make an image special. Seems like it wasn't all that long ago that many of us were gathered on the alternative forum over at FM using Leica and Zeiss lenses on our Canon/Nikon bodies with adapters...so I know I'm not alone in my obsession with having the best glass. Having shot with most brands over the years I've come to favor Rollei, Zeiss and Leica glass. I'm sure many folks here remember Guy's well deserved love affair with the Zeiss 21mm 2.8 and there are many that sing the praises of the Zeiss/Hassy/Rollei 110 2.0 and the Zeiss 120 4.0. And the Hasselblad 250 and 350 Super Achromats and the Leica R 180 2.0 that Doug Herr does his magic with. I've owned and loved all of these lenses and as a consequence consider myself to be a "glass" guy. I pick my glass first and whichever system supports it is secondary. Last system was the Hy6 with the marvelous Rollei lenses (and problematic e75LV Sinar back). Now I've got the Leica S system with the full complement of available lenses and they are all among the finest I've ever owned. As a fringe benefit the S2 camera suits my shooting style and subject matter equally well. But there are equally experienced and better photographers than I who have chosen other systems...which is why a test drive is essential.

PS Sometimes I wonder if Leica's red dot was inspired by the matador's muleta (red cape/cloth).
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Well the OP was about comparing the images.
Of course glass makes a difference, but it needs to make a difference in context.
I made the statement, simple as it was, that to compare them you must compare them.
Unfortunately I would have shot with both yesterday if I had both but I don't.
So far nobody has got to the OP's point other than Jack and Guy's description of the two; Apologies if I have missed anyone.

So how do we do a comparison in this case unless we can shoot S lenses on a Phamiya mount or LS lenses on a S2 mount without adding complexity to the comparison?

If you are willing to permit system to system comparison then someone please who has both at their disposal please put up the images. Or perhaps loan me an S2 for long enough to do some controlled comparisons.
Unless we actually do that we are just :deadhorse:.
-bob
 

Jeffg53

Member
Isn't it fascinating that we can have 60+ posts on a dead horse. Supposition and speculation mixed with bias are potent forces.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Well I currently own and shoot with Hy6 and a bunch of Rollie lenses using both Sinar and Leaf backs on the system. I also own and shoot with an S2 and some lenses ( I wont mention the use of an adaptor to I use to expand the lens arsenal to include a bunch of Zeiss lenses ) I have owned and shot with various Phase backs and the Mamiya glass ( but no LS Mamiya glass ) I have also used Phase backs on a fairly comprehensive RZ system I own including every lens from 30mm fisheye to 210. No need to mention the H system I recently offloaded which included every HC lens Hasselblad made (except zooms).

I am not an engineer by training and the only labs I have ever consulted in where pharmaceutical companies and actuarial companies so I wont call myself a 'scientist' - I happen to have academic credentials in Mathematics - pure and applied at undergrad and postgrad levels ( yeah I can add) - and I long ago stopped giving a toss about credentials - because in hedge fund land all you have is risk to worry about - and how fat your balance sheet is or otherwise.

Bob is 'technically' correct in pointing to the issue of 'perception and memory' as confounding factors in any discussion regarding observed preferences. same arguments / discussions in audio land btw for same reasons.

What we are witnessing any any gentlemanly discussion also relates to the two types of scientist or empiricist operating in any field - as any graduate of a traditional School of Philosophy will understand - you are entering the world of instrumentalism versus operationalism.

In simple terms the instrumentalist doesn't care ( as much) for the discovery and application of theoretical ( empirically extrapolated and hypothesized or otherwise) truth, the good old instrumentalist cares about ( mainly) is what works.

The operationalist however is firstly and lastly concerned about the discovery of universal truth.

here is the rub - when dealing with perception - you have the embarrassing fact of problems of definition and measurement - so typical empirical ( observational ) based types of testing are fraught with error accordingly.

So as Bob as a scientist would know - referencing issues of perception to how an engineered system is designed to work isn't going to prove anything to anyone.


Me? I like the way certain glass draws and that why I have so much of it. In fact the whole notion of better / best / bestest is boring. Forced to choose ? I will stick to my Leica M glass. -:)

no such thing as a bad lens.

Pete
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Well the OP was about comparing the images.
Of course glass makes a difference, but it needs to make a difference in context.
I made the statement, simple as it was, that to compare them you must compare them.
Unfortunately I would have shot with both yesterday if I had both but I don't.
So far nobody has got to the OP's point other than Jack and Guy's description of the two; Apologies if I have missed anyone.

So how do we do a comparison in this case unless we can shoot S lenses on a Phamiya mount or LS lenses on a S2 mount without adding complexity to the comparison?

If you are willing to permit system to system comparison then someone please who has both at their disposal please put up the images. Or perhaps loan me an S2 for long enough to do some controlled comparisons.
Unless we actually do that we are just :deadhorse:.
-bob
You'll get my S2P and S lenses for a test scenario when a Shar-Pei wins the Miss Universe contest :LOL:

Problem is that if someone did that side-by-side it'd still be :deadhorse:

Even IF I had both systems the OP wanted to discuss, I'm not familiar with the new Schneider lenses and working the files to final images in the latest version of C1 ... and same with a non-S2 user. To me, it would require someone that uses both systems frequently and could restrict comments in context to their own creative objectives and style of photography.

I did run a personal test between my Hasselblad H4D/40 and a loaner S2P for a week. Since I use a Leica M frequently, I used that as a base for a processing starting point, which was still flawed but at least a base to work from. The objective in the end was to see how I felt about the S2 and images in various scenarios I shoot in. The results of the over-all experience, ergonomics, speed of shooting, form-facor difference ... topped off by the incredible S lenses ... prompted my selling of the H4D/40 and upgrading my studio Hasselblad CF39/MS to a H4D/60.

In essence ... the S2 assumed the traditional role of a 645 and the H4D/60 that of a 6X7 (and modularly a 6X9 view camera) ... similar to the way I saw those roles before digital reached the level of IQ it now offers. 645 was supposed to be faster and less cumbersome compared to a 6X6 or 6X7 kit. The S2 restores that working relationship for me.

Much like Shelby has mentioned, my first early reactions to the S2 optics was a worry that the "character" wasn't there. That has long since gone away. The S "character" revealed itself once I lived with the S for a while. The result is a more natural, non-digital looking, pleasant character that is consistent across the lens line-up. When I bolt on any of the S lenses, I don't feel that it is one of the weaker siblings compared to the others.

In the end, the S2 form factor and shooting experience is different from all other MFD choices out there right now ... and suffice it to say that all of the S lenses most certainly will not disappoint ... not to mention that it is simply the most seductive, beautiful, silky smooth vixen of a photographic tool I've ever laid hands on :)

So, find the glove that fits, and wear it.

-Marc
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
Dear Mr, Farkas.
1) you are persistently changing the subject. The issue was color depth. It is measured by the signal to noise ratio of the least significant bit.
2) It has nothing to do with lenses.
3) Do not argue with a scientist who also happens to be a moderator unless you have facts and not opinion or perhaps desire to spend some time in the penalty box.
4) Folks have been trying to define better for years and have mostly ended up confused
have a nice day
-bob
Wow...I'm not sure how the words, scientist and moderator, ended up in the same sentence, when discussing Leica vs Phase, but empirical observations and experience, trump theory and logic...IMO.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Wow...I'm not sure how the words, scientist and moderator, ended up in the same sentence, when discussing Leica vs Phase, but empirical observations and experience, trump theory and logic...IMO.
I'm all for empirical observations and experience. The problem is that sales pitches often come dressed in empirical clothing. I'm very happy to have vendors making the case for their products, but when the volume (in both quantity and loudness) of vendor posts drowns out the opinions of those whose biases are at least not primarily financial, I think it does the site a disservice. Guy facilitating GAS is one thing. Vendors doing it is another.

To be clear, I don't think any lines were crossed in this thread, but when a subject is so polarizing as Brand A vs. Brand B, I wish the vendors would stay out of it, or at least keep a low profile and offer to make their pitch offline.

Best,

Matt
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
Wow...I'm not sure how the words, scientist and moderator, ended up in the same sentence, when discussing Leica vs Phase, but empirical observations and experience, trump theory and logic...IMO.
So that empirical observations meaning same subject side by side?
that would be nice, but as Marc points out that would not end the discussion as folks would then have all sorts of preferences for A or B and those might drift depending on the subject.
I have seen just sort of thing in several double blind photo comparisons which is how many of the camera makers decide how to adjust their secret sauces.
If you want to talk lenses in general, I LOVE the Cooke PS945 and currently the Rodenstock 70mm HR-W. Those two lenses are very different and draw differently and are best with different subjects.
So as to answer the OP more directly, it comes down to "check it out for yourself" since the evaluative and subjective nature of the visual system all but requires that you do.
The problem is that one set of eyes describing how A looks and comparing that description to one made by a different set of eyes of a different subject is rendered by B produces not a very useful result.
So is "sharp" the same as "clinical" or "crunchy" is "smooth" the same as "low contrast"?
These often used words further illustrate the issue in that a lens is evaluated by the observer isn a way that may be described positively or negatively depending on his taste.
-bob

p.s.
I do intend to try every lens made before I die LOL
 

Shashin

Well-known member
THE most important factor when choosing a new camera is your think it is cool.

The second is that you can afford it, but that that can be optional. At least until your significant other finds out...
 
...When I bolt on any of the S lenses, I don't feel that it is one of the weaker siblings compared to the others...
-Marc
I hadn't really thought of this until you wrote it down. I have taken it for granted having been using the S system for a while now.

Sure, I bought into the S system because I knew from testing that the lenses were top notch.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm all for empirical observations and experience. The problem is that sales pitches often come dressed in empirical clothing. I'm very happy to have vendors making the case for their products, but when the volume (in both quantity and loudness) of vendor posts drowns out the opinions of those whose biases are at least not primarily financial, I think it does the site a disservice. Guy facilitating GAS is one thing. Vendors doing it is another.

To be clear, I don't think any lines were crossed in this thread, but when a subject is so polarizing as Brand A vs. Brand B, I wish the vendors would stay out of it, or at least keep a low profile and offer to make their pitch offline.

Best,

Matt
I'm just a gear slut glass whore. Somehow I bought a Cambo lens today. Lol

I tend to agree on the kool aid factor. I maybe the one person along with Jack that actually shot them side by side. You heard my comment and his. Take it for what it is worth. There still sits a review on it and the lenses did not change from then. The S glass looks very cron and that is how it draws, pretty dang simple and not remotely scientific. The LS glass draws between a cron and a lux is how I view it. The problem here and always has been is people keep thinking Phase is Mamiya which always had a bad vibe , tend to agree but if no one has not noticed recently Phase One has not made a Mamiya based glass in a long time. The last 4 or 5 Lenses announced or brought to market is Schneider and folks you can take my word on this that is all that will be made going forward. Mamiya factory is really just following whatever is being directed by Schneider so if your not talking LS glass than it is meaningless lets get that straight since that is the present and future.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I'm just a gear slut glass whore. Somehow I bought a Cambo lens today. Lol

I tend to agree on the kool aid factor. I maybe the one person along with Jack that actually shot them side by side. You heard my comment and his. Take it for what it is worth. There still sits a review on it and the lenses did not change from then. The S glass looks very cron and that is how it draws, pretty dang simple and not remotely scientific. The LS glass draws between a cron and a lux is how I view it. The problem here and always has been is people keep thinking Phase is Mamiya which always had a bad vibe , tend to agree but if no one has not noticed recently Phase One has not made a Mamiya based glass in a long time. The last 4 or 5 Lenses announced or brought to market is Schneider and folks you can take my word on this that is all that will be made going forward. Mamiya factory is really just following whatever is being directed by Schneider so if your not talking LS glass than it is meaningless lets get that straight since that is the present and future.
Hi Guy,
I dont own any crons but if they draw like the S-glass I should maybe x-change my luxes for crons ;) just kidding (I even agree that the/some Luxes wide open draw a little bit more creamy/dreamy than the S-lenses)
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I'm just a gear slut glass whore. Somehow I bought a Cambo lens today. Lol

I tend to agree on the kool aid factor. There I maybe the one person along with Jack that actually shot them side by side. You heard my comment and his. Take it for what it is worth. Still sits a review on it and the lenses did not change from then. The S glass looks very cron and that is how it draws, pretty dang simple and not remotely scientific. The LS glass draws between a cron and a lux is how I view it. The problem here and always has been is people keep thinking Phase is Mamiya which always had a bad vibe , tend to agree but if no one has not noticed recently Phase One has not made a Mamiya based glass in a long time. The last 4 or 5 Lenses announced or brought to market is Schneider and folks you can take my word on this that is all that will be made going forward. Mamiya factory is really just following whatever is being directed by Schneider so if your not talking LS glass than it is meaningless lets get that straight since that is the present and future.
Guy, I believe the comparison you are referencing is exactly 2 years old, and I think that caveat should be noted.

While the S lenses have not changed, the firmware and processing attributes have been significantly improved, as has the user learning curve for this relatively new system ... which, IMO and user experience, made a difference in the end look and feel that is now possible to extract from the S2 lenses (i.e., end files formed by those lenses). If software made no difference, then a P1 file should look the same in C1 and LR, which it doesn't.

Leica has been very diligent in improving this camera both from an experiential aspect, and from an image IQ perspective.

I'm glad your description of being chron like was followed by "not being remotely scientific", my non-scientific take is that the S lenses draw like S lenses and have no real counterpart ... so it is a struggle to place them with-in previous experiences, and every attempt is subjective at best.

If forced to historically place the unique S optics, I'd say the 120/2.5 is more Lux like in terms of 3D feel, bokeh, focus fall-off and all those subjective terms we force fit to an image, mostly because it is really fast for a 120 MFD lens. There is no cron counterpart for the S-180 ... the R-180/2 produces a different look and feel. There is no 28 lux, the only fast Leica 28mm is a cron, and to say the S-35mm has a similar feel would be highly desirable IMO. So that leaves the 70/2.5 which I see as between a Lux and chron in feel ... as processed now in LR3.5, not 2 years ago.

I have the utmost respect for Schneider optics and think it was a fab move for Phase to go there. That is also an on-going improvement for users of Phase products ... and I suspect they also produce their own unique look and feel compared to anything else out there.

-Marc (not a vendor, nor do I even like Kool-aid ;)
 

MFCurious

New member
Marc,

Thanks for providing some S lens feedback. Having come from shooting with M glass the 'cron or 'lux comparisons are helpful at least initially in getting some handle over the character of the glass. Looking at images on the web really doesn't help at all with that kind of assessment unless they're full raw images of the types of imagery that I shoot (which mostly, those I've seen are most certainly not).

I'm torn over whether to jump in further with the DF & LS investment with the up-coming newer 75-150LS / 240LS and/or 150LS to replace my current line up. I'm not unhappy with the glass, albeit not all Phase/Mamiya is born equal and there seems to be some sample variability even in the best glass. However, the camera is definitely in the category of 'blah' as far as I'm concerned. The alternative that I'm considering is to get out of that side of things, keep my IQ back for my technical camera and instead invest in the S system instead for the DSLR. I know from reading your posts that you've been through some similar decisions with your Hasselblad/Leica changes, albeit less of a complete shift from what I've seen.

(and to reiterate, yes I know that I need to rent/trial this stuff myself ... )
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc,

Thanks for providing some S lens feedback. Having come from shooting with M glass the 'cron or 'lux comparisons are helpful at least initially in getting some handle over the character of the glass. Looking at images on the web really doesn't help at all with that kind of assessment unless they're full raw images of the types of imagery that I shoot (which mostly, those I've seen are most certainly not).

I'm torn over whether to jump in further with the DF & LS investment with the up-coming newer 75-150LS / 240LS and/or 150LS to replace my current line up. I'm not unhappy with the glass, albeit not all Phase/Mamiya is born equal and there seems to be some sample variability even in the best glass. However, the camera is definitely in the category of 'blah' as far as I'm concerned. The alternative that I'm considering is to get out of that side of things, keep my IQ back for my technical camera and instead invest in the S system instead for the DSLR. I know from reading your posts that you've been through some similar decisions with your Hasselblad/Leica changes, albeit less of a complete shift from what I've seen.

(and to reiterate, yes I know that I need to rent/trial this stuff myself ... )
Yep, as I mentioned, swapping MFD systems is an agonizing process ... and all of the initial advice that Guy, Jack, and other regular contributors to the GetDpi MFD forum provides about being careful with your initial selection needs very careful attention. This isn't anything like moving from Canon to Nikon or Sony.

IMO, dump-moving from Hasselblad or Phase One is an exercise in futility ... Murphy's Law says the minute you do, one will leap-frog the other ... it's just a matter of time.

However, the S2 is somewhat different because Leica (wisely) went in a different direction with the form-factor of the S2. I've owned a Mamiya AFD-III camera with a Leaf back, and Hasselblad H ... and the user experience of the S2 is totally different from these more modular cameras. After living with the S2 that fact becomes crystal clear ... it promotes "take with" a lot more for me, so gets used in place of both a 35mm DSLR and a MFD kit in many applications.

One thing that hasn't been touch on much is the direction of the optical line-up. Leica seems to be focusing on producing the wider end of the focal length spread right now ... 35mm (28mm equivalent in 135), 30mm (24mm), and the next lens is supposed to be a 24mm (21mm). Another anticipated S lens is the planned 30-90/3.5 ASPH (24-70). There is also a lot of user demand for a fast aperture S-50mm (35mm FOV). I personally like this direction because I like shooting wider angle, and no one has such a wide selection of digitally optimized reflex lenses like this.

While Leica is quite famous for longer APO lenses, not much has been forthcoming about where the longer S lenses may be going beyond the 180mm ... initially, there was mention of a planned S-350/3.5 APO, but not much since then. So, your indication favoring longer Tele focal lengths like the LS240 may not be fulfilled fast enough for you. Of interest is Josh Lehrer's post on the Red Dot forum where they are adapting the Leica APO Telyt-modular R 400/4 to a S2 ... which evidently has a large enough image circle to cover the S2 sensor. Absolutely incredible results. IF I ever won the mega-lotto, I'd buy Doug of Wildlight Photo this set up as a contribution to the art of photography :) But I personally would have little use for such a long lens. I have a Hasselblad HC300mm with a 1.7X converter that I use maybe once a year, if even that.

No doubt that your IQ back is the very best choice for a tech field camera .... and the W/A selections for those cameras are second to none. My H4D/60 back will be my go-to unit for view camera work as soon as they start producing the battery solution for the 60 (soon, please!).

Hope this helps a bit,

-Marc
 

jlm

Workshop Member
so if the dough is not a consideration, why wouldn't one go with the S2?
it has the build and ergo quality, it has the lenses, quality and lineup, isn't it weather sealed?

is it just a matter of money?
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
I have to agree with Marc in the overall substance of his argument. I am an S2 owner. I have just two lenses so far, the 35mm and 120mm. In the past I owned a full Rollei system with both Schneider and Zeiss optics on a Hy6. I mostly shot film, but I also had a 22mp e54LV Sinar back for awhile. I shoot Hasselblad V with a 203FE, so I continue to own some of the best V system glass. The Mamiya 7II has taken some of my best photos, and I would say that performance wise, they are some of the best lenses available in medium format to this day. I have shot Nikon on 35mm, Canon FD, Olympus OM, a close to full kit of Leica R including the DMR, Leica rangefinders from the IIIb to the M9 with Leica, Canon, Konica and Zeiss lenses, 4x5 with Schneider lenses and probably a number of other things I am forgetting.

After trying all those, I can unequivocally state that the S 35mm and S 120mm are the best overall lenses I have used. Though I have not been in the S system for that long, the lenses continue to surprise me on just how amazing they are. It is not just resolution, it is how that resolution is maintained over the whole field even when wide open. It is how minor the distortion is for the focal length and how they often perform better at f/2.5 than other lenses at middle apertures. The character is neutral, in that they do not have aberrations that "add" to the photo like the Zeiss 110/2 does for a portrait or the Cooke lenses etc. They just render the scene the way it appears in person.

The only lenses I have compared directly on the S2 are the S2 lenses to the V lenses. I have only tried the 80mm CFE, 110/2 and a friend's 250mm f/5.6 Superachromat. The 80mm CFE has decent resolution at f/2.8, but is low in contrast and has lots of color aberration at that aperture, it needed to be stopped down to about f/8 to get close to the 120mm's performance. The 250mm Superachromat performed similarly to the 120mm in one test and worse in another. In practical terms however, it's very slow lens speed and difficulty in focusing on the S2 rules it out for me. One test had it at similar resolution and contrast, while the second showed it as lower in both contrast and resolution. Merits more testing, but in terms of use on the S system, the 180mm f/3.5 would be a no-brainer: AF, weather sealed, faster and likely similar or better performance.

From a pure performance standard, the 120mm Leica decimates the 110/2. With both lenses at f/2.5, the Leica is sharper in every area of the image, with less vignetting, less color aberration and higher contrast. The corners and edges on the 110/2 are mush, while they are still quite sharp on the Leica. The 120mm is even sharper on center at f/2.5 than the Zeiss is at f/8. I say this as someone who absolutely loves the 110/2 and the way it renders. But from a performance evaluation, the Leica beats it handily. It certainly does not fail from the bokeh standpoint either -- the backgrounds still look lovely.

So what does this all mean? I am sure that Phase's new lenses are capable of performing extremely well, and offering comparable performance at their best apertures. I would not be surprised if the Leica still handily beat them, given how they have done so with so many other great lenses and systems, I have tried. But at the end of the day, the overall shooting experience is what matters. This is where you need to test and figure out what you really want out of a system. For me, I wanted a very high resolution camera that I could use mostly for landscape and portraiture on location. I live in Iceland and often have to use the camera in bad conditions (while I wait for the good ones!), so having the weather sealing is a huge plus for me. From there, I appreciate the handling characteristics. If I were a studio photographer, I would have given more consideration to the Phase and Hasselblad cameras (though maybe still have gone with Leica?). These are the things you need to figure out based on your own work.

But why not a picture, after all these words. Not the greatest picture, but a good demonstration of the S2 resolution. This was taken wide open with the 35mm at f/2.5. I was amazed at how the S2 was able to keep from blowing out the highlights on the crane (which was brightly lit by strong lights on the dock) and still get a clear shot of the aurora, which is quite dim in comparison. The resolution is just the icing on the cake...certainly more than would be expected from a very wide angle lens wide open on medium format, let alone f/2.5 (the fastest of any wide angle on medium format).



Center:


edge:


By the way, this photo was not heavily post-processed -- there was no masking or selective editing. There was some recovery and exposure changes in lightroom, and basic sharpening. The surreal look is more from the artificial lighting on the dock and the way we are not used to looking at night scenes as being bright...basically, the camera sees more than we do.
 

MFCurious

New member
Well, in my own case the dough IS a consideration. I missed out on the trust fund lottery and so my 'habit' is funded by a good day job but it certainly isn't at CEO, Wall Street trader or surgeon level either. The piggy bank is definitely of a finite size.

No system change is ever without some cost so it's just a question of how much is worth bearing I think and whether it's worthwhile in the medium term (I won't be so naive as to say long term). Everything you mentioned about the S2 are precisely the reasons for considering it though.

Marc has a good point about the inevitable leap frogging of system capabilities. I've always felt comfortable with Leica which isn't really how I feel about Phase One/Mamiya right now. I like the backs, I like the glass overall but the camera leaves me cold and future replacement of the camera body is an unknown at this time in terms of capabilities, product release timeframes, and even then whether it'll be better than what we have today. I could just as easily go to a Hasselblad solution as an alternative actually although that just doesn't appeal to me as much as the full DSLR integration of the Leica today. This is all really fishing to see what appeals, or not - and staying the course with what I have is also a very viable choice too btw.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
If money is really tight, I would look at the Pentax 645D. One of the most sophisticate MFD bodies available. Lenses are plentiful and inexpensive on the used market and many are really excellent--not S2 excellent, but really very good.
 

MFCurious

New member
The 645D isn't a step forward IMHO. Sorry. The glass is everything and that's where I really don't see any advantages.
 
Top