I Think everyone here is being influenced by passion and the "S2" which for many is out of reach. I use to be invested heavily into Leica ta one time to the point where it got ridiculous. So as an ex Leica junkie I am speaking from my experience and without any emotional attachment to gear.
1. There is no doubt the S2 glass is amazing. Can't deny that.
2. The S2 is so ridiculously over priced it's not even funny. And then they have the extra fee for the added extras like scratch resistant glass, warranty etc... all things that should already be covered by a camera pushing the 30K range.
3. Sad but true, I would take a D800E over the S2 for several valid reasons.
3a. Support
3b. Cost
3c. Zeiss Otus line and new upcoming Otus lenses. And yes the Otus is better than any Leica lens no matter how hard it is to accept for someone who spent a fortune on Leica glass. but the facts are undeniable.
3d. D800 breaks, your out 3k and can replace it probably the same day. S2 breaks, your out 28k, and good luck having it serviced and finding one easily.
3e. S2 technology is old.
3f. Th money you save from S2 can go a long ways. However, for someone who can afford an S2 and the line up of lenses, I don't think that is a problem. I Thank God I can afford such luxuries in life when so many cannot. But at the same time, I don't like over paying regardless of how much one makes.
3g. The people you show your pictures to cannot tell the difference between an S2 image and a D800E image
3h. Hang tight, Sony may introduce a 54mp camera soon and with the right glass, it will be killer for a fraction of a fraction of the S2 price
However, the bottom line is what makes you happy! I just dumped all my high end glass including the Otus along with a couple of D4 cameras and switched to a Sony A99 with all the Zeiss auto focus lenses. Guess what, I never looked back and I had lots of money left over.
Good luck with decision.
I think this is a good counter balance to all the posts in support of keeping the S2. Reality checks are always worth mentioning.
Of course, don't expect your opinion to go unchallenged
… and we must remember there are no absolutes in any creative endeavor, only opinions.
Beside, I'm snowed in and it is bitter cold out, so I have the time
1) I agree. :thumbs:
2) Overpriced compared to what? I lost a lot more on my Hasselblad H gear than I would if I sold the S gear. Compared to a D800E? Well, to buy that argument, you have to believe 35mm is the same visual interpretation as MF provides, and subscribe to Bean-Counter ideas about creative matters … which I don't. Sorry.
Beasides, Bean Counter mentalities usually do not fair well in any creative endeavor. Whatever it costs to satisfy your personal creative vision is usually worth it … if you can afford it. If not, then you can make bean counter arguments to the contrary
. Bean counters will talk you out of almost anything given the chance. It is their job.
3a) I had Nikon … extremely bad service experiences, the horror stories I could tell you … and now they are squeezing out the independent repair people:thumbdown:, so good luck when the warranty runs out. Every service experience with my S2 has been stellar (don't confuse M service with the separate S service system). Representative of everyone's experience? Don't know. Don't care. Horrible from Nikon, Great from Leica.
3b) Duh. Well, yeah. Ya pay to play … that should be Leica's theme line.
3c) Opinion fostered by the "pixel peeper generation" … Otis may be better for full-filling many people's opinion … but they don't make MFD AF lenses, so it's a moot point to me. To use Otis, you have to use a Canon or Nikon 35mm, and to get AF you mostly have to use Nikon lenses … no thanks, don't like them.
3d) Weird arguments. :wtf: A Leica S2 isn't $28K. Anyone that wants to buy mine for $28K please e-mail me :ROTFL:. If my S2 breaks I wouldn't toss it in the trash, I'd repair it. If it was a total loss then insurance would replace it. BTW, if I want FF 36 meg for cheap, I can get a A7R for $2K … but it is still a 35mm Bean Counter argument, and not a larger sensor and all that entails. If you don't see the difference between 35mm rendering and that of larger sensor cameras, that's your problem, not mine.
3e) Yep. So are a number of cameras and digital backs … yet somehow, people keep making amazing images with them. Except in extreme applications, the technology merry-go-round designed to keep everyone buying the latest greatest shouldn't be confused with actually making photographs. Digital reached the point of diminishing returns a few year ago, but the upgrade mentality from its' infancy remains unabated.
3f) The money you save by buying something that satisfies your personal creative sensibilities
and keeping it despite all the rational horse-crap designed to grift you into selling something, then buying something else, is what will really go a long ways.:thumbup:
3g) In your opinion. My photos have to satisfy me first … if they don't, then other people's opinion is irrelevant. Left to the masses, most can't tell a cell phone shot from a D800, because everything is squashed down to a sub 1 meg jpeg in sRGB color space, and posted on Twitter, etc.
3h) Sony may do a 54 meg sensor. So? Maybe Leica will do a 60 meg CMOSIS sensor, or 80meg, or 100 meg. Unfortunately "Maybe Gear" has never taken a good photo. Doesn't matter to me anyway, I suspect the Leica S2 or S with CCD sensor may be the last S that'll satisfy my personal creative evaluation … and I hope a lot of others go for the latest-greatest S, so I can get a S (type 006) cheap to add to the S2 I already have :clap:
IMHO, YMMV, etc.
- Marc