delander † Posted November 12, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Pop over there now, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2009 Posted November 12, 2009 Hi delander †, Take a look here S2 images on DPreview. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marcusperkins Posted November 12, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 12, 2009 The files have undoubtably been highly compressed, and as clearly stated, come from a preproduction model. However, they really don't do the camera any favours. The photos in David Farkas's reviews are so much better quality wise, I wondered if it is even from the same camera. It would appear to my mind that unless there is a lot of light available, the S2 struggles. Now I'm very curious to see files from a full production model, although that may not be until next year - which is not so far off! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted November 13, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 13, 2009 The light makes the images look flat and boring but the technical quality is product of the in-camera-JPG-engine (only the first images are RAW-converted) and therefore not a good way to show the quality of the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 13, 2009 The light makes the images look flat and boring but the technical quality is product of the in-camera-JPG-engine (only the first images are RAW-converted) . That's probably not the case, Georg, the naming of these files would indicate that at least 10 images were converted using ACR. Anyway, these pictures are not worth a comment, if this picture linked below can represent the camera's capability at ISO 320 outdoor, I won't even pay a thousand dollars for it. http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/leicas2_samples/originals/l1000170.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted November 13, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 13, 2009 My take was the ISO 160 images converted in ACR were excellent with a great deal of detail. Several images were slightly out of focus as if the camera selected a different focus point such as #18, 12, 14, and 20. All of the in camera JPEGs were very soft and looked really bad to me with detail smeared and generally flat hazy look. Both 320 and 640 ISO were noisy, much noisier than I would have expected. Moire was evident in several pictures despite Leica's claim that they could not get any images with moire in their testing. It seemed to me that the camera (at least from the samples I have seen) does its best in the studio at ISO 160 where it produces stunning resolution and results. The outside shots just didn't show me much, especially when one considers we are talking about a $30K system to start. There are way too many better alternatives and the camera falls short where it is supposed to be strongest (out in the field). I don't think Phase One or Hasselblad should worry too much if this is what one gets for $30+K. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted November 13, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 13, 2009 I agree, these images are horrible but it's not the technical IQ the camera itself is capable of. Maybe just the internet geeks are complaining about that but Leica should offer technical perfect samples. Due to the microlenses it has a higher sensitivity (100ASA-160ASA, 200ASA->320ASA?), but the noise-performance of this sensor itself won't be much different than other 6µm-offerings (P40/65+, H4D-50) which would result in usable 640ASA - I don't see a problem with that, for serious print-work everything beyond that is also unusable with any DSLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted November 13, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) My take was the ISO 160 images converted in ACR were excellent with a great deal of detail. Several images were slightly out of focus as if the camera selected a different focus point such as #18, 12, 14, and 20. All of the in camera JPEGs were very soft and looked really bad to me with detail smeared and generally flat hazy look. Both 320 and 640 ISO were noisy, much noisier than I would have expected. Moire was evident in several pictures despite Leica's claim that they could not get any images with moire in their testing.It seemed to me that the camera (at least from the samples I have seen) does its best in the studio at ISO 160 where it produces stunning resolution and results. The outside shots just didn't show me much, especially when one considers we are talking about a $30K system to start. There are way too many better alternatives and the camera falls short where it is supposed to be strongest (out in the field). I don't think Phase One or Hasselblad should worry too much if this is what one gets for $30+K. i have talked to a few people (very serious photographers), who shot with the S2 that AF is just like all the other MF AF systems, ok in good light, hunting in low light, nothing special altogether. base iso resolution and tonality is reportedly very good, but again nothing special compared to real MF offerings. everything higher than 400 iso is (with today's firmware) unusable, worse than Hasselblad and much worse than P65+ pixel pinning. by today's experience this means that about 1/2 stop improvement is still possible with firmware, certainly not much more. the camera seems to convince in the handling department and this has apparently some seductive effect on IQ interpretation. what i have seen so far (including DNGs) is not convincing at all and contrasts some of the raving (pre)reviews which float around. and pardon me, but i discount david farkas' review which after all comes from an admitted leica fanboy and leica salesman (no disrespect intended). all in all i am disappointed. such a beautiful body, weathersealed and sexy, with certainly excellent lenses, an apparently great fujitsu processor and under par overall IQ. i wish nikon would decide to go MF and allow S2 lenses on their body.... peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentleman Villain Posted November 13, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 13, 2009 The S2 and it's optics controlled the bald skies in those photos very well. This is especially apparent in the photographs of the beautiful model. The photographer's chosen exposure is blowing out the background like an H-bomb yet she never gets murky even with the intense wrap around light. Flare is very well controlled. Most other systems would have turned that terrible lighting ratio situation into pure "mush" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted November 13, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 13, 2009 The S2 and it's optics controlled the bald skies in those photos very well. This is especially apparent in the photographs of the beautiful model. The photographer's chosen exposure is blowing out the background like an H-bomb yet she never gets murky even with the intense wrap around light. Flare is very well controlled. Most other systems would have turned that terrible lighting ratio situation into pure "mush" Sorry, but that is nonsense. There is nothing at all remarkable about those files. They could have been shot with a low grade Canon or Nikon SLR using a cheap Zoom. And don't be conned by perceived sharpness of head shots - it's very easy to get surprisingly sharp images even on 6mp cameras. One of the reasons why manufacturers always used to shoot watches, and heads in their marketing campaigns - things we look at everyday, but never in fine detail (we don't study eyelashes when talking to somebody) so we're easily impressed when we see a close up of a face or a watch. David Farkas's pictures have much more detail, but appear to be shot in ideal conditions (bright sun) and possibly in a studio. The idea of using the S2 for some serious documentary work is suddenly not so appealing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted November 13, 2009 Author Share #10 Posted November 13, 2009 The S2 is a 37.5 mp camera how much difference are you expecting between it and the 24mp Nikon d3x? The DPreview guys walk along the south bank of the Thames and photograph the mass of buildings and cranes on the north bank. They do this with most of the cameras they review and although the shots are not identical they are useful for getting an idea of the reproduction of fine detail in scenic shots. I dont think they use tripods but they do use an aperture appropriate to the DOF they need. The S2 photographs were taken on a grey day as Phil Askey pointed out. A day with little contrast, rather different conditions to those used in David Farkas's blog. I think one has to take the conditions into account here. It might have been better received if they had done it on a sunny day. All that being said there are some very similar shots available on DPreview taken with the Nikon D3x/70mm lens (sunnier conditions). The S2 shows more detail compared to the D3x as one would expect for 37.5 v 24 Mp but the difference is not that great - no surprise there. With regard to ISO surely we have all learnt by now that Kodak CCDs and their accompanying electronics are not going to compete with the ISO performance of a Japanese CMOS unless Kodak is able to make real improvements in that area. Nowadays every Canon (and probably Sony/Nikon) camera comes out with a slightly improved sensor and electronics. These programmes are ongoing and over the years incremental improvements add up to something quite visible. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted November 13, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 13, 2009 The S2 is a 37.5 mp camera how much difference are you expecting between it and the 24mp Nikon d3x? The DPreview guys walk along the south bank of the Thames and photograph the mass of buildings and cranes on the north bank. They do this with most of the cameras they review and although the shots are not identical they are useful for getting an idea of the reproduction of fine detail in scenic shots. I dont think they use tripods but they do use an aperture appropriate to the DOF they need. The S2 photographs were taken on a grey day as Phil Askey pointed out. A day with little contrast, rather different conditions to those used in David Farkas's blog. I think one has to take the conditions into account here. It might have been better received if they had done it on a sunny day. All that being said there are some very similar shots available on DPreview taken with the Nikon D3x/70mm lens (sunnier conditions). The S2 shows more detail compared to the D3x as one would expect for 37.5 v 24 Mp but the difference is not that great - no surprise there. With regard to ISO surely we have all learnt by now that Kodak CCDs and their accompanying electronics are not going to compete with the ISO performance of a Japanese CMOS unless Kodak is able to make real improvements in that area. Nowadays every Canon (and probably Sony/Nikon) camera comes out with a slightly improved sensor and electronics. These programmes are ongoing and over the years incremental improvements add up to something quite visible. Jeff i am in perfect agreement. the S2 offers marginal IQ improvement over the D3x (at base iso, certainly less IQ than D3x at >400 iso), with a highly limited system and a triple price tag (counting lenses in). it offers worse resolution and less flexibility than the current top MF offerings but still a higher price tag. nice step backwards. peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted November 13, 2009 Share #12 Posted November 13, 2009 I've been chatting with a commercial photographer here in London. His opinion is that what will impact the use of the S2 by professionals is not whether it can compete with Blad or Phase, or even D3x. He thinks instead that it will be a move to video capture by commercial shooters, with stills extracted. So basically, he's saying that the days are numbered for all MF pro-level digital cameras, because cameras like the Red Epic are going to remove that market altogether. I think that if there is a market, it's going to be people like Wedding photogs, who want the portability, but need to turn up with a 'better' camera than uncle bob for credibility. (As well as non-pro's who can afford the gear). That might very well be a big enough market to sustain the S2 - who knows? He might also be wrong about it all going to video capture, but my gut feel is that he is correct. Even the ads in the subway and bus stops are moving images with occasional stills. IMHO - people won't be buying it for the image quality - they will be buying it for the usability (size, form-factor, features). The image quality from MF digital is already more than almost anyone needs. The question remains as to whether the usability is good enough to make people part with their cash or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 13, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 13, 2009 I think that if there is a market, it's going to be people like Wedding photogs, who want the portability, but need to turn up with a 'better' camera than uncle bob for credibility. I think only other photographers will be impressed with the S2 as a status symbol - to the average punter it looks just like any other DSLR. If the idea is to look different to the average hack wedding photographer, you are better off turning up with a Blad. He might also be wrong about it all going to video capture, but my gut feel is that he is correct. Even the ads in the subway and bus stops are moving images with occasional stills. There was even a magazine published recently (Esquire?) that had a 'video' embedded on the front cover. That said, I think your chum is overly pessimistic about the future of stills photography (at least outside the editorial market) and I don't think the S2's lack of video capability has any significance to its success or otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest farbtupfer Posted November 13, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 13, 2009 So the S2 is mostly a fair weather cam...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted November 13, 2009 Share #15 Posted November 13, 2009 There was even a magazine published recently (Esquire?) that had a 'video' embedded on the front cover. That said, I think your chum is overly pessimistic about the future of stills photography (at least outside the editorial market) and I don't think the S2's lack of video capability has any significance to its success or otherwise. It was Esquire - and not only the cover, the entire photo shoot of the model as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted November 13, 2009 Share #16 Posted November 13, 2009 I simply cannot believe how much whining these horrible dpreview-samples create on the net... Just google for it, just links to those samples... Of course the IQ is way superior to any DSLR (larger photosites and sensor, no AA-filter, way superior lenses), here's the link to a nice "ISO320-handheld-open-aperture".sample from Mr. Farkas' review: http://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/shareID6403983/fileID424567217/424567217.jpg 100%-crop: http://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/shareID6403983/fileID424698627/424698627.jpg Yes, you could achieve a similar quality with a P40+ and Rodenstock-lenses - but the handling is quite different... Maybe Leica should think twice before not publishing any samples themselves and relying on dpreview instead... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted November 13, 2009 Share #17 Posted November 13, 2009 As I see it the big advantage was supposed to be that the S2 lent itself better to outside use rather than studio use due to its better ergonomics/handling; however, the images don't seem to validate that purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted November 13, 2009 Share #18 Posted November 13, 2009 As I see it the big advantage was supposed to be that the S2 lent itself better to outside use rather than studio use due to its better ergonomics/handling; however, the images don't seem to validate that purpose. This image might: http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a96/Nephilim666/S2_2.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 13, 2009 Sigh ... is that what you want to show off after blowing $20k+ on a camera? try this one: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/103567-s2-images-on-dpreview/?do=findComment&comment=1115797'>More sharing options...
Gerard Posted November 13, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 13, 2009 sdai; what make and model of toothbrush is that? Looks like it does a mighty fine job! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.