piero Posted December 2, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 180mm ƒ3.5 ISO 160 manual focus more comments later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 2, 2009 Posted December 2, 2009 Hi piero, Take a look here S2 sample image. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest farbtupfer Posted December 2, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 2, 2009 Sorry but whats impressive with this photo... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted December 2, 2009 don't intend to impress. Just very nice sharpness and tonal range. No post processing tricks. Tomorrow I'll write my impressions on the camera I have tested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted December 2, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 2, 2009 don't intend to impress.Just very nice sharpness and tonal range. No post processing tricks. Tomorrow I'll write my impressions on the camera I have tested. I look forward to reading about your impressions. I have also tested the camera and really liked it. I posted my thoughts on another forum with images. Sadly, the S2 brings out the worst in some people and discussion on the S2 deteriorates into a bunch strong (and sometimes personal) commentary which is not conducive to a rational discussion on the pluses and minuses of the system. I hope it doesn't happen here, but my experience on the other forum made me hesitant to post my thoughts here. Hopefully, it will go better here tomorrow because it would be good to have a dialog with others that have actually tested the camera. Mark Gowin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengilbert Posted December 3, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 3, 2009 Mark, No comment on the pic, but I think the problem with all the S2 tempest is that people post images on the internet which can't really show the alleged value of the camera and then the fans rave and the critics critique. If the camera costs as much as a car, it ought to be pretty good. Most of the pictures I've seen (as far as I can tell on the 'net) don't appear to be significantly better than the output of a lot of "lesser" cameras. I'd expect the S2 to be very good; it's certainly priced to be. But for most people, it's like owning a Ferrari and driving it around town. You don't need it; you'll impress some people and cause others to think you're a wanker. To each his own. SG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheewai_m6 Posted December 3, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 3, 2009 I look forward to reading about your impressions. I have also tested the camera and really liked it. I posted my thoughts on another forum with images. Sadly, the S2 brings out the worst in some people and discussion on the S2 deteriorates into a bunch strong (and sometimes personal) commentary which is not conducive to a rational discussion on the pluses and minuses of the system. I hope it doesn't happen here, but my experience on the other forum made me hesitant to post my thoughts here. Hopefully, it will go better here tomorrow because it would be good to have a dialog with others that have actually tested the camera. Mark Gowin it's not just the subject of the S2, it's typical of this forum generally. particularly from members (not all) who have been around a long time. they pick every minute detail of your words and try to 'put you in your place'. a certain lack of sense of humour also. it is automatic to read your words in an offensive tone rather than what you intend. i understand why photographers of other brands thinking leica users are 'snobbish' or up themselves because leica users treat other leica users like rubbish let alone other brands. evident on the leica user forum unfortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheewai_m6 Posted December 3, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) i find the image OP quite special. not artistically i guess, but the tones and the smoothness of the image is really nice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 3, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 3, 2009 The main thing is that it is hard if not impossible to judge image quality from a computer screen. However, I agree that the tonal transitions in this image seem to be exceptionally good. Having said that, it would be extremely disappointing if they weren't.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted December 3, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted December 3, 2009 I had the S2 in my hands for a day, in a studio and out. Nice body, nice ergonomics. Some times needed to get used to the menus (I am a mac user and hate the PC approach at things), otherwise very nice, clear and a pleasure to look at. Love the fact that there are not many things to set and program. They way it should be, for me. I did not care to check quality at high ISO, I don't shoot at high ISO. Holding the camera in hands is lovely. Lenses are a bit chunky. They are, indeed. And shooting with the 180, hand holding is a bit heavy. No vertical grip available at that moment, probably easier to shoot with that grip. The file is very nice, the tonal range superb. The auto focus I did not get along with with ease, but probably after a couple of days shooting I could have gotten along better. The view finder is very bright and clear, a pleasure to work with. Compared to other files of medium format ( I've worked with an Leaf Aptus 75S on a Hasselblad) I like the clarity and smoothness of the S2 better. A sense of depth and space I also encountered on the M9 files, compared i.e. with the MKlll. Many changes have been made on sensors from a coupe o years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted December 4, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 4, 2009 Piero, did you try using the rear button for start/stop of the auto focus? I found it to be a better experience that having auto focus assigned to the shutter button. Then again that could be because that is the way I am accustomed to using my dSLRs versus real performance differences. Mark Gowin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #11 Posted December 4, 2009 Piero, did you try using the rear button for start/stop of the auto focus? ...Mark Gowin The shutter button for auto focusing is a drag. Your suggestion sounds much better. I wish somebody had told me Many things, also the situation involved, was very pre-production at that demo day. I kind of had to figure out things on my own. Really, one of the things that left me doubtful is the size of the barrel of the lenses. They are anything but a pleasure to hold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted December 4, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 4, 2009 I would say that from this image there cannot be told very much. It could have been easily done with any high end DSLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #13 Posted December 4, 2009 ptomsu: not really. I have been shooting with other DSLR and long lenses. And this clean file right out of the DNG is hard to find. IMveryHO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted December 4, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 4, 2009 The shutter button for auto focusing is a drag. Your suggestion sounds much better.I wish somebody had told me Many things, also the situation involved, was very pre-production at that demo day. I kind of had to figure out things on my own. Really, one of the things that left me doubtful is the size of the barrel of the lenses. They are anything but a pleasure to hold. There has already been a firmware update to both body and lenses since you tried the camera. The update has addressed the lag when activating AF from the shutter release. Rear button responsiveness and overall AF speed has been significantly improved as well. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted December 4, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 4, 2009 Peiro-- Nicely lit and I agree... if this is minimal processing, this looks fantastic, even over the Web (the fact the lighting it so good always helps ) May I ask what RAW converter you used? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted December 4, 2009 Jamie: just plain Lr2, with white balance set on the white of the eye ball. No sharpening, no color correction, no defringe. no clarity. light was an Octa above left at 30° from camera axis and a a small bank at right on eye level. (small bank half the power of Octa, but closer to be only 30% weaker) It is, IMHO, a great sensor and file. I know about the Firmware updates, S2 PM was there with me, great person by the way, and was taking notes for issues to be addressed at firmware developers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted December 4, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 4, 2009 Jamie:just plain Lr2, with white balance set on the white of the eye ball. No sharpening, no color correction, no defringe. no clarity. light was an Octa above left at 30° from camera axis and a a small bank at right on eye level. (small bank half the power of Octa, but closer to be only 30% weaker) {snipped} Piero--thanks so much for the information. Given what your telling me, this is outstanding quality already (and makes me want one even if there's no way I could justify owning one!). I have to say it reminds me of the DMR only with better transitions, great colour and, of course, much more detailed. FWIW, I don't think the browser does these justice (mine doesn't anyway on Firefox... in PS this looks much better). By the way, will you post the whole file or more files? Please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 4, 2009 It's a great technical shot, and shows good studio technique, but something that can nearly be matched with a four year old 1Ds Mk2 and 135mm lens. By way of example: ISO 400 135 F2 @ 2.2 1Ds Mk2 (16mp) Natural light No make up Handheld Default LR2 output. Had it been shot in a studio at 100/160 ISO and at F2.8 it would have been noticeably better - better still on a 5D2 100% crop - I assume the S2 file is too http://www.marcusperkins.co.uk/canon/_J6M0354.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 4, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 4, 2009 It's a great technical shot, and shows good studio technique, but something that can nearly be matched with a four year old 1Ds Mk2 and 135mm lens.... Or a 5 yo 6MP cam with a 300mm or a macro lens. Valid comparisons imply the use of the same field of view and the same subject distance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 4, 2009 Share #20 Posted December 4, 2009 Or a 5 yo 6MP cam with a 300mm or a macro lens. Valid comparisons imply the use of the same field of view and the same subject distance. That's a very fair point. However, it's a 100% crop from a 1Ds2. Based on that info it should be easy to figure out the full frame size (unfortunately I'm not able to show the full frame and identify the guy). It would be interesting to know for sure what the magnification difference is. When I have time tomorrow, I'll figure out the exact size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.