mwilliamsphotography Posted February 4, 2010 Share #21 Posted February 4, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks David, I was indeed wrong by a bit ... but not much. I was looking at the S2 with CS lens since the H/C lens is a leaf shutter ... and the S2 is 5.1 lbs verses 5.04 lbs. It's not worth looking for where I got the bad info, but I didn't make it up ... probably mixed up specs on some site or I miss read it. Regardless, after a couple hours of shooting with either you'll know you've been working : -) Another correction: The service contract you quoted for the S2 is for the camera only, right?. The lens is extra. I called to confirm that the Hassy contract I quoted is not only for 3 years, and includes the lens, but it also includes a loaner for the full three years. But, hey, it is just a camera, and not worth getting one's shorts in a knot. Probably the very best policy right now is to buy nothing, use what you have (or rent when needed), let the dust settle for a year or so, and see if the ecomomy recovers. -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 4, 2010 Posted February 4, 2010 Hi mwilliamsphotography, Take a look here The new Hassel doesn't seem to be an S2 killer.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 5, 2010 Share #22 Posted February 5, 2010 Leica S2 -- lighter body, heavier lens -- total = 4.65 pounds; Phase One -- heavier body/back, lighter lens -- total = 5.00 pounds. Since when do we not have a lens on David. I don't care what the weight is between the body and lens it is a group weigh in and one that you carry. When do we not have 3 or 4 lenses in a bag and carry it either. Individual numbers mean very little. Let's face it we carry systems and use systems to shoot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted February 5, 2010 Share #23 Posted February 5, 2010 Leica S2 -- lighter body, heavier lens -- total = 4.65 pounds; Phase One -- heavier body/back, lighter lens -- total = 5.00 pounds. Since when do we not have a lens on David. I don't care what the weight is between the body and lens it is a group weigh in and one that you carry. When do we not have 3 or 4 lenses in a bag and carry it either. Individual numbers mean very little. Let's face it we carry systems and use systems to shoot I wasn't saying that we don't shoot without a lens, but I think you knew that. My point was that while the 70mm is slightly larger and heavier than the Hassy lens (6 oz more), the overall package is lighter. The HC 210 is heavier than the S2 equivalent, the 180, as I stated in my previous post. The HC 120 Macro is 3.12 lbs, while the S 120 Macro is 2.83 lbs, even though the S lens is 1.5 stops faster (f/2.5 vs f/4). It is also physically smaller. The HC 35 is a few ounces heavier than the S 35, again with the S lens being 1.5 stops faster. So, from the four initial S lenses, only the 70mm is heavier (by only 6 oz) than the corresponding HC lenses, and the S lenses all offer faster f-stops (ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 f-stops). Now, if the body is 2/3 lb lighter, and most of the lenses are lighter also (even while offering faster apertures) I think that would mean that a full S system is lighter by a fair amount vs. a full H system of the same equivalent focal lengths. In fact, the first four S lenses combined weigh 1/2 lb less than the HC 35, 80, 120, and 210. So, along with the weight savings in the body, you'll be carrying over a pound less in the bag. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted February 5, 2010 Share #24 Posted February 5, 2010 Another correction: The service contract you quoted for the S2 is for the camera only, right?. The lens is extra. -Marc Yes. As I posted previously, the Premium Service Package is $1495 for the body and $495 for the lens. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 5, 2010 Share #25 Posted February 5, 2010 I wasn't saying that we don't shoot without a lens, but I think you knew that. My point was that while the 70mm is slightly larger and heavier than the Hassy lens (6 oz more), the overall package is lighter. The HC 210 is heavier than the S2 equivalent, the 180, as I stated in my previous post. The HC 120 Macro is 3.12 lbs, while the S 120 Macro is 2.83 lbs, even though the S lens is 1.5 stops faster (f/2.5 vs f/4). It is also physically smaller. The HC 35 is a few ounces heavier than the S 35, again with the S lens being 1.5 stops faster. So, from the four initial S lenses, only the 70mm is heavier (by only 6 oz) than the corresponding HC lenses, and the S lenses all offer faster f-stops (ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 f-stops). Now, if the body is 2/3 lb lighter, and most of the lenses are lighter also (even while offering faster apertures) I think that would mean that a full S system is lighter by a fair amount vs. a full H system of the same equivalent focal lengths. In fact, the first four S lenses combined weigh 1/2 lb less than the HC 35, 80, 120, and 210. So, along with the weight savings in the body, you'll be carrying over a pound less in the bag. David Well I don't speak much about the Hassy systems since it is not one I shoot and I don't want to guess at any of there system for lack of accuracy. Your weights maybe the case overall. I do know the Phase lenses are smaller and lighter than either one of them. Now we have to see how the LS glass measures up in weight and bulk. Bottom line none of them are small , light weight systems. Just can't get around that given the sensor sizes and that is just part of MF shooting. As we like to say it is a given. BTW I don't like the wording on this thread to start with nothing is a killer of any system they all are different . I know one thing, I would never say that in any review against any system as well. I actually like parts of all three systems out there . Maybe they need to blend. Have to find that u-tube video it is pretty funny Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 5, 2010 Share #26 Posted February 5, 2010 I think that's the point I'm trying to get across Guy. Nothing kills something else here. It's all based upon needs and desires of any given shooter. If you want a 35mm DSLR shooting experience but with greater IQ potential, have the capital to indulge in the high priced spread, then Leica is the only game in town. Good for them I say. If you want even higher IQ potential, want to use your digital back on a tech or view camera, or in some cases like a V, H or Contax 645 etc. prefer a waist level finder ... then the modular systems camera is the territory to shop in. BTW, when were are talking these weights, a Lb here or an Lb there means nothing in most scenarios. If I were mountain climbing I'd select something else anyway. But the S2 would be a great product for some specific wildlife shooters like Doug who's expressed interest in this camera. I like the S2 idea, and for the most part the existing camera ... if it had proved to functionally replace a 35mm DSR enough ... I'd already have ordered one. Heck, it's still on my shopping list because the heart might well over-rule the head here ... LOL! -Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoersch Posted February 5, 2010 Share #27 Posted February 5, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I like the S2 idea, and for the most part the existing camera ... if it had proved to functionally replace a 35mm DSR enough ... I'd already have ordered one. Heck, it's still on my shopping list because the heart might well over-rule the head here ... LOL! -Marc This may turn out to be THE biggest problem Leica will have trying to sell the S2 (apart from its hideous price tag): the S2 tries to be MF quality with 35mm handling, but doesn't really live up to 35mm DSLR expecatations of reduced size & weight, higher ISO, faster autofocus, and longer focal length lenses. It is too big and too slow (slow in ISO and autofocus) for sports or reportage, too short (in focal length) for wild life, too closed system for versatile studio shooting, too expensive for a lot of professionals and most amateurs. So that, to this day, I have not been able to figure out who would really need a camera like that - apart from a handful of people for whom it all comes down to: well, I don't need it, but I like it, and since I have the cash... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 5, 2010 Share #28 Posted February 5, 2010 Hasn't that been an issue for a number of new innovations though? 645 offered more resolution than 35mm, but was kinda big and clunky compared to 35mm kits ... and a lot slower. It offered less resolution than standard Medium Format ... yet it caught on. The Mamiya ZD was really the first to do this type camera ... but wasn't there yet. Now Leica with a much better, more well thought out offering. I hope it is successful enough to garner some attention from other makers who may consider following suit. But I seriously doubt it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted February 5, 2010 Share #29 Posted February 5, 2010 Hasselblad's lens has a leaf shutter... Current Leica's Summarit doesn't... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 5, 2010 Share #30 Posted February 5, 2010 Which will add more weight but most likely that will be marginal . Still the same barrel and glass Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted February 6, 2010 Share #31 Posted February 6, 2010 Well, I was thinking on price/cost, not weight... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 7, 2010 Share #32 Posted February 7, 2010 Is there anyway these comparisons can be done without the dpreview style provocation of something being a "Killer"? Even if Blad's new rig was 100MP, 2 pounds, SLR ergos, ISO 1,000,000, it would not "Kill" anything, that is gear headed enthusiast talk born of these damned internet forums... I am pretty sure David Burnett and his old Speed Graphic would be a H4D-40 "KIller", but only because he is a "Killer" photographer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted February 8, 2010 Share #33 Posted February 8, 2010 Is there anyway these comparisons can be done without the dpreview style provocation of something being a "Killer"? Perhaps we could adopt the Rangefinder Forum style instead and have a poll <grin>. I agree it's nonsense to describe anything as a "killer", but we'll no doubt hear this every time anyone releases a new MF camera or back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted February 8, 2010 Share #34 Posted February 8, 2010 Why should a Hasselblad be an S2 killer? The S2 is dead and outdated before it is really available, while Hasselblad (and others) have complete lineups of cameras and backs and lenses and improve functionality with every model, while the S2 is still struggling from the flaws of the first series. Or did I understand something wrong ????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted February 8, 2010 Share #35 Posted February 8, 2010 Or did I understand something wrong ?????Apparantly yes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted February 8, 2010 Share #36 Posted February 8, 2010 Why should a Hasselblad be an S2 killer? The S2 is dead and outdated before it is really available, while Hasselblad (and others) have complete lineups of cameras and backs and lenses and improve functionality with every model, while the S2 is still struggling from the flaws of the first series. Or did I understand something wrong ????? Well, I've had one since December and mine is very much alive and kicking so I can't understand why you would make a claim such as this which is, and I hope you'll understand why I want to speak bluntly, not true at all! Have you shot with one? Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 8, 2010 Share #37 Posted February 8, 2010 I wasn't saying that we don't shoot without a lens, but I think you knew that. My point was that while the 70mm is slightly larger and heavier than the Hassy lens (6 oz more), the overall package is lighter. The HC 210 is heavier than the S2 equivalent, the 180, as I stated in my previous post. The HC 120 Macro is 3.12 lbs, while the S 120 Macro is 2.83 lbs, even though the S lens is 1.5 stops faster (f/2.5 vs f/4). It is also physically smaller. The HC 35 is a few ounces heavier than the S 35, again with the S lens being 1.5 stops faster. So, from the four initial S lenses, only the 70mm is heavier (by only 6 oz) than the corresponding HC lenses, and the S lenses all offer faster f-stops (ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 f-stops). Now, if the body is 2/3 lb lighter, and most of the lenses are lighter also (even while offering faster apertures) I think that would mean that a full S system is lighter by a fair amount vs. a full H system of the same equivalent focal lengths. In fact, the first four S lenses combined weigh 1/2 lb less than the HC 35, 80, 120, and 210. So, along with the weight savings in the body, you'll be carrying over a pound less in the bag. David so the S2 system weighs one pound less, has 23 mpx less and a much smaller sensor. your postings make me realize that hasselblass is doing exceptionally well on all accounts. peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted February 8, 2010 Share #38 Posted February 8, 2010 ...In fact, the first four S lenses combined weigh 1/2 lb less than the HC 35, 80, 120, and 210. So, along with the weight savings in the body, you'll be carrying over a pound less in the bag. David I think the S system will be a lot lighter as there are only two lenses in it. ;-) When I was 19 I got a Hassy 500 CM, prism, 80,150, and 50. I used to carry this all of the time even for "street" photography. Weight was no problem and I'm not a big person. Years later I switched to a Rollei 6006 which is a fairly heavy camera when used with a prism and some of the lenses I had. (The 40mm and the 350mm were pretty heavy.) I used a pistol grip and didn't have any problems shooting hand held. On most commercial projects, photographers bring a lot of cases of lights, computers, grips, filters, backgrounds, etc. The camera case is no big deal. I think some clients might see a photographer who is using a larger camera as more professional or more committed to the project. In any case few clients will complain about your choice of gear if you are using a Hasselblad. Once when I was shooting an architectural project with a 4x5 Linhof, the owner of the ad agency asked why I wasn't using a Hasselblad... as that is the "best" camera in the world. So Hasselblad's marketing and promotion has paid off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted February 9, 2010 Share #39 Posted February 9, 2010 Well, I've had one since December and mine is very much alive and kicking so I can't understand why you would make a claim such as this which is, and I hope you'll understand why I want to speak bluntly, not true at all! Have you shot with one? Tim Well then you are lucky, I have shot one and it worked well, but I have heard from a lot of not so well functioning samples. But despite this discussion about how long Leica will need to be able to really ship all S2 cameras 100% working, there is still the issue that it CANNOT be compared to MF cameras, as it has smaller sensor size - not worth going into that discussions again. And for the argument that it is smaller and thus more easily to use and transport and delivers exceptional IQ (once it is really there) I only can say, I have a much more compact and transportable M43 system, which produces outstanding IQ (RAW and JPEG as well), is much more compact and MUCH cheaper - so what? I am happy with it for what I use it but it will never replace my real MF system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted February 9, 2010 Share #40 Posted February 9, 2010 Apparantly yes Apparently a typical LUF commet - right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.