What the heck is going on? Leica?

[gogopix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One of the interesting, and unexpected turns in this thread is the more tempered and thoughtful comments on both + and - side.

I looked at other threads and they were either ant- (kill, dead end for leica etc) or pro, from OWNERS with the guts to show images.But no dialog-mostly pile on or excuses.

 

Here, I now see that S2 is delivering, though slowly, users have criticisms, but seem balanced (and the files look GOOD!)

 

Mark I do look forward to your commonts as well as images.

 

I will say now, that I had a deposit (yes pretty high) on an S2 since it was announced. I then saw "I just had too damn much gear, and was hardly using my MF stuff. I dropped from the list. I also upgraded M8 to M9 (Thanks David, who had me on that list too - terrible when you are SO predictable LOL) and all I can say to M9 waiters; keep waiting it is really a great camera.

 

Now, I find, and this may have you challenging my sanity, but reading between the lines, looking at the files (esp Tim's thoughtful ISO comparisons) I have decided to try to rent an S2 for a shoot in Ireland (I do 3,000-4,000 in 2-3 weeks so a good test.) I'm not saying I'm on the list, but my Contax is 10 years old, and I am finding myself leaving it on the tripods (I have 2C645 bodies, a Truewide and an Alpa) and take the M9 out with me. I have basically only TWO imaging systems; the P65+ and the M9. All the rest are accumulated Hassey V, Contax, and misc. lenses and bodies. The last trek to My Blanc was really tough with over 25lbs of photo gear and swapping P65+ and a rented P30 back between contax and alpa)

 

For me the S2 will be aimed as my future high res travel shoot being just a bit more that I need. I am now printing 24" x 3,4,6,7 Ft! 18MP M9 is good, but doesn't quite hack it.

 

I have a big family and hardly ever sell anything. Also, I am told I am a packrat... a more apt description than when I call MYSELF a collector (except my wife keeps wanting to add the word "junk" before it :-)

 

Anyway, if it works out, sometime between June and Dec I too may get an S2, keeping the Contax/P65+ for my small studio and local tripod work (and some 'playing around, like the Truewide, where I shhoot P65+ using Leica R 800mm modular! TRUTH>

 

So we'll see in the meantime, I have one last comment; I don't know why Guy felt he was viewed as anti or others did; part of my reason to be interested again in the S2 was his and Jack's work at testing. Any GOOD critic will let you know pros and cons, and then YOU make the decision. Sorry to see his frustration, but I do understand it.

 

For the rest please use this or other threads, as we have a growing S2 user group and esp for those of us seriously considering, we need all the help we can get (figured I would say it first!!)

 

with best regards

Victor

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[paulmoore]

I have been supportive and pro S since it was announced..I think it could be a great system.. but that is the problem..it could be.. it is not a system but a camera and lens.

I am looking for a new system..and until they get it together and produce a system I am not

a part of it. Leica is a wonderful brand and have enjoyed my r9dmr for almost 5 years..

but come on.. you want to play in the pro league you had better come to market with a pro system. I think hasselblad has been smart here and capitalized on Leica's slowness..I for one am looking again at them as my solution,

[GMB]

One of the interesting, and unexpected turns in this thread is the more tempered and thoughtful comments on both + and - side.

 

For the rest please use this or other threads, as we have a growing S2 user group and esp for those of us seriously considering, we need all the help we can get (figured I would say it first!!)

 

 

+1

 

Very helpful and balanced test for someone like me who is considering to get a MFD system and, of course, has the S2 on the list.

[LuxBob]

From a purely business point of view i would suggest that Leica has made some classic mistakes;

1. It is attempting to launch more than one product more or less at the same time - even for a large company this is a rule that you try not to break.

2. In each of these there is a key technology change. with the S2, not just a complete new camera but a new lens system. Change means risk and you do your best to minimise risk at launch.

3. Production - a new launch puts pressure on production and distribution. From the little I know about this relatively small company they have little flexibility in production and distribution.

They are probably learning some hard lessons right now and I trust that their financial backers see a solid future.

[ohnri]

I, for one, will miss Guy's input greatly as I see him as a serious critic without a personal agenda. I hope, after reflection, he decides to continue making his very helpful contributions here.

 

I also enjoy hearing from David, who as a Leica dealer, has a point of view but is not trying to fool anyone about it either. I find his experience and knowledge to be very helpful.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[Jay101]

I, for one, will miss Guy's input greatly as I see him as a serious critic without a personal agenda. I hope, after reflection, he decides to continue making his very helpful contributions here.

 

Yes, a voice of reason amongst the half-wits and ill-informed. I find his posts valuable so will continue to follow his thoughts elsewhere online.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks guys . I will come back when Leica actually starts putting stuff out there. I don't like these shooting arrows on dates when stuff will be released. I will also work in the background with them to try and help move things along. The second foot just dropped on them today . Leaf announced a 40 mpx back as well. Phase, Hassy and leaf all have 40 mpx backs . I'm trying to test the Hassy soon here. Anyway I am not far away but i am very sick of certain posts on the S2 which to me i find very misleading to the public. I'm a straight shooter with no BS in my words and as owner of a forum, working pro, workshop owner and instructor and reviewer. I standby my words and my honesty even as blunt as they are. So for the moment a good break from this is needed. Keeps my temperature low

[tashley]

I will also work in the background with them to try and help move things along.

 

I am sure Leica will be very grateful for any help you can give them.

 

I standby my words and my honesty even as blunt as they are.

 

Excellent and commendable - in which case I for one would truly appreciate it if you could be a little more specific on the following:

 

i am very sick of certain posts on the S2 which to me i find very misleading to the public.

 

I think it's clear the the majority of the constructive participants here are looking for straight talking and honest opinions, in which case, having identified that some posts are misleading, it would be really helpful of you to identify which posts they are (and what is misleading about them) so people can avoid being mislead!

 

Good to have you back Guy - I hope my post further up this thread in support of you might have played some part in your return!

 

Tim

[mwilliamsphotography]

One of the interesting, and unexpected turns in this thread is the more tempered and thoughtful comments on both + and - side.

I looked at other threads and they were either ant- (kill, dead end for leica etc) or pro, from OWNERS with the guts to show images.But no dialog-mostly pile on or excuses.

 

Here, I now see that S2 is delivering, though slowly, users have criticisms, but seem balanced (and the files look GOOD!)

 

Mark I do look forward to your commonts as well as images.

 

I will say now, that I had a deposit (yes pretty high) on an S2 since it was announced. I then saw "I just had too damn much gear, and was hardly using my MF stuff. I dropped from the list. I also upgraded M8 to M9 (Thanks David, who had me on that list too - terrible when you are SO predictable LOL) and all I can say to M9 waiters; keep waiting it is really a great camera.

 

Now, I find, and this may have you challenging my sanity, but reading between the lines, looking at the files (esp Tim's thoughtful ISO comparisons) I have decided to try to rent an S2 for a shoot in Ireland (I do 3,000-4,000 in 2-3 weeks so a good test.) I'm not saying I'm on the list, but my Contax is 10 years old, and I am finding myself leaving it on the tripods (I have 2C645 bodies, a Truewide and an Alpa) and take the M9 out with me. I have basically only TWO imaging systems; the P65+ and the M9. All the rest are accumulated Hassey V, Contax, and misc. lenses and bodies. The last trek to My Blanc was really tough with over 25lbs of photo gear and swapping P65+ and a rented P30 back between contax and alpa)

 

For me the S2 will be aimed as my future high res travel shoot being just a bit more that I need. I am now printing 24" x 3,4,6,7 Ft! 18MP M9 is good, but doesn't quite hack it.

 

I have a big family and hardly ever sell anything. Also, I am told I am a packrat... a more apt description than when I call MYSELF a collector (except my wife keeps wanting to add the word "junk" before it :-)

 

Anyway, if it works out, sometime between June and Dec I too may get an S2, keeping the Contax/P65+ for my small studio and local tripod work (and some 'playing around, like the Truewide, where I shhoot P65+ using Leica R 800mm modular! TRUTH>

 

So we'll see in the meantime, I have one last comment; I don't know why Guy felt he was viewed as anti or others did; part of my reason to be interested again in the S2 was his and Jack's work at testing. Any GOOD critic will let you know pros and cons, and then YOU make the decision. Sorry to see his frustration, but I do understand it.

 

For the rest please use this or other threads, as we have a growing S2 user group and esp for those of us seriously considering, we need all the help we can get (figured I would say it first!!)

 

with best regards

Victor

 

Victor, I appreciate your personal insights, and have recently gone through a similar process of re-evaluating my over-all kit ... having sold half a lifetime's worth of Pack-Rat accumulation as I head toward semi-retirement from my main profession in the advertising profession to focus solely on Photography. I can no longer be a "collector" ... it all has to earn a living.

 

This has meant a major shift in the type of paying photographic work I tend to do ... partly because of the poor economy and its effect on commercial photography in my geographical area, and partly due to the early semi-retirement and shift to more reliance on photographic income, (I know, I know, bad timing).

 

In effect, it means more time for photographic works, and less working capital to revamp to meet current photographic needs. So, any consideration of this magnitude is a dead serious one because it probably is the last major move I will make for some years. I know for a fact that I'm not alone in these sobering deliberations.

 

The net affect is that almost ANY input, however delivered is welcome ... extremes aside, it is still informative and I feel perfectly able to sort out information from vitriol or exuberance. If someone rants about a S2 failure no matter how isolated, I want to know .... just as much as I want to hear about warm, fuzzy experiences from other owners. Comparisons like Jack and Guy did are obviously most welcome, and answered some questions, but not all.

 

I did have an opportunity to shoot with the S2 + 70 and 180 lenses for 1/2 day while in St Pete's Beach FL ... including some fill flash work indoors with the Leica SF58. Because of that, the S2 remains on the "revamp" list as I weigh the Pros and Cons. The files are beautiful from the S2 ... however, I am experience in working with a number of MFD systems and that is the criteria used when comparing. I do think that is the same criteria Guy uses and perhaps is the source of his "misinformation" critique.

 

My initial thought (or hope) was that the S2 would replace my 35mm DSLR system ... a system I place less pressure on than do other photographers ... I do not need much over ISO 800, nor do I use super long lenses or super wide zooms all that often. In essence for high-end weddings, a S2, 35, 70 and probably 120 or 180 would cover most applications ... backed up by a Sony A900 and 24-70 zoom. In studio I already have a H3D-II/39 which I use a lot on a Rollie Xact-II for commercial work.

 

However, you are ahead of my curve already having a P65+ ... the consideration I face is that both upgrading the H system to a H4D/60 AND adding a S2 system are not in the cards financially.

 

I admit to rambling here, because I still haven't made a final decision which way to go ... although the smart money would be on the H upgrade, my actual current use favors the S2.

 

-Marc

[ptomsu]

@ Marc!

 

Reading through your posts and remembering some other conversations I have the feeling that either staying with H3D2 or upgrading to H4D60 would be the path to go. And using the A900 as DSLR system wherever this is appropriate.

 

I really do not see as much difference between a S2 and A900, but I very well see a noticeable difference towards the Hasselblads and Phases especially with higher MP count. I think the S2 is kind of overrated or expectations are too high. And it is heavy as well, so the difference to "real" MF is not big enough to justify changing a system (or systems) - at least not for me.

 

I would argue that seeing the S System as the only system replacing MF and DSLR is somehow dangerous, other than you really have very specific requirements and do not shoot outside this range. But a DSLR system paired with the big range of available lenses, especially zoom lenses, does offer lot of flexibility, which you never will be able to get from the S2. On the other side the S2 will never come close to the IQ of modern MFDBs in the range between 40 - 60 MP.

 

So either you are really comfortable with the "limited" area of usage of the S System, and even better if you currently do not own anything, then I would tend to say it is the right choice. In all other cases I feel it is the wrong investment. Well and talking about investment - if the S System would be say 1/3 cheaper compared to Phase and/or Hasselblad systems, then it could be also a good solution.

 

Other than that I cannot see why to invest in it. Although I must say I would also love to own one and be able to use it as needed, but .... yes there are the $$$$$ or €€€€€€

[gogopix]

Marc, Peter,

 

Very thoughtful points. One advantage I have is the spreading of MF purchaces over a 10 year period, good upgrades (the first P25 gave 10k credit for Kodak, I only paid 10,500!.)

On 35mm, unfortunately I have had over 30 years to accummulate! :-)

 

The S2 becomes a dilemma; is it a 35mm replacement? or a MF? For me the comment on weight is important; am I going to be looking at a M9 for street/cityscape plus alpa/35mm/P65+ for lanscape/panos? I've had 3 rotator cuff surgeries and am looking at a fourth - I don't get sick, I break body parts! So, if the S2 isn't a weight benefit over the C645/P65 with say 45/80/140 Then it doesn't work for me. Hence my leaning toward an S2 test. If it IS a heavy schlep, then Plan B.

 

As you both have reminded me, we each have our needs; no 'one size fits all' So please, Peter Marc, and Tim and Guy, and of course David F., keep up the S2 dialog. Just for comparison on weight, the C/P65 with lens gets over 6-7lbs. Around one's neck for 7 hours while climbing 3000ft or trekking 10 miles gets old. Yet some of my best shots (that SELL!) are from shots many just can't GET. (Mt Blanc Massif from across; a 7ft pano where you can actually SEE the great massif)

 

So anything under 4lbs net is attractive; seems S2 gets there, or does it ?(I can easily backpack 20lbs of gear for extra lenses). Maybe the May trip will decide one way or another.

 

regards

Victor

[Turbo989]

After reading the reviews and reading what others had to say, I am finding it less and less desirable to own a Leica. I currently own a 1935 Leica III and it was something my grandfather spoke about like the best thing since sliced bread and nothing came close to it.

 

Now being a professional photographer myself, I have grown up in the digital era and have been looking for a digital Leica SLR because of their legendary stature. Now I wouldn't mind paying the price if it was better, but looking at the images ~ I am finding it hard to constitute spending $26000 more than my Nikon D3. I can shoot at ISO 6400-100K with very minimal noise.

 

Here are a few handheld natural light shots from Disneyland since they don't allow flash photography:

 

Exposure: 0.006 sec (1/160) Aperture: f/2.0 Focal Length: 50 mm ISO Speed: 6400

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2775/4215747832_a82bdec0c5.jpg

 

Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60) Aperture: f/1.4 Focal Length: 50 mm ISO Speed: 6400

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4002/4214997535_310478a97e.jpg

 

Also now with companies like Leitax

 

Leica lens for Nikon cameras

 

I am thinking that it may be a better route. Leica has always been known for the extraordinary lens designs so why not take the best high ISO performance in the Nikons and the optimal lens performance of the Leica.

 

Even then, in the current day time, I find Leica 90mm F/2 or F/2.8 lenses going for well over $2000. But really, a Nikon 85mm F/1.4 is a just as legendary of a lens, if not better, and costs 1/2 the price.

 

Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.4D - Review / Test Report - Analysis

 

I honestly don't want to pay the extra cash just for a name.

[mwilliamsphotography]

After reading the reviews and reading what others had to say, I am finding it less and less desirable to own a Leica. I currently own a 1935 Leica III and it was something my grandfather spoke about like the best thing since sliced bread and nothing came close to it.

 

Now being a professional photographer myself, I have grown up in the digital era and have been looking for a digital Leica SLR because of their legendary stature. Now I wouldn't mind paying the price if it was better, but looking at the images ~ I am finding it hard to constitute spending $26000 more than my Nikon D3. I can shoot at ISO 6400-100K with very minimal noise.

 

Here are a few handheld natural light shots from Disneyland since they don't allow flash photography:

 

Exposure: 0.006 sec (1/160) Aperture: f/2.0 Focal Length: 50 mm ISO Speed: 6400

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2775/4215747832_a82bdec0c5.jpg

 

Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60) Aperture: f/1.4 Focal Length: 50 mm ISO Speed: 6400

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4002/4214997535_310478a97e.jpg

 

Also now with companies like Leitax

 

Leica lens for Nikon cameras

 

I am thinking that it may be a better route. Leica has always been known for the extraordinary lens designs so why not take the best high ISO performance in the Nikons and the optimal lens performance of the Leica.

 

Even then, in the current day time, I find Leica 90mm F/2 or F/2.8 lenses going for well over $2000. But really, a Nikon 85mm F/1.4 is a just as legendary of a lens, if not better, and costs 1/2 the price.

 

Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.4D - Review / Test Report - Analysis

 

I honestly don't want to pay the extra cash just for a name.

 

You're comparing apples to oranges there. The file size is what you are paying with MF Digital. Horses for courses.

 

As far as lenses are concerned ... Nikon is doing a great job with their newer nano coated lenses and I was delighted with the 14-24 on my D3X and D700 before opting out of Nikon. The Nikon 85/1.4 was pretty darned good also ... but no Leica R 90AA by any stretch of the imagination. You may be confusing the older 90/2 or 2/8 costing in the hundreds with the 90AA which goes for that $2,000. you mentioned (which is high IMO). Virtually no CA with the Leica 90 APO/ASPH, micro contrast, beautiful Bokeh, and color rendering like nothing else out there.

 

-Marc

[tashley]

You're comparing apples to oranges there. The file size is what you are paying with MF Digital. Horses for courses.

 

As far as lenses are concerned ... Nikon is doing a great job with their newer nano coated lenses and I was delighted with the 14-24 on my D3X and D700 before opting out of Nikon. The Nikon 85/1.4 was pretty darned good also ... but no Leica R 90AA by any stretch of the imagination. You may be confusing the older 90/2 or 2/8 costing in the hundreds with the 90AA which goes for that $2,000. you mentioned (which is high IMO). Virtually no CA with the Leica 90 APO/ASPH, micro contrast, beautiful Bokeh, and color rendering like nothing else out there.

 

-Marc

 

Just curious Marc, why did you opt out of Nikon? For when I need an SLR I have a 5DII but have seriously been thinking of going 3Ds... so would be really interested to hear your thoughts if you have a moment.

 

FWIW I agree totally with your response to Turbo.

 

Best

 

Tim

[mwilliamsphotography]

Just curious Marc, why did you opt out of Nikon? For when I need an SLR I have a 5DII but have seriously been thinking of going 3Ds... so would be really interested to hear your thoughts if you have a moment.

 

FWIW I agree totally with your response to Turbo.

 

Best

 

Tim

 

Not sure if this appropriate for a S2 thread ... but since you asked, I'll make it relate ... LOL!

 

My use of a 35mm DSLR is almost exclusively for wedding work. I use a 35mm DSLR in concert with a Leica M9, with the M now accounting for about 1/2 of all wedding shots ... and that probably will grow in percentage now that I've finally completed my M lens line-up from 16mm to 135mm lenses ... focal lengths that account for 95% or more of shots taken.

 

I opted out of Nikon because it was a fair amount of capital wrapped up in a system that was getting less use (D3 and D3X). I never used it in studio because of the Hassey MFD system, with the back frequently used on a Rollie Xact-II ... nor do I shoot sports, birds, or auto racing. Most low light work is done with the M and lenses like the 24/1.4, 50/0.95 Nocti, and 75/1.4. I rarely need more than ISO 1000 at a wedding and the M9 is fine for that.

 

However, I still must have a 35mm DSLR for some wedding applications. So I now use a Sony A900 which I tested for a full wedding season before off-loading the Nikons. The Zeiss optics were the biggest draw. A noble replacement for the Contax N and Leica R systems I once favored because of the optics.

 

Had Leica followed through with a R10 Digital, even a 18 meg like the M9, and some AF lenses in useful focal lengths ... priced at a bit of a premium compared to Nikon/Canon Pro models ... I'd be using that instead.

 

With the abandonment of the R system, that was the hope I held for the S2 ... a replacement for all the 35mm DSLR stuff ... and for location work with MFD ... not a replacement for digital view camera studio imagery.

 

Upwards of $50,000.for a basic 3 lens Pro kit, lack of 35mm DSLR like AF performance, and a few other comparative drawbacks, threw a bucket of cold water on that idea. Mostly the $50K part ; -)

 

Still, if the economy wasn't so poor and work so difficult to land these days ... I'd throw logic out the window along with the entire Sony kit ... and indulge the S2.

 

Instead, I'm pricing out the H4D/40 to add to the H system ... reports of it's AF innovation and increased ability in low light focusing is exactly what I needed to hear.

 

The newest Phase One camera and P40+ with its Pixel Binning abilities and Schneider optics is also a possibility for my needs. This is the camera that Guy Mancuso now uses for all applications.

 

Interesting times, albeit confusing, for photography.

 

-Marc

[tashley]

Not sure if this appropriate for a S2 thread ... but since you asked, I'll make it relate ... LOL!

 

My use of a 35mm DSLR is almost exclusively for wedding work. I use a 35mm DSLR in concert with a Leica M9, with the M now accounting for about 1/2 of all wedding shots ... and that probably will grow in percentage now that I've finally completed my M lens line-up from 16mm to 135mm lenses ... focal lengths that account for 95% or more of shots taken.

 

I opted out of Nikon because it was a fair amount of capital wrapped up in a system that was getting less use (D3 and D3X). I never used it in studio because of the Hassey MFD system, with the back frequently used on a Rollie Xact-II ... nor do I shoot sports, birds, or auto racing. Most low light work is done with the M and lenses like the 24/1.4, 50/0.95 Nocti, and 75/1.4. I rarely need more than ISO 1000 at a wedding and the M9 is fine for that.

 

However, I still must have a 35mm DSLR for some wedding applications. So I now use a Sony A900 which I tested for a full wedding season before off-loading the Nikons. The Zeiss optics were the biggest draw. A noble replacement for the Contax N and Leica R systems I once favored because of the optics.

 

Had Leica followed through with a R10 Digital, even a 18 meg like the M9, and some AF lenses in useful focal lengths ... priced at a bit of a premium compared to Nikon/Canon Pro models ... I'd be using that instead.

 

With the abandonment of the R system, that was the hope I held for the S2 ... a replacement for all the 35mm DSLR stuff ... and for location work with MFD ... not a replacement for digital view camera studio imagery.

 

Upwards of $50,000.for a basic 3 lens Pro kit, lack of 35mm DSLR like AF performance, and a few other comparative drawbacks, threw a bucket of cold water on that idea. Mostly the $50K part ; -)

 

Still, if the economy wasn't so poor and work so difficult to land these days ... I'd throw logic out the window along with the entire Sony kit ... and indulge the S2.

 

Instead, I'm pricing out the H4D/40 to add to the H system ... reports of it's AF innovation and increased ability in low light focusing is exactly what I needed to hear.

 

The newest Phase One camera and P40+ with its Pixel Binning abilities and Schneider optics is also a possibility for my needs. This is the camera that Guy Mancuso now uses for all applications.

 

Interesting times, albeit confusing, for photography.

 

-Marc

 

Thanks Marc - and you did manage to make it thread-relevant!

 

I have to say that even at half the price I would never use an S2 for weddings other than possibly for posed large groups on a tripod in good light - its higher ISO is great compared to a P45+ but I have no doubt that it loses to a binned P40 though it would be interesting to see someone do a normalised comparison.

 

I never do weddings other than for friends (I'm just not a good enough photographer!) so my main use for a D3s would be to fill in where, in the Venn diagram of photographic life, the S2 and M9 don't meet at all - in other words for very low light (clubs, pubs, sleazy joints) and for very fast AF tracking, such as surfing for example. Which all goes to show how needs-specific gear is these days.

 

Thanks again

 

Tim

[mwilliamsphotography]

Thanks Marc - and you did manage to make it thread-relevant!

 

I have to say that even at half the price I would never use an S2 for weddings other than possibly for posed large groups on a tripod in good light - its higher ISO is great compared to a P45+ but I have no doubt that it loses to a binned P40 though it would be interesting to see someone do a normalised comparison.

 

I never do weddings other than for friends (I'm just not a good enough photographer!) so my main use for a D3s would be to fill in where, in the Venn diagram of photographic life, the S2 and M9 don't meet at all - in other words for very low light (clubs, pubs, sleazy joints) and for very fast AF tracking, such as surfing for example. Which all goes to show how needs-specific gear is these days.

 

Thanks again

 

Tim

 

Oh, I think the S2 could cut it for more than just tripod mounted formals Tim. When I tested it back in November, that's what I was looking at it for ... and the dealer kindly brought a SF58 to try with it. Not bad actually. ISO 640 and fill flash did pretty well. Remember, it's the flash duration that freezes the subject, so hand holding a MF camera can be mitigated somewhat by that.

 

I still contend that not having ISOs in whole numbers was a mistake on the S2. Jumping from 640 to 1250 didn't work well for me in indoor situations ... any more than it did on the M8 ... where incremental whole numbers on the M9 makes it far more versatile for smaller refinements. I use ISO 800 and 1000 on the M9 frequently. For some S2 test shots, if I had ISO 800 to select from, it would have been spot-on for balancing with the fill flash, while introducing as little additional noise as possible.

 

 

(BTW, I'd be the first to admit that the Nikon D3s coupled with a new Nano coated 24/1.4 is a VERY seductive proposition for almost any photographer with a heart beating in their chest. The available light possibilities boggle the mind. An expensive proposition, but not "Leica expensive" that's for sure.

 

I do find it odd they did a 24/1.4 ... Nikon desperately needs a fast AFS, modern 35/1.4, and to re-vamp the 85/1.4 with Nano crystal coatings and AFS VR. But that is a matter for the Nikon forums : -).

 

-Marc

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Leica is sending me a S2 late next week to take on our Salton Sea workshop . Only with a 70mm this time but some folks will get a chance to work with it. No formal testing planned as before but may try a few things.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mwilliamsphotography]

A well informed "birdy" told me that the 35mm for the S2 is "produced" and has been shipped to the USA from Leica.

 

If true, then a decent base system can now be assembled.

 

We'll see.

 

-Marc

[tashley]

A well informed "birdy" told me that the 35mm for the S2 is "produced" and has been shipped to the USA from Leica.

 

If true, then a decent base system can now be assembled.

 

We'll see.

 

-Marc

 

I believe that your birdy, though sharing a common reptilian ancestor with the snake, does not speak with forked tongue!

 

;-)