Nikon D800E vs Leica S2

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why don't you just compare results? It appears you have access to those through your friend.

[glenerrolrd]

Today a good friend of mine yet again sang the praises of his D800 (as he does every freaking time I see him) . This friend made the claim that the D800 produces "higher quality images than an 8x10 view camera" (his words) .

 

If this guy were just some Nikon fanboy/doofus, he and his claims about the D800 would be easily dismissed - but he's not. He owns & runs a very successful commercial photography studio, can barely keep up with the demands for his services and is one of the best photographers in the area. The guy is the real deal - so I can't dismiss him as a blind Nikon moonie.

 

To say that he is enamored with all things digital would be the understatement of the decade. He thinks my commitment to rangefinder photography and the Leica M system is a lot of nonsense. He is of the opinion that I would be light years ahead if I were to dump my Leica M kit in favor of a pair of D800 bodies to use with my Nikon lenses.

 

In the end, it is my call alone whether I stick with my M film cameras (which I 'm 99% sure I will choose to do) or dump them in favor of D800 bodies.

 

My question is this: Is my friend right about the D800 image quality? Could it really be "better than an 8x10 view camera?" To be honest, that claim seems to be a bit farfetched.

 

His claim also makes me wonder how the image quality of high end film cameras and lenses such as Leica's current M lenses and Hasselblad V system (Zeiss T* lenses) would stack up against the D800 and Nikon's pro lenses.

 

Any insight or information would be appreciated.

 

Since I have both the S2 and the D800E and the very best lenses for both ....the claims for the D800E are just nonsense . Not sure most of the tests even know what to look for yet create a fair evaluation .

 

The primary differences in MF and the D800E show up in tone separation and the ability to render subtle differences in color . An S2 file with show it in the skin of a model or the detail in the sky . Its not about sharper or higher resolution ..its about the overall IQ . So showing me the ability to render detail in a high frequency scene isn t the point . The 2nd area is just color fidelity .... an S2 file properly exposed (for the highlights ) and processed to pull down the tone curve (including the lights ) just nails the color almost everytime in any kind of lighting. The Nikon NEF files require a "craftsman" to get consistent color .

 

Ok ..now onto the lens differences . The Leica S lenses using the the lens profiles in CS or LR are simply the very best lenses ..I have used . (my friends that shoot field cameras tell me the Rodie s and Schneider digitals are better but I have no basis). The lenses create the beautiful micro contrast,smooth roll off in bokeh and clean color fidelity that translates to "brilliance" .

 

The resolution in a 40MP file is a given with good glass . In fact with the right glass and careful technique there are plenty of examples of fantastic 30x40 prints from a 10MP DMR file .

 

The very best Nikkors are not comparable with the best Zeiss and Leica R glass if you can get past tests of resolution in the corner wide open . The Leica R lenses are similar to the S glass but a huge challenge to use on a D800 because the require manually stopping down to working aperture . The Zeiss glass goes from superb to average depending on the lens and distortion and aberrations can be hard to correct in post . Plus they are manual focus . You have a huge number of lenses to choose from and they are far from equal.

 

 

So no doubt the D800E is a superb camera at a break thru price and getting 40MPs is the sweet spot for IQ (beyond that you had better be very very good with your technique). Its also not comparable with a M film camera ...totally different strengths and weaknesses .

 

Keep in mind most really great photographers would tell you they are at best average at evaluating equipment . It could be a great camera for your requirements but better than 8x10 film is comparing apples and oranges .

[Advertisement]

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

[Messsucherkamera]

Why don't you just compare results? It appears you have access to those through your friend.

 

True - to a point.

 

I can compare his D800 images to my Summicron and Summilux images. However I have no access to 8 x10 or smaller sized LF chromes to use for compairson.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Messsucherkamera

[batmobile]

I think he can't see beyond the scope of his own needs.

 

Try comparing the finest B&W silver prints from 10x8 negs with anything done on a FF digital camera, for tonality and overall charm.

 

Try carrying a D800 with lens on your wrist all day for a week, shooting street or documentary where snap shooting is the order of the day. You'll need a new wrist. make that a new arm.

 

People forget utility and the creation of original images and persistently favour technical qualities. In your friend's case, the D800 probably seems amazing compared to what used to be possible out of a package that size, but for many purposes the D800 is still far too big for some applications.

 

I might well buy a D800, but a Leica M replacement it is not.

 

Today a good friend of mine yet again sang the praises of his D800 (as he does every freaking time I see him) . This friend made the claim that the D800 produces "higher quality images than an 8x10 view camera" (his words) .

 

If this guy were just some Nikon fanboy/doofus, he and his claims about the D800 would be easily dismissed - but he's not. He owns & runs a very successful commercial photography studio, can barely keep up with the demands for his services and is one of the best photographers in the area. The guy is the real deal - so I can't dismiss him as a blind Nikon moonie.

 

To say that he is enamored with all things digital would be the understatement of the decade. He thinks my commitment to rangefinder photography and the Leica M system is a lot of nonsense. He is of the opinion that I would be light years ahead if I were to dump my Leica M kit in favor of a pair of D800 bodies to use with my Nikon lenses.

 

In the end, it is my call alone whether I stick with my M film cameras (which I 'm 99% sure I will choose to do) or dump them in favor of D800 bodies.

 

My question is this: Is my friend right about the D800 image quality? Could it really be "better than an 8x10 view camera?" To be honest, that claim seems to be a bit farfetched.

 

His claim also makes me wonder how the image quality of high end film cameras and lenses such as Leica's current M lenses and Hasselblad V system (Zeiss T* lenses) would stack up against the D800 and Nikon's pro lenses.

 

Any insight or information would be appreciated.

[Larcomb]

Today a good friend of mine yet again sang the praises of his D800 (as he does every freaking time I see him) . This friend made the claim that the D800 produces "higher quality images than an 8x10 view camera" (his words) .

 

If this guy were just some Nikon fanboy/doofus, he and his claims about the D800 would be easily dismissed - but he's not. He owns & runs a very successful commercial photography studio, can barely keep up with the demands for his services and is one of the best photographers in the area. The guy is the real deal - so I can't dismiss him as a blind Nikon moonie.

 

To say that he is enamored with all things digital would be the understatement of the decade. He thinks my commitment to rangefinder photography and the Leica M system is a lot of nonsense. He is of the opinion that I would be light years ahead if I were to dump my Leica M kit in favor of a pair of D800 bodies to use with my Nikon lenses.

 

In the end, it is my call alone whether I stick with my M film cameras (which I 'm 99% sure I will choose to do) or dump them in favor of D800 bodies.

 

My question is this: Is my friend right about the D800 image quality? Could it really be "better than an 8x10 view camera?" To be honest, that claim seems to be a bit farfetched.

 

His claim also makes me wonder how the image quality of high end film cameras and lenses such as Leica's current M lenses and Hasselblad V system (Zeiss T* lenses) would stack up against the D800 and Nikon's pro lenses.

 

Any insight or information would be appreciated.

 

It's not physically possible for the D800 to equal an 8 x 10 view camera image. Diffraction and other factors make it impossible.

[AlanJW]

Not an objective measure but I have a D800e and an M9 - but no view camera. The D800 is a terrific DSLR, perhaps the most bang for the buck out there today, it is capable of superb images ( and I disagree that they require a lot of pp; with a profile made with the X-Rite Passport and software, D800e images do not require a lot of work; on the other hand M9 images generally require zero work). For what it is the D800e is the closest I have come to M images, but there is still a naturalness in the M9 images that is not replicated in the Nikon.

[Messsucherkamera]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think he can't see beyond the scope of his own needs.

 

Try comparing the finest B&W silver prints from 10x8 negs with anything done on a FF digital camera, for tonality and overall charm.

 

Try carrying a D800 with lens on your wrist all day for a week, shooting street or documentary where snap shooting is the order of the day. You'll need a new wrist. make that a new arm.

 

People forget utility and the creation of original images and persistently favour technical qualities. In your friend's case, the D800 probably seems amazing compared to what used to be possible out of a package that size, but for many purposes the D800 is still far too big for some applications.

 

I might well buy a D800, but a Leica M replacement it is not.

I think you hit the nail on the head in your first scentence.

 

For his applications, the D800 may be "it." That doesn't mean the D800 is "it" for every application, though. He's a bit of a technology /computer/ photoshop junkie too so that goes a long way in explaining his D800 (and digital) fetish.

 

For me, photography carries with it somewhat of an artistic zenlike undercurrent. Photographing has a decidedly metative feel (my style of shooting and my subject matter does, at least; YMMV).

 

My film Leicas fit in with that zenlike experience better than any SLR ever could, particularly a digital SLR.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Messsucherkamera

[pierovitch]

Unless you need high speed 10fps with autofocus, quality is going to be determined by the best optics and careful technique. Sports photography in a year or two will be 4K video stills taken at 25-100fps that leaves the rest of photography's quality high ground to Leica. Go to the DPR site RAW comparisons and target the feathers its marginal but it is visible.

Large format film resolution can be over rated. I have used the best APO Schneider and Nikon lenses under laboratory conditions and all the detail in a negative can be easily captured in a 20Mp file. 10x8 film would require optimum apertures a vacuum back and the finest repro lenses with micro focussing to even approach an S2. As for Nikon lenses they fall short even on a D700.

[glenerrolrd]

My film Leicas fit in with that zenlike experience better than any SLR ever could, particularly a digital SLR.

 

Its about the "inner game" .... Ask any great photographer what they were thinking when they made the photograph ......answer ....NOTHING . Now ask ..what where you feeling ...joy ,sorrow ... watch them light up.

 

If you can find that in a modern DSLR you are fortunate ....with a film M ..you hear comments like yours frequently .

[fjheimann]

As soon as I have time, there will be a compare between 800e wit Zeiss 100 and S2 120Apo.

Franz

[Constable]

I did exactly this .... I'll see if I still have files. The S2 is ahead marginally but it pushed me into ordering the Hasselblad adaptor and the H120 lense to get to true 1:1 macro!

 

Ed