S in use cf DSLR in use

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am with you on this Juha, as I mentioned earlier, I absolutely prefer the simple (and sufficient) user interface of a Leica M/S over any other modern digital I used.

 

Switching between Leica M/S and the Nikon gear involves always a few moments of getting used to the entirely different user interface approach.

I am not referring to "where is button A for function X on this or that camera but an entirely different approach of focussing, metering and composing.

[tom0511]

If I compare the S to my 5dIII I also prefer the handling/user interface of the 5d, and the IQ for sure.

However I am also amazed often how fast my 5dIII focuses. I can clearly get more spontaneous images of my kids with the 5dIII.

The AF of the S hunts sometimes a bit forth and back before locking (not only with the 120 but also with other lenses). I compared another new body to mine and it was the same behavior.

The thing about the Otus...its manual focus - that's why I would allways prefer the S+70mm over the d800+Otus, except maybe for still/landscape where you can use life view.

[stephan_w]

I am curious about the Leica S. It seems quite DSLR-like from a user perspective. Does the experience (I'm not talking about image quality) differ that much from using a DSLR combo like a D800E + 1.4/55 Otus?

 

I didn't read all the advice given here, but having both and having/had a lot of manual lenses on the Nikon, I would say that only on stills and in live view you will be able to focus accurately enough with the Nikon/Zeiss combo to achieve something near of the S2.

 

I can get only 80-90% sharp photos with the AF of the Nikon, and with manual it is even worse. The S2 nails it 95% and better (for portrait/fashion work, for landscapes etc). Also the S-files are always better, as the lenses are simply marvelous.

 

For the other arguments, you must really test one to see if the size fits you, it is definitively larger dann 35 mm, including the D800. Also you will definitively need the handgrip if you shoot vertical frames.

 

As others pointed out, the S has its limits, but for me I would never give away my S. BUT I have several other cameras when I go out on a walk..........

[John Black]

The Leica S' viewfinder is not only big, but very bright with F2 to F2.8 lenses. My in-focus keeper rate with manual focus lenses on the Leica S was better than the Canon 1Ds Mark III (which also has a big viewfinder by dSLR standards).

 

I'm not a fan of the newer style dSLR's with the LED overlays - such as the Nikon D800 and Canon 7D. The overlay takes away some of the sharpness and it makes manual focusing (at least for me) more difficult.

 

I'm probably in a minority here, but I look forward to a CMOS based Leica S with a good ISO 3200-6400 performance. If shooting longer lenses like a Mamiya 200/2.8 APO or the 300/2.8 APO that Dirk mentioned, then I need at least a monopod. But if shooting the 70S or something comparable, then I'm pretty likely to wing it handheld.

[glenerrolrd]

Interesting discussion. I shoot with the M , the S2 and the D800E using primarily Leica R glass but also the Nikon super telephotos . A lot will depend on what type of work you plan on doing .

 

For real action …the Nikon is the only serious alternative . I shoot Polo action for example with a D4 and the 400/2.8 AF . Leica produces nothing comparable . I have shot a lot of sports ..big difference in using continuous focus verse predicting the point of focus . Only the Nikon AF system(of the three being discussed) can do the continuous focus . But unless you emphasis is on fast moving sport ….then all three of my systems can be used for most applications . For example…I could shoot studio portraits ,landscape or travel with each system and I have .

 

I find the ergonomics and operation of all three systems to be more than adequate for most street and travel . For me the M is more fun and I use it most . The S2 is a joy to work with and the D800E is just plain fast and responsive .

 

The S2 image quality beats the D800E even with the Otus (I have one) ….but its primarily in the fine separation of tones and pleasing color of the CCD sensor . So for anything that can be done with a slower deliberate method …the S2 will produce the more pleasing results .

 

The aesthetic of the raw files processed in lightroom …much better with the M and the S2 ..they could be perfect between the M9 and the S2 ….but you can get close enough with the D800E and Leica R glass . You just have to profile the camera and it takes more effort in post processing . So if I am shooting essentially the same subjects as the M …but want better IQ …the S2 wins easily .

 

The D800E blows away the Leica alternatives for ISO s over 1600 ..so if you wanted a bunch of ISO3200 /6400 ..its not happening with the S2 .

 

Each alternative is pretty great .

[RobDose]

Hey guys

 

I've been using the S2 for a couple of years now. I think it's wonderful.

 

I initially bought it purely for personal reasons. I wanted a camera for me rather than using all my "work" cameras all the time. However I have slowly started reaching for it when shooting what I think would benefit form the quality of the lenses.

 

On the topic of handling. I go kayaking with it. That is pretty much all I need to say, really. It is very robust, easy to use, and reliable.

 

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for all the advice and for sharing experiences. This has become a very useful reference.

 

Currently I am going to stick with the M system. I will pick up the S to develop landscape, still life/architecture and portraiture, as and when. If I ever develop an interest in sports reportage, I will go back to D800/E, and even though the Otus is awesome, would probably opt for a longer focal length with AF - the Nikkor AFS 2.8/300, etc. It seems pretty clear from the commentary here that anything "busy" or "dark" - the D800 (and equivalents at Canon no doubt) offer the better solution. For anything "slow" or "bright", the S.

 

Taking aside those practical considerations, I have to admit three other leanings toward the S - 1. the sheer optical quality of the S lenses (with their weather sealing and AF a nice advantage of Otus range when needed); 2. The huge viewfinder and simple controls; 3. the sheer aesthetic and tactile pleasure of the Leica quality. When I have held the S in the store, I am sure I have caught myself beginning to drool, a little!

 

But for now, I think it would be an expensive toy, and given I can only use one camera at a time, I will stick with the M until such time as it is clear to me the system would be warranted to improve my photography. (repeat to myself, repeat to myself!).

 

When that time comes, I would venture back to this very helpful thread and re-read.

 

Thanks.

[colonel]

Just back from 1 week in Havana with the S2 and the 30-90 zoom. Extremely happy with the results: Natural, vivid colors with almost no post processing. It is not a camera for high ISO but 640 works fine, 1250 with some processing. The camera is ergonomically perfect, although it has some weight, carrying it around for 5 days works fine. The zoom makes it a versatile walk-around. All in all very happy. A few shots (the BWs are Monochrom) can be seen on https://www.flickr.com/photos/55833221@N00/

 

amazing pics, thanks for posting

I feel I've been to Cuba now, no need to go

[tobey bilek]

There is a comparison somewhere on www. They are close, but S wins for sharpness.

 

Unfortunately it displayed the same funky colors of every M8 I tried. You can get rid of them with a camera profile.

 

A D800 produces nice images at high iso and adobe NR fixes them perfectly. The old sensor in the S is best used at lower iso, however I did discover My M8 & 9 could be made decent with color noise in addition to luminance noise correction. S is probably the same.

 

I suspect you will have the same red line issue as the M every time a cosmic ray hits a pixel. Trip to Leica to map out. Nikon just gets one bad pixel you can click over. Big difference.

 

You will buy the best Nikon lenses for the 800 and now you will have a base set for the D4 or D4s which is world class for high iso and either will make the S look poor. Plus you will have the money to buy it.

 

But if you will make many many 24 x 36" prints or larger for a tripod or with flash, the S will be better.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Just back from 1 week in Havana with the S2 and the 30-90 zoom. Extremely happy with the results: Natural, vivid colors with almost no post processing. It is not a camera for high ISO but 640 works fine, 1250 with some processing. The camera is ergonomically perfect, although it has some weight, carrying it around for 5 days works fine. The zoom makes it a versatile walk-around. All in all very happy. A few shots (the BWs are Monochrom) can be seen on https://www.flickr.com/photos/55833221@N00/

Fantastic stuff especially the B&W pictures...............who needs a bloody Leica Monochrom when you can get pictures like that with the S

[Jeff S]

Fantastic stuff especially the B&W pictures...............who needs a bloody Leica Monochrom when you can get pictures like that with the S

His b/w shots ARE from the Monochrom…as he wrote above, and as the captions indicate.

 

Screen shots don't show much of anything, anyway.  But hardly news that either camera (and various others) can do a splendid job with b/w in an overall workflow.

 

Jeff

[Winedemonium]

Thanks for everyone's comments over the past 14 months.

 

Given the amazing S-E 006 deal on offer earlier in the week... I pulled the trigger. I bought one lens with it to begin -- the 100mm Summicron. I will probably add a wide before too long. But I wanted to test the camera out before making further decisions.

 

I'm looking forward to trying this camera, which arrives sometime this coming week.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

 

 

I'm looking forward to trying this camera, which arrives sometime this coming week.

Enjoy

[platypus]

Fantastic stuff especially the B&W pictures...............who needs a bloody Leica Monochrom when you can get pictures like that with the S

Is it really necessary to denigrate the marvellous Monochrom?  There is no need to justify your recent swop-over.

                                   (Denigrate: to belittle, diminish, insult, vilify, slight, revile....or if you prefer:  to unfairly criticise)

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Is it really necessary to denigrate the marvellous Monochrom? There is no need to justify your recent swop-over.

(Denigrate: to belittle, diminish, insult, vilify, slight, revile....or if you prefer: to unfairly criticise)

Hahahahahaha. Funny stuff

[EoinC]

Hahahahahaha. Funny stuff

Particularly funny when, as Erling and Jeff pointed out, the photo's you were praising were taken on a Monochrom.

Strange days, indeed.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Particularly funny when, as Erling and Jeff pointed out, the photo's you were praising were taken on a Monochrom.

Strange days, indeed.

+1. Well done

[EoinC]

No problem - I would imagine the S series are capable of excellent B&W images, also.

[Photoskeptic]

There is a comparison somewhere on www. They are close, but S wins for sharpness.

 

Unfortunately it displayed the same funky colors of every M8 I tried. You can get rid of them with a camera profile.

 

A D800 produces nice images at high iso and adobe NR fixes them perfectly. The old sensor in the S is best used at lower iso, however I did discover My M8 & 9 could be made decent with color noise in addition to luminance noise correction. S is probably the same.

 

I suspect you will have the same red line issue as the M every time a cosmic ray hits a pixel. Trip to Leica to map out. Nikon just gets one bad pixel you can click over. Big difference.

 

You will buy the best Nikon lenses for the 800 and now you will have a base set for the D4 or D4s which is world class for high iso and either will make the S look poor. Plus you will have the money to buy it.

 

But if you will make many many 24 x 36" prints or larger for a tripod or with flash, the S will be better.

Funny, I get better color out of my M8.2 than I do my D810. BTW, my M8 was the same as the M8.2. Heck, I guess I'm a real contrarian - I get great color from my M-P (though I wish it would quit underexposing!) I must say the S006 has always blown me away with it's color - and still does, and I would have had one earlier except I shot something which was even better and I'm trying to get away from camera bodies with mirrors .

 

One other thing, the S is capable of excellent bw - check out Rolo's work .

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear