How well is the S series actually selling?

[007]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Given that Leica still sells a film M as long as there is a demand, I would not worry about the S. The R had run its course. Leica decided to build an S that would be to a different sensor than anyone else then, rather than an R that would be welcomed by only say 4,000 R owners. The fact that S equipment depreciates the same rate as other digital gear should not be a surprise. And no, I do not expect there to ever be a mirrorless S. The SL essentially is that, for a smaller sensor.

 

But back to the original question:

Over 2,000 S per year times five years = 10,000

[leicapages]

Given that Leica still sells a film M as long as there is a demand, I would not worry about the S. The R had run its course. Leica decided to build an S that would be to a different sensor than anyone else then, rather than an R that would be welcomed by only say 4,000 R owners. The fact that S equipment depreciates the same rate as other digital gear should not be a surprise. And no, I do not expect there to ever be a mirrorless S. The SL essentially is that, for a smaller sensor.

 

But back to the original question:

Over 2,000 S per year times five years = 10,000

 

Thanks to all who contributed to this topic. Let me be a bit more specific. Of course the current Leica S series is offering excellent quality at 37.5 mio pixels etc. But as it is presented as a competitor against medium-format systems, it would have to be put up against offerings by PhaseOne / Leaf and Hasselblad. At the same time, it is proposed as a high-end SLR sort of competitor. But with the arrival of the latest Canon 5Ds and 5Dr the heat seems to be on from that side too. In a nutshell: the S seems sort of pressed between two competing offers and the question is whether it offers enough compelling reasons, long-term, to hold out and stand on its own, or whether it will simply be pushed out from the marketplace by the combined forces of high-end SLRs and top-end medium format players. The megapixel race is already lost in any case with top-end medium format at 80 mio pixels. Admittedly, a camera system is the sum of all elements that contribute to the final image, and there are thus many other factors and reasons to get the S, but the question would be if that really is sustainable long-term. Especially when one adds the overall cost of the system to the equation. This is a harsh market and business environment. While the S made a lot of sense when it was introduced and up to say 2 years ago, things have moved on since. That is not to say the S is not an excellent product in its own right. But looking at it from the perspective of someone who has invested heavily in M and R systems, only to find out that the R users have been left in the cold by Leica at some point, it makes me wonder whether it is really worthwile and, above all, "safe" to buy into yet another very expensive system if the risk exists that it is losing traction on the marketplace long-term given the developments I described above.

(on another personal note: at the same time, as I have invested heavily in Rolleiflex 6000 and Hy6 systems, one should wonder if it is "worthwhile" to add the S to that mix)

Looking forward to some further thoughts.

[Advertisement]

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

[zeleny]

Thanks to all who contributed to this topic. Let me be a bit more specific. Of course the current Leica S series is offering excellent quality at 37.5 mio pixels etc. But as it is presented as a competitor against medium-format systems, it would have to be put up against offerings by PhaseOne / Leaf and Hasselblad. At the same time, it is proposed as a high-end SLR sort of competitor. But with the arrival of the latest Canon 5Ds and 5Dr the heat seems to be on from that side too. In a nutshell: the S seems sort of pressed between two competing offers and the question is whether it offers enough compelling reasons, long-term, to hold out and stand on its own, or whether it will simply be pushed out from the marketplace by the combined forces of high-end SLRs and top-end medium format players. The megapixel race is already lost in any case with top-end medium format at 80 mio pixels. Admittedly, a camera system is the sum of all elements that contribute to the final image, and there are thus many other factors and reasons to get the S, but the question would be if that really is sustainable long-term. Especially when one adds the overall cost of the system to the equation. This is a harsh market and business environment. While the S made a lot of sense when it was introduced and up to say 2 years ago, things have moved on since. That is not to say the S is not an excellent product in its own right. But looking at it from the perspective of someone who has invested heavily in M and R systems, only to find out that the R users have been left in the cold by Leica at some point, it makes me wonder whether it is really worthwile and, above all, "safe" to buy into yet another very expensive system if the risk exists that it is losing traction on the marketplace long-term given the developments I described above.

(on another personal note: at the same time, as I have invested heavily in Rolleiflex 6000 and Hy6 systems, one should wonder if it is "worthwhile" to add the S to that mix)

Looking forward to some further thoughts.

I bought my S2-P nearly five years ago, as my first “serious” camera of this century, about a decade after divesting from the M series in the mid-Nineties. My primary use is for product photography with Broncolor strobes; however I wanted an integrated, unit construction DSLR that functioned similar to my old Nikon F2AS for occasion amateur use in the great outdoors. I amortized the camera body and four Leica lenses in less than two years. At this time, I am contemplating an upgrade to a Type 007. I also expect to get into the SL as soon as Leica releases adapters for the S lenses. I couldn’t be happier with the quality of the glass, autofocus glitches notwithstanding. On the other hand, I fully expect the camera bodies to be subject to “digital rot”. Renewing them periodically is a cost of doing business.

 

I have no need for more pixels at this time in my current applications. My main concern is to broaden the ISO range, boost the data throughput, and acquire the capacity for occasional 4K video making. I have been making videos with a modular and indefinitely upgradeable RED DSMC system with Canon lenses, but with my work biased 9:1 in favor of still photography, it makes no sense to maintain a dedicated video system subject to very different output standards. Neither am I tempted to go with the Canon 5DS, inferior to my S system in optics and file quality. The fact that Leica has fulfilled its promise to provide a home for R lenses by introducing the SL, which also is meant to accommodate its excellent optics in the M and PL mounts, instills me with confidence in the survival of its professional camera ranges. The Q and T series, not so much.

Edited November 11, 2015 by zeleny

[tom0511]

Thanks to all who contributed to this topic. Let me be a bit more specific. Of course the current Leica S series is offering excellent quality at 37.5 mio pixels etc. But as it is presented as a competitor against medium-format systems, it would have to be put up against offerings by PhaseOne / Leaf and Hasselblad. At the same time, it is proposed as a high-end SLR sort of competitor. But with the arrival of the latest Canon 5Ds and 5Dr the heat seems to be on from that side too. In a nutshell: the S seems sort of pressed between two competing offers and the question is whether it offers enough compelling reasons, long-term, to hold out and stand on its own, or whether it will simply be pushed out from the marketplace by the combined forces of high-end SLRs and top-end medium format players. The megapixel race is already lost in any case with top-end medium format at 80 mio pixels. Admittedly, a camera system is the sum of all elements that contribute to the final image, and there are thus many other factors and reasons to get the S, but the question would be if that really is sustainable long-term. Especially when one adds the overall cost of the system to the equation. This is a harsh market and business environment. While the S made a lot of sense when it was introduced and up to say 2 years ago, things have moved on since. That is not to say the S is not an excellent product in its own right. But looking at it from the perspective of someone who has invested heavily in M and R systems, only to find out that the R users have been left in the cold by Leica at some point, it makes me wonder whether it is really worthwile and, above all, "safe" to buy into yet another very expensive system if the risk exists that it is losing traction on the marketplace long-term given the developments I described above.

(on another personal note: at the same time, as I have invested heavily in Rolleiflex 6000 and Hy6 systems, one should wonder if it is "worthwhile" to add the S to that mix)

Looking forward to some further thoughts.

 

You could see the S as a camera not being as fast as a D810 and not as high resolution as Medium format backs.

But you could also see it as a camera-system to be nearly as good IQ as medium format backs but being nearly as flexible as a DSLR. (Thats how I see it).

Also the lens quality is impressive, plus you have AF and weather sealing (compared to using Zeiss lenses on a Nikon or Canon).

I had a Hy6 with Sinarback some years ago and really liked it, but when I switched to the S system I started to use it much more often than I would use the Hy6.

Myself I am struggeling if I should upgrade from my S006 to S007 to expand the flexibility even further. (Amateur use only)

Best, Tom

[RVB]

You could see the S as a camera not being as fast as a D810 and not as high resolution as Medium format backs.

But you could also see it as a camera-system to be nearly as good IQ as medium format backs but being nearly as flexible as a DSLR. (Thats how I see it).

Also the lens quality is impressive, plus you have AF and weather sealing (compared to using Zeiss lenses on a Nikon or Canon).

I had a Hy6 with Sinarback some years ago and really liked it, but when I switched to the S system I started to use it much more often than I would use the Hy6.

Myself I am struggeling if I should upgrade from my S006 to S007 to expand the flexibility even further. (Amateur use only)

Best, Tom

 

Tom ,I upgraded to the 007,live view is a game changer and high ISO is a huge bonus as is the 3.5fps,its operationally quite different but I think it would take just a few days to adjust,I'm really happy with it.

 

A friend has an IQ280 back and we've done many comparison's (Using my 006) ,there is little difference in IQ (IQ280 just about edges it in fine detail due to smaller pixel),S glass is better in both our opinions and Im sure when Leica moves to sub 5 or even 4 micron pixels we'll see another jump in S IQ.

 

Rob

Edited November 12, 2015 by RVB

[Jon Warwick]

A friend has an IQ280 back and we've done many comparison's (Using my 006) ,there is little difference in IQ (IQ280 just about edges it in fine detail due to smaller pixel),S glass is better in both our opinions and Im sure when Leica moves to sub 5 or even 4 micron pixels we'll see another jump in S IQ.

 

Thanks for posting this comment, it's very helpful for me - I've been angling towards an S given it was built from the ground up for its particular lenses and sensor combo, and when I look at test prints cropped from massive 60x40" images I am so amazed that it comes from "just" a 38mp camera (versus what I get from my small format M240) that I was questioning by just how much an even bigger sensor and higher MP might behave. I can see (ONLY when nosing) these large S prints that extra detail is potentially possible at the margin, presumably from something like a P1 80MP back, but the S's pixel level acuity from the 6 micron size and flawless lenses seem to allow the S to punch very far above its headline megapixel weight. The S's image quality (which I mean to be more than just resolution alone) in very large prints look absolutely beautiful.

[RVB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for posting this comment, it's very helpful for me - I've been angling towards an S given it was built from the ground up for its particular lenses and sensor combo, and when I look at test prints cropped from massive 60x40" images I am so amazed that it comes from "just" a 38mp camera (versus what I get from my small format M240) that I was questioning by just how much an even bigger sensor and higher MP might behave. I can see (ONLY when nosing) these large S prints that extra detail is potentially possible at the margin, presumably from something like a P1 80MP back, but the S's pixel level acuity from the 6 micron size and flawless lenses seem to allow the S to punch very far above its headline megapixel weight. The S's image quality (which I mean to be more than just resolution alone) in very large prints look absolutely beautiful.

I've done some fairly large 36x24 prints and they look excellent,better than my D810 for sure and you can stitch if you need more MP,I think Leica will eventually release a TS lens too.

 

Another point worth bearing in mind is that the IQ380 is a hell of a lot more expensive and the latest Phase blue ring glass is pretty much the same price as the S glass.

 

I also used a Hasselblad for a few years,its was pretty good but S glass is superior without a doubt.

 

One last point is that i used image print with a latest model epson and the prints were stunning.

 

Rob

Edited November 12, 2015 by RVB

[DucatiTerminator]

I've done some fairly large 36x24 prints and they look excellent,better than my D810 for sure and you can stitch if you need more MP,I think Leica will eventually release a TS lens too.

 

Another point worth bearing in mind is that the IQ380 is a hell of a lot more expensive and the latest Phase blue ring glass is pretty much the same price as the S glass.

 

I also used a Hasselblad for a few years,its was pretty good but S glass is superior without a doubt.

 

One last point is that i used image print with a latest model epson and the prints were stunning.

 

Rob

Would this not work?

http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-S/Leica-S-Lenses/TS-APO-Elmar-S-120MM-f-5.6-ASPH

[zeleny]

Would this not work?

http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-S/Leica-S-Lenses/TS-APO-Elmar-S-120MM-f-5.6-ASPH

It sure does for me.

[John McMaster]

That is a short telephoto made by Schneider, a wide angle is required for many purposes

 

john

[RVB]

Would this not work?

http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-S/Leica-S-Lenses/TS-APO-Elmar-S-120MM-f-5.6-ASPH

Yes,I had that lens and returned it,it didn't really give me that same IQ as Leica glass,its a Schneider,but when i spoke of a Leica TS i was really referring to a wide angle,they did show one at the launch of the S system a few years ago.

Edited November 13, 2015 by RVB

[RVB]

The lens I was referring to is seen here on the far right.

 

[DucatiTerminator]

Thank you for the clarification. Am I correct in guessing that all of but two of the lenses pictured above ^^^ have made it to the S lens lineup? I don't think that I would ever need a TS lens for what I do (though I admit to wanting to learn how to use a tech cam//MFDB w/movements), however, that 350mm (?) looks mighty tasty.

[RVB]

Thank you for the clarification. Am I correct in guessing that all of but two of the lenses pictured above ^^^ have made it to the S lens lineup? I don't think that I would ever need a TS lens for what I do (though I admit to wanting to learn how to use a tech cam//MFDB w/movements), however, that 350mm (?) looks mighty tasty.

Everything except the TS & 350mm are available now,rumours say the 350mm was shelved because of the projected cost,it would have been well over €10k,but considering the Zoom is already close to that price I think it would have still sold.

 

I would buy a TS 30mm as soon as they brought one to the market,they are a lot of fun and excellent for architecture,the control over image perspective is really fantastic.

[darylgo]

Something to consider in your medium format decision is the sensor size, Leica choose the 30x45 as the ideal sensor.  Iirc it allowed greater depth of field for times when needed while providing selective focus with rather slow (by 35mm standards) lenses.  Smaller sensor size then allowed the S lenses to be stellar performers, not an easy task as Hasselblad and Phase have been catching up for many years and have the disadvantage of larger sensor coverage.   

 

Re: 350mm lens.  When Zeiss introduced their Contax version it was in the $5k price range, more than double the price of any other lens in the system.  The rep said it was too expensive for the company to give him a sample for his store demos.   

Edited November 13, 2015 by darylgo

[DucatiTerminator]

Everything except the TS & 350mm are available now,rumours say the 350mm was shelved because of the projected cost,it would have been well over €10k,but considering the Zoom is already close to that price I think it would have still sold.

 

I would buy a TS 30mm as soon as they brought one to the market,they are a lot of fun and excellent for architecture,the control over image perspective is really fantastic.

For the sake of speculation, let's assume that there are approximately 10,000 S cameras sold to date. I wonder how many potential lens sales it would require for Leica to consider "unshelving" the 350? Kickstarter, anyone? LOL

Edited November 13, 2015 by DucatiTerminator

[Jon Warwick]

I would buy a TS 30mm as soon as they brought one to the market,they are a lot of fun and excellent for architecture,the control over image perspective is really fantastic.

Me too, a truly-Leica-made and wide TS would exceptionally useful on an S, given i take a lot of architecture images and want to avoid keystoning .......  I wonder why the Leica TS didn't (yet) ever reach market? 

Edited November 14, 2015 by Jon Warwick

[Manolo Laguillo]

The lens I was referring to is seen here on the far right.

 

Where did you get this picture from? I would kill for a 30mm (ok, it can be a 35mm instead) shift lens for the Leica S... 

[RVB]

Where did you get this picture from? I would kill for a 30mm (ok, it can be a 35mm instead) shift lens for the Leica S... 

With the TS lens you can shift stitch for a wider shot so even a 35mm would be fine and would produce a much wider shot,not sure what the exact figure would be but around 24mm.

 

Shot was a Leica promo shot for the release of the S and I got it from slasher.com.

 

I still believe we will get the TS at some stage.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[RVB]

Where did you get this picture from? I would kill for a 30mm (ok, it can be a 35mm instead) shift lens for the Leica S... 

 

Just read this "The Panorama Shift Adapter allows you to create seamless 3:1 aspect ratio panoramas. Effective angle of view is 120 degrees (using a 35mm focal length medium format lens)—equivalent to a 17mm wide-angle, but without the geometric distortion."  on Zork's site http://www.zoerk.com/pages/p_psa.htm ,it seems they say a 35mm medium format lens can produce a stitched image equivalent to a 17mm lens using their TS adaptor.