To S or not to S

[asiafish]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been a serious amateur for a number of years and mostly shoot travel, portraits, a few events (weddings and meetings) and some casual walk-around.  For travel and portraits I usually print 11X17" books and occasionally will print large (20X30"), but more often I stay below 16"X20".  Currently I shoot with both APS-C (Leica X 113) and 35mm (Leica M-E and M Monochrom and a Canon 6D), and love the CCD look on the M9 and original M Monochrom.

 

Last week I was at the San Francisco Leica Store and played with the new SL, but I also played with the S 007, and previously tried out the S 006 and had forgotten how much I loved the view through that massive viewfinder and the smoothness of those incredible medium format CCD files.  Needless to say, I'm considering an S006 and 70mm Summarit that I would use primarily for portraits, but also for light travel.

 

For foreign tourism/travel nothing beats an M for me, but I also travel twice yearly to Seoul, Korea where my wife's family lives, and in those trips I usually don't walk too far, and of course would have my M or X for when out exploring, and the S more as an upgrade of my Canon 6D.

 

So the question I keep asking myself is just how much I would gain with an S 006 and 70mm Summarit compared to something like a Zeiss Otus 55mm and the new Canon 5Ds.

 

Any thoughts?

[Advertisement]

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

[RVB]

I've been a serious amateur for a number of years and mostly shoot travel, portraits, a few events (weddings and meetings) and some casual walk-around.  For travel and portraits I usually print 11X17" books and occasionally will print large (20X30"), but more often I stay below 16"X20".  Currently I shoot with both APS-C (Leica X 113) and 35mm (Leica M-E and M Monochrom and a Canon 6D), and love the CCD look on the M9 and original M Monochrom.

 

Last week I was at the San Francisco Leica Store and played with the new SL, but I also played with the S 007, and previously tried out the S 006 and had forgotten how much I loved the view through that massive viewfinder and the smoothness of those incredible medium format CCD files.  Needless to say, I'm considering an S006 and 70mm Summarit that I would use primarily for portraits, but also for light travel.

 

For foreign tourism/travel nothing beats an M for me, but I also travel twice yearly to Seoul, Korea where my wife's family lives, and in those trips I usually don't walk too far, and of course would have my M or X for when out exploring, and the S more as an upgrade of my Canon 6D.

 

So the question I keep asking myself is just how much I would gain with an S 006 and 70mm Summarit compared to something like a Zeiss Otus 55mm and the new Canon 5Ds.

 

Any thoughts?

 

The Summarit 70mm has autofocus and optional leaf shutters which are a big asset for working with flash,you also get the fabulous viewfinder and of course the big sensor and the lovely files it produces as well as better DR than the Canon.I would also take a good look at the Summicrom 100mm for portraits.

 

S006 bodies can be bought at good prices now and the S70 isn't much more expensive than an Otus.

 

As far as IQ is concerned I also prefer the S skin tones to the Canon(or Nikon).

 

Rob

[Printmaker]

Like you, I mostly shoot with a M9 and a Monochrom but I also have a S2/70 that I use in situations where I would have used a 4x5 or 8x10 view/technical camera. The files from the S2 (or S) are wonderful. The IQ is much better than what I get from the smaller Leicas.

 

But weight is a factor — at least for me. If I know that I'm just going to walk a short distance, then it is no big deal. But add a tripod and a few odds and ends and it becomes a burden on a hike. Yes the S(2)/70 weighs less than my old Linhof but I stopped dragging that beast around when I hit 50. You'll have to make that decision yourself. Bakersfield is hot and if you shoot in Death Valley...

 

The other factor is the cost of the lenses. I'd really like to add a 120 and a 35 but that's another $15k. (Or $9k used). That is a lot of cash. Add those to the price of a S/70 and you could have bought a baby Benz or 3 series. Of course that might not be a consideration for you but having just retired, I need to justify this type of purchase as it would no longer be a business deduction. Still there probably is a used 120 mm in my near future.

 

As for Canon 5Ds/Zeiss, I can not say for sure as I have not shot the new Canon. But size and weight will be close enough to no longer be a factor. I suspect the S would out perform the Canon in terms of IQ. Bigger sensor equals better tonality. But I suspect we're splitting hairs. I've never been a fan of Canon's color signature. The flesh tones look orange/peach to me. But like I said, I have not used the new 5Ds or any 5D for that matter. So the color may have changed since I tried out a 1D Mark something or other about 7 years ago. They sure seem popular with wedding photographers.

 

I'd say that if you have a lot of L glass, then a Canon 5Ds would be your best bet. Otherwise the S/70 will kick some serious butt.

[alan.y]

Now the S70 used frequently goes for under USD 2500, less than the Otus 55 used.

[SaW]

If you love M9 files you will adore S files.

The S system gives tremendous output (clarity, silky smoothness, drawing, absence of optical quircks) that cannot be matched by DSLR's.

1 month ago I had the occasion to test run all sorts of lenses with a Nikon D810 (Otus, Milvus, Sigma Art, etc). All impressive lenses.

Some are coming close or matching the S lens quality (Otus) but price, size and weight are approaching the S lenses too, and have no AF. No secret here.

However as a Leica S2 user I've found the Nikon final files output disappointing, even used with the best lenses. Be it the camera profile, curve, contrast, I don't know but my 8 years experience in Lightroom couldn't help. Leica S files are in another league.

A friend of mine used to say that even if a 4 cylinders engine car has the same performance that a V8, you won't have the same experience driving the V8...

 

I wish I could save money buying a D810 and some good lenses but the file rendering is not for me, I've ended up buying into the new S007.

[Herr Barnack]

Somewhere there is a youtube video of Joel Meyerowitz where he talks about the S and print quality. 

 

He tells the story of making a six foot long print using the S and a six foot long print of the same scene using and 8x10 view camera.  He was going to use the S for a book project but the publisher's people objected, wanting him to use an 8x10 camera.  He showed the two prints to the people at the publisher who had objected; they could not tell which print was from which camera.  

 

I shoot with an M-P 240 and have always felt that the "small" (compared to the S) sensor in it produces print quality that surpasses 120 film with ease and approaches that of 4x5 film at what I think of as medium image size (11"x16.5" printed area).  I'm sure that the M-P will retain that print quality at larger sizes; I have yet to make a series of test prints to determine how large, though. 

 

If your goal is staggering print quality at huge print sizes, the S will certainly deliver.

[magosak]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Now the S70 used frequently goes for under USD 2500, less than the Otus 55 used.

 

I jumped on a similar S70 deal recently and have been looking for a 006 since then. There was a time when 006 was heavily discounted but those deals are nowhere to be found now and the second hand prices are also quite high. I might just sell the S70 and get a M-P (240) instead. 

[Guest chipcarterdc]

There are some insanely good deals on used 006s still to be had:

 

http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/used-s-cameras/products/used-leica-s-typ-006-extra-battery-2

 

Which is the same or less than a used M-P 240: http://leicastoremiami.com/collections/used-m-cameras

 

The price of the 006 on the used market has dropped so significantly that I've kept mine as a backup for the 007....

[asiafish]

Like you, I mostly shoot with a M9 and a Monochrom but I also have a S2/70 that I use in situations where I would have used a 4x5 or 8x10 view/technical camera. The files from the S2 (or S) are wonderful. The IQ is much better than what I get from the smaller Leicas.

 

But weight is a factor — at least for me. If I know that I'm just going to walk a short distance, then it is no big deal. But add a tripod and a few odds and ends and it becomes a burden on a hike. Yes the S(2)/70 weighs less than my old Linhof but I stopped dragging that beast around when I hit 50. You'll have to make that decision yourself. Bakersfield is hot and if you shoot in Death Valley...

 

The other factor is the cost of the lenses. I'd really like to add a 120 and a 35 but that's another $15k. (Or $9k used). That is a lot of cash. Add those to the price of a S/70 and you could have bought a baby Benz or 3 series. Of course that might not be a consideration for you but having just retired, I need to justify this type of purchase as it would no longer be a business deduction. Still there probably is a used 120 mm in my near future.

 

As for Canon 5Ds/Zeiss, I can not say for sure as I have not shot the new Canon. But size and weight will be close enough to no longer be a factor. I suspect the S would out perform the Canon in terms of IQ. Bigger sensor equals better tonality. But I suspect we're splitting hairs. I've never been a fan of Canon's color signature. The flesh tones look orange/peach to me. But like I said, I have not used the new 5Ds or any 5D for that matter. So the color may have changed since I tried out a 1D Mark something or other about 7 years ago. They sure seem popular with wedding photographers.

 

I'd say that if you have a lot of L glass, then a Canon 5Ds would be your best bet. Otherwise the S/70 will kick some serious butt.

I don't have a lot of L glass.  Currently I use the 6D and a Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon and Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar.  I love the 35mm, the 50mm is just okay, soft wide-open and still at f/4 in the corners, but lovely bokeh.

 

An S006 with the 70mm would not be to make money, this is strictly a hobby for me. 

[asiafish]

Somewhere there is a youtube video of Joel Meyerowitz where he talks about the S and print quality. 

 

He tells the story of making a six foot long print using the S and a six foot long print of the same scene using and 8x10 view camera.  He was going to use the S for a book project but the publisher's people objected, wanting him to use an 8x10 camera.  He showed the two prints to the people at the publisher who had objected; they could not tell which print was from which camera.  

 

I shoot with an M-P 240 and have always felt that the "small" (compared to the S) sensor in it produces print quality that surpasses 120 film with ease and approaches that of 4x5 film at what I think of as medium image size (11"x16.5" printed area).  I'm sure that the M-P will retain that print quality at larger sizes; I have yet to make a series of test prints to determine how large, though. 

 

If your goal is staggering print quality at huge print sizes, the S will certainly deliver.

I never print larger than 20X30", for me its more about tonality, smoothness and that secret sauce that just makes some images look magical. 

 

I had a loaner M240 for a few months while my M-E was getting a sensor replacement and while the resolution was clearly a cut above as was dynamic range, it was missing that secret sauce that most likely is my lack of PP skills and the DNG files from the CCD being closer out of camera to my desired end point in print than to anything technical.

[A miller]

im sure youll get a lot of what you (emotionally) want to hear posting this in the "S" forum.

I will go against the grain of this S lovefest and recommend that you get a nice MF like an Alpa with a sublime a Rodenstock lens kit.

There really is nothing like large film.

 

I am sorry but i have not been impressed by the QPR that the S delivers based on the samples i have seen on this forum, particularly with landscapes (the portraits that i have seen have OTOH been quite nice, but sounds like you enjoy other types of photography)

 

The look of real film will never become obsolete and will only distinguish your images further from all the rest (every film stock is like a different sensor); whereas the S will only be current for, say, the next 3-5 yrs.

 

I dont own an Alpa camera kit but they are widely regarded as the holy grail of medium format compact travel cameras (which can use a 6x9 film back). I do though have a Hasselblad Superwide (SWC/M) which is very compact and easy to travel with. I also have a Linhof Technika Press which is mighty heavy but well worth the schlep around NYC where i live.

 

You already have so much very capable digital gear, why not mix it up a little?

 

 

PS: with all due respect to Joel Meyerowitz, let's remember that he is a paid spokesman for Leica...

[asiafish]

im sure youll get a lot of what you (emotionally) want to hear posting this in the "S" forum.

I will go against the grain of this S lovefest and recommend that you get a nice MF like an Alpa with a sublime a Rodenstock lens kit.

There really is nothing like large film.

 

I am sorry but i have not been impressed by the QPR that the S delivers based on the samples i have seen on this forum, particularly with landscapes (the portraits that i have seen have OTOH been quite nice, but sounds like you enjoy other types of photography)

 

The look of real film will never become obsolete and will only distinguish your images further from all the rest (every film stock is like a different sensor); whereas the S will only be current for, say, the next 3-5 yrs.

 

I dont own an Alpa camera kit but they are widely regarded as the holy grail of medium format compact travel cameras (which can use a 6x9 film back). I do though have a Hasselblad Superwide (SWC/M) which is very compact and easy to travel with. I also have a Linhof Technika Press which is mighty heavy but well worth the schlep around NYC where i live.

 

You already have so much very capable digital gear, why not mix it up a little?

 

 

PS: with all due respect to Joel Meyerowitz, let's remember that he is a paid spokesman for Leica...

 

Thanks for the suggestion.  I still shoot film, both Leica (M5) and Canon (EOS 650) using the same lenses that I use for digital.  I remember shooting medium format back in the 80s and had a Yashicamat 124G (a cheap TLR) and later a beat-up Hasselblad 500c.

 

Yes, there is magic in film and the idea of buying an MF film setup has crossed my mind, especially now that the Zeiss lenses I used to dream about are actually within reach.  I haven't ever seen an Alpa.  Worth looking into given the much lower cost of used film gear, and especially as MF is more likely (for me) to use for serious projects rather than casual photography.

[Manolo Laguillo]

I am sorry but i have not been impressed by the QPR that the S delivers based on the samples i have seen on this forum, particularly with landscapes (the portraits that i have seen have OTOH been quite nice, but sounds like you enjoy other types of photography)

 

The look of real film will never become obsolete and will only distinguish your images further from all the rest (every film stock is like a different sensor); whereas the S will only be current for, say, the next 3-5 yrs.

 

With all due respect, I can't agree with that opinion of yours: the S delivers a very very high quality, quite comparable to the one a 8x10 film can offer.

I'm saying this because I have one S(006) camera, and I have printed 2 meters wide, with a fantastic quality.

 

I'm 62 now, and don't want to work with film anymore. I need the quick processing only a digital camera is able to offer. The S is small enough, I work with it as I always did with a view camera: slowly and deliberately. In this I don't want to be quick... :-) With the S I carry much less then I used to in those 4x5/8x10 films decades... (I've worked with those formats doing cityscape and landscape for aprox 25 years)

 

I am thrilled with the S because it gives me what I wanted before I came to use it for the first time. In other words: I knew already what photography is capable of when I used the S for that very first time.

 

Even if Meyerowitz would be a "paid Leica spokesman", which I doubt, something he can't do is expressing a lie... And I don't need him telling me about the quality a S can deliver: that is something I can judge by myself.

 

Don't try the S, A miller, you will regret it... :-) :-)

[A miller]

Fair enough, Manolo. All the power to you and everyone else for getting so mich enjoyment out of your S. I am only speaking in the most honest way possible about how i feel. I will say, though, that one's appetite for using film depends a lot on how efficient the development and scanning/printing workflow can be achieved. If the workflow is not there, i can understand how one can get very quickly disenfranchised.

 

Horses for courses.

 

For me, i have sold all my digital Ms and now only shoot with film. With all of the (relative) conveniences and shortcuts that digital offers, the only way FOR ME to move forward with my enjoyment in photography is to go backwards - to the bare bone fundamentals. Mastery of this is, to me, part of the art being created. It is more work, but then again Adam did eat that damn apple.

 

Asiafish: i am afriad that you might get some serious sticker-shock when you look up the Alpa, so you might want to sit down when you look it up .

[Manolo Laguillo]

You are right, A miller, what incredible cameras the Alpas are... I understand you vey well!

 

Yesterday I was looking at that well known photo Paul Strand did make in the 20's of a movie camera's interior: he did it, I would bet, because he was fascinated by the beautiful precision of that instrument, by those shining and polished surfaces, because of the physicality in itself. That's part of our craft, no doubt.

[ocean2059]

I am also an amateur and have been using S2 for over almost two years.  This past summer, I also took the S2 with 25/70/120 lenses for a three-week trip in western China (silk road).  And I really enjoy using the system!  In addition to the beautiful color from the CCD sensor, the looks of all the files are very special, different than images from 35mm full frame sensor.  On the same trip, I also bring a Sony A7/r with 35mm f2.8 Zeiss lens as a point-and-shoot back-up. While the images from Sony sensor are good, but there is just not comparison to the S2.  Here are few images:  https://www.flickr.com/photos/97024932@N08/albums/72157661404880339

 

I also have a Nikon D810 system with some Zeiss ZF lenses, 25/2, Otus 55/1.4 and 135/2 APO.  The Otus is truly a fantastic lens in every way and from a technical perspective, it's perfect lens.  But I much prefer the files from Leica S2 that those from Nikon.  I always feel, it's often difficult to compare a single image or few images to determine which system is better.  But when I look my images as a batch or a group, S2 images are just special and their colors are just so much better than those from Nikon and Sony.  But S2 and S 006 are limited to low ISO (640 - 800).  In in door and low light situation, I will prefer to use D810 with Otus 55.   

[holyhikaru]

I have Sony A7rII+ Zeiss Otus 55/85mm  and Leica S 007+100mmf2.

 

For image quality, I don't notice much different between photos from both camera. The bokeh quality, to my eye, seem to be quite on par.

 

The weight of Leica S really cause me trouble sometime especially in the first week I had it.

 

The file size of Leica S is larger than Sony's. Eventhough the harddisk is not the problem, I find it is very slow to import the photos into CaptureOne or Lightroom.

 

Having said that, I still prefer the color I got from Leica S.

[asiafish]

Fair enough, Manolo. All the power to you and everyone else for getting so mich enjoyment out of your S. I am only speaking in the most honest way possible about how i feel. I will say, though, that one's appetite for using film depends a lot on how efficient the development and scanning/printing workflow can be achieved. If the workflow is not there, i can understand how one can get very quickly disenfranchised.

 

Horses for courses.

 

For me, i have sold all my digital Ms and now only shoot with film. With all of the (relative) conveniences and shortcuts that digital offers, the only way FOR ME to move forward with my enjoyment in photography is to go backwards - to the bare bone fundamentals. Mastery of this is, to me, part of the art being created. It is more work, but then again Adam did eat that damn apple.

 

Asiafish: i am afriad that you might get some serious sticker-shock when you look up the Alpa, so you might want to sit down when you look it up .

 

Just looked, and wow, those are some pricey toys, and clearly not what I'm looking for in terms of workflow (separate viewfinders or ground glass).  I shoot almost everything hand held, and with the S I would expect no shake issues so long as I can keep my shutter speed at 1/250th or higher with the 70mm or 100mm lens.  In daylight this shouldn't be a problem as most of what I want a larger format for will be shot at or near wide-open, not likely to stop down much past f/5.6, which at ISO 100 will usually give me 1/500th or 1/1000th, and wide open at ISO 800 (highest I would likely push a CCD S) I could likely still keep at 1/125th or higher even in very overcast conditions at f/2.5.

 

Indoors or evening I'll likely reach for a different tool, like my Canon 6D with an f/1.4 lens or my M Monochrom with an f/2.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[asiafish]

Another question for the S users here.  I know the benefits when printing large and of course the depth of field differences, but are the tonality improvements (compared to full-frame 35mm format) readily visible in smaller print sizes such as 11X14"?  By far the majority of my work ends up printed at that size or slightly smaller and bound in photo books that I give to family.  Will the difference be obvious with high-quality printing?

Also, compared to a 35mm full-frame DSLR, how well do you find the S handles for handheld use?  I don't use tripods much, but with the ISO 800 nice and clean I don't foresee any problems keeping shutter speeds at 1/250th or higher.  Is the S responsive in casual use?  Weight with the 70mm is about the same as a Canon 5Ds with a 55mm Otus, and of course the S has autofocus which the Otus does not.  Is the autofocus quick?  

 

At this level of pricing and the amount of weight, I really want to make sure I will see a benefit in my usual print sizes and that said benefit is worth the bulk compared to full-frame 35.

Maybe I'm trying to talk myself out of it, but I can't get the thought of shooting the S out of my head.

[Manolo Laguillo]

Another question for the S users here.  I know the benefits when printing large and of course the depth of field differences, but are the tonality improvements (compared to full-frame 35mm format) readily visible in smaller print sizes such as 11X14"?  By far the majority of my work ends up printed at that size or slightly smaller and bound in photo books that I give to family.  Will the difference be obvious with high-quality printing?

 

Also, compared to a 35mm full-frame DSLR, how well do you find the S handles for handheld use?  I don't use tripods much, but with the ISO 800 nice and clean I don't foresee any problems keeping shutter speeds at 1/250th or higher.  Is the S responsive in casual use?  Weight with the 70mm is about the same as a Canon 5Ds with a 55mm Otus, and of course the S has autofocus which the Otus does not.  Is the autofocus quick?  

 

At this level of pricing and the amount of weight, I really want to make sure I will see a benefit in my usual print sizes and that said benefit is worth the bulk compared to full-frame 35.

 

Maybe I'm trying to talk myself out of it, but I can't get the thought of shooting the S out of my head.

 

There is a difference, even at A3 size, between prints made from Leica M and Leica S dng's. The smaller the size, the subtler will be the difference, and the more knowledge will be necessary on the side of the viewer to sense and appreciate it. But this is how things are, in photography, music, literature, marketing

The 70mm + S body is not small, but the ergonomics are very high. The rig balance is fantastic.

The autofocus is quick, I would say...

 

There is a point you are not mentioning: the gorgeous experience of framing the picture with / through this incredible viewfinder.

This is IMO a decisive factor, as I have said 'ad nauseam' in other threads... :-)