To S or not to S

[jpk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Medium format even on facebook looks different to 35mm let alone APS-C. If you get used to the images out of an S you will know what I mean. The 70mm's AF speed feels similar to Nikons screw driver AF of say the AF-D 85 / 1.8 on a D700, but more accurate. Hope this helps!

[asiafish]

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... :-)

 

Yes, that viewfinder is what interested in the S to begin with.  Another workshop participant had one about two-years-ago and I tried it for a few minutes and quickly put it down when I learned the price.  I didn't think about the S again until a few weeks ago when I tried the new SL, and the salesman handed me the S to compare.

[asiafish]

Medium format even on facebook looks different to 35mm let alone APS-C. If you get used to the images out of an S you will know what I mean. The 70mm's AF speed feels similar to Nikons screw driver AF of say the AF-D 85 / 1.8 on a D700, but more accurate. Hope this helps!

 

I use a Canon 6D which should be similar in AF then.  The center point is fantastic and the outer points not so hot, so I use center only.  If the S with 70mm can be nearly as fast as the 6D with the Canon 85/1.8 (I haven't tried the Nikon) then its quite fast indeed.

[jpk]

Note I did not mean USM driven AF (AF-S in Nikon jargon) but the older so called screw driver AF with in body motor.

 

Even the noise of the S70mm's AF reminds me of Nikons screw driver AF - - or Minoltas for that matter, but is snappier than the latter.

[Jeff S]

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.

The best way to find out is to try one out....either rent* or talk to a dealer about a trial run (Leica Miami, for instance, has advertised in the past about their 'test drive' program), and other dealers might do so informally.  The cost would be small compared to a purchase commitment, and you might negotiate the rental cost into the purchase price if you buy.

 

Regardless of other opinions, you're the only one who can judge based on your shooting needs and style, workflow, and print judgment.

 

(*) For some reason, I didn't see an S listed at lens rentals...   http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/leica/cameras   You might give them a call.)

 

Jeff

[asiafish]

The best way to find out is to try one out....either rent* or talk to a dealer about a trial run (Leica Miami, for instance, has advertised in the past about their 'test drive' program), and other dealers might do so informally.  The cost would be small compared to a purchase commitment, and you might negotiate the rental cost into the purchase price if you buy.

 

Regardless of other opinions, you're the only one who can judge based on your shooting needs and style, workflow, and print judgment.

 

(*) For some reason, I didn't see an S listed at lens rentals...   http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/leica/cameras   You might give them a call.)

 

Jeff

Leica Store SF is pretty good about these things.  My plan next time I'm up there is to walk around the neighborhood for an hour or so, then if I enjoyed using it for the hour I'll likely be parted from my money and my near-new Leica M-E on the spot.

 

January 7 is the day, not too far now.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica Store SF is pretty good about these things.  My plan next time I'm up there is to walk around the neighborhood for an hour or so, then if I enjoyed using it for the hour I'll likely be parted from my money and my near-new Leica M-E on the spot.

 

January 7 is the day, not too far now.

You need to take it home for a while and make prints if you really want to answer your question(s) above.....but seems like you don't really need the answers.  

 

Jeff

[Deliberate1]

 

 

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... :-)

Amen and amen.

[asiafish]

You need to take it home for a while and make prints if you really want to answer your question(s) above.....but seems like you don't really need the answers.  

 

Jeff

 

I know that large prints will blow away anything I can do with 35mm, just not sure how noticeable it will be with smaller prints like 8X10 and 11X17.

[Jeff S]

 

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.

 

 

To repeat....only one way to know...

 

Jeff

[John McMaster]

You can tell the difference in a 1200 pixel wide JPEG between an S and an M image IME

 

john

[jip]

We can't answer it for you, but you have to ask yourself: why do I want a medium format camera. If you just want it because you simply just want it, I wouldn't buy it. But then again you want it

 

It's a great camera but it's not very versatile and you need fast shutter speeds or tripods to get the most out of it... And ISO on the S2 and S006 goes to maximum of 640-800. And by then you already lose the quality difference over small format SLR's so really do you want the S? And all its downsides?

[jpk]

...not exactly the quality, but the quantity, e.g. resoluton, DR etc.

[jip]

Also the dynamic range of the 006 is smaller than that of the Leica M240 in terms of exposure latitude, so don't expect it to be THAT great either.

 

Don't get me wrong I love the S006 but it's not that because you spent 10K on a body it suddenly is better than other cameras.

[hoppyman]

I think that your decision ought to be based on what is important to you, your priorities, the value for money etc etc. The cameras are just different animals with different strengths and weaknesses.

 

I worked primarily with the M system for some years and shot about 15000 frames or so with the (Typ 240) and since then a similar number with the S2. I tried a loan (Typ 006) for a few hundred frames, half outside and the rest in a studio workshop. I used my (Typ 240) and The Summilux M 50 ASPH in parallel with the (Typ 006) and Summarit M 70CS, trying to duplicate shots there in identical scenario.

Now I have the (Typ 007) and have shot about 2000 frames with that so far.

I can add my anecdotal impressions and opinions from the way I use the cameras. For the last couple of years nearly all of my photography has been beauty/fashion/art in studio. For travel of course the M system is a much better choice.The simple summary is that my whole M system is for sale and I use the S system almost exclusively now.

The comparison shooting  (006 & 240) was in art nude workshops, one in hard bright midday sun (yes you really can!) and into shade and in a professional studio environment with expert lighting setups.

 

In the hard sun, from the (Typ 006) I saw greater dynamic range, better AWB performance, more practical resolution, more 'natural' default colour rendering in DNG using Lightroom. In AF the single central point didn't bother me as I have long used the focus,recompose method with M cameras. Now that I have learnt to use the MF mode and only actuate AF from the rear joystick, I like the AF better. If the lens is for example focussed at infinity and then you point as a very close subject it does take noticeable time to drive that mass. You can really see that long travel with the APO Macro 120 which has a large range of course. If your starting point is near in the focus range then it is perfectly OK.

 

Manual focus with the accessory microprism/split image screen is flat out superior to every camera that I have ever used since the 70's, even to the precision of the (Typ 240)'s RF.

[albireo_double]

I travel with the S system, usually with just two lenses (e.g. 45/120) and it is big and heavy ...but sort of manageable. Where I find a big difference between S and M is people's response to me as a photographer. The S system requires a much stronger consent from the people I wish to photograph, whereas the M allows me to act the 'snap happy tourist with an old camera' to some extent and maybe catch an impromptu portrait here and there. So it's not just the IQ but also what sort of images you want to get - there are images that the S simply won't deliver and places where you'll stick out like a sore thumb when using the S. I know it's kind of obvious but in the end it often matters to me more than resolution and bokeh.

[asiafish]

Wow, a lot of great responses here, and a lot to think about.

 

I don't see as replacing my M system, but replacing my full-frame Canon DSLR system.  Right now I generally use the M for travel, my X for street and the Canon for more organized portrait work and macro.  I do take the Canon with me for my family trips to Korea, but I also take the M or X and use the Canon again only for organized family portrait work or occasionally for architecture.

 

I'm not even thinking about replacing the M or X for street and travel, but trying to decide between starting an S system and ditching the Canon, or adding better glass and perhaps a better body to my Canon system.  I recently bought (used at a great price) a Carl Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon ZE and am quite happy with it.  The new Milvus 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 would be a significant upgrade from the nifty-fifty and 85mm f/1.8 that I own now.

 

The problem is, I held the S, looked through the viewfinder, and have played with a few files.  I'm in love, even though I don't really need it as I don't sell my pictures.

[hoppyman]

 

SNIP.....................The problem is, I held the S, looked through the viewfinder, and have played with a few files.  I'm in love, even though I don't really need it as I don't sell my pictures.

If you can pay for it, just get it It's not about "need"    

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/247391-studio-beauty-portrait-s2/

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/248412-studio-fashion-with-the-s-system/

 

[asiafish]

If you can pay for it, just get it It's not about "need"    

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/247391-studio-beauty-portrait-s2/

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/248412-studio-fashion-with-the-s-system/

 

 

One new question that has come up after discussing the S 006.  Would an S2 give me essentially the same thing for what I would it for (portraits and static work)?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Printmaker]

... Where I find a big difference between S and M is people's response to me as a photographer. The S system requires a much stronger consent from the people I wish to photograph, whereas the M allows me to act the 'snap happy tourist with an old camera' to some extent and maybe catch an impromptu portrait here and there. So it's not just the IQ but also what sort of images you want to get - there are images that the S simply won't deliver and places where you'll stick out like a sore thumb when using the S. I know it's kind of obvious but in the end it often matters to me more than resolution and bokeh.

That is my experience as well. No one pays any attention to me when I'm shooting with my M9 or Monochrom. This is especially true when I'm just carrying just the camera. But everybody notices the S2. Enough so that I tend to leave it back at the studio unless I know I'm going to need it's IQ.

 

On a different note, whenever I use the S2 in a situation that requires a quick response and a fast frame rate, I'm always disappointed. This camera is slow. No big deal when working on a tripod or waiting for the studio flashes to recycle but it is an issue when you need to work fast. And the ISO limitation does become an issue occasionally. Of course the S 007 fixes these issues.

 

I'm not really complaining, I really like this camera. The IQ is amazing. And it does a wonderful job of replacing my 4x5 and 8x10 cameras. But if Leica comes out with a 36 MB M style camera, I may just sell it or trade it in.