To S or not to S

[ZHNL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Without intend of being impolite, I very much question the validity of a comment as to comparing a manual focus 35mm lens with the Leica S lenses, commenting how inferior the manual focus application of the S lenses is.

In my experience the Leica S lenses are second to none in terms of optical performance.

Sure there are wonder lenses with less functionality and fitting only other systems, incompatible with the Leica S but what exactly does this matter in comparing it with a Leica S ?

 

I do use among others a 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor on my D800E.

For this purpose (and some of the other fantastic manual focus classic Nikkor lenses) I have adapted a highly sensitive full matte focussing screen to the D800E which does improve manual focussing of lenses with such fast apertures a lot.

 

With that screen (the very best solution one can use to manually focus on a 35mm DSLR with very fast lenses I might add), I still have immense difficulty to nail focus at apertures faster than f1.4 with ANYTHING moving faster than at snail speed.

 

The Leica S finder in combination with Leica's manual focus screen is second to none in terms of precision and clarity. It compares favorable to the late Rolleiflex screen, to the latest Rollei (6000 series) screen in my super-charged Exakta 66, to the excellent latest Hasselblad V screen in my 203F or anything else I had the joy of peering through.

 

Manual focus with the Leica S is as good as it gets on a SLR!

No manual focus lens on a SLR will become as fast and responsive as a professional grade autofocus lens on an upper tier Canon or Nikon body … ever.

 

The Otus lenses may very well be a great achievement in optical design but in this comparison are very much meaningless, aren't they?

 

We could as well be comparing how much better the 50 Summicron APO a lens is as the Hasselblad 80mm f/2.8 HC on a H5D - it is as ridiculous a comparison as an Otus 55mm vs the 70/2.5 Summarit on a Leica S, No?

No worry, I am cool with your comment. but please see my reply here. 

 

Without intend of being impolite, I very much question the validity of a comment as to comparing a manual focus 35mm lens with the Leica S lenses, commenting how inferior the manual focus application of the S lenses is.

 

Because OP’s title is “to S or not to S”. It is not “only good info about S please.”  

Anybody spend such amount of cash will evaluate other options. And people with similar thought in their mind will benefit from such information from who has all the experience with those high end lenses.    

 

In my experience the Leica S lenses are second to none in terms of optical performance.

 

Well, I cover this already. They are not. They are very sharp lenses and have first class rendering as I pointed and part of it benefit from its larger and beautiful sensor but they are at least a stop slower, have more CA and less sharp cross frame at equivalent wide open aperture when compare high end 35mm system pix to pix.

 

Sure there are wonder lenses with less functionality and fitting only other systems, incompatible with the Leica S but what exactly does this matter in comparing it with a Leica S ?

 

Again, “to S or not to S”, if not to S, you can buy a set OUTS lens or 50APO Leica use on 50M canon, 36M Nikon and 42M sony. It is up to OP if he want go that routine. I am just laying down the info for discuss and think about.  

 

I do use among others a 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor on my D800E.

For this purpose (and some of the other fantastic manual focus classic Nikkor lenses) I have adapted a highly sensitive full matte focussing screen to the D800E which does improve manual focussing of lenses with such fast apertures a lot.

 

With that screen (the very best solution one can use to manually focus on a 35mm DSLR with very fast lenses I might add), I still have immense difficulty to nail focus at apertures faster than f1.4 with ANYTHING moving faster than at snail speed.

 

Well, I won’t say MF will be a good option for anybody and it requires a lot of skill and correct expectation for what you get. But I personally enjoy manual focus a lot and feel it is free up my composition due to the limitation of center AF or changing focus point on fly or let computer doing work for me. The biggest benefit is I get better keeper rate with fast glass WO than AF, the keeper rate here is not just infocus image but also the images with composition I like better.

 

 

OTUS are not the best lens for manual focusing experience I feel. It is too smooth to my like and focus throw a little to long from MFD to say 3M, the most important range to me. My favorite Manual focus lens are Leica R. they reach a very fine balance between focus feel and turning range. 

 

The Leica S finder in combination with Leica's manual focus screen is second to none in terms of precision and clarity. It compares favorable to the late Rolleiflex screen, to the latest Rollei (6000 series) screen in my super-charged Exakta 66, to the excellent latest Hasselblad V screen in my 203F or anything else I had the joy of peering through.

 

I used Hasselblad 500 with chest level VF. I don’t have experience with other MFormat camera. But I agree Leica S have nicer VF than any other manufacture right now.

 

Manual focus with the Leica S is as good as it gets on a SLR!

 

You are contradicting yourself here. “I very much question the validity of a comment as to comparing a manual focus 35mm lens with the Leica S lenses, commenting how inferior the manual focus application of the S lenses is.”

 

The VF is the best currently, but the lens design is not well thought I feel, especially given its not so great AF. For example 70 Summarit from MFD to infinity is only about 90 degree focus turn, this is horrible to do MF fast and accurately.

 

No manual focus lens on a SLR will become as fast and responsive as a professional grade autofocus lens on an upper tier Canon or Nikon body … ever.

 

I agree here. Depend what you do and what you need and what is your expectation. But I feel this is also a good info for OP to think about if that is he is after. What I can say here is Leica S and S2 is still in dinosaur age in AF. S007 is much improved here but still much worse than Canikon say D700 7 year ago.

 

The Otus lenses may very well be a great achievement in optical design but in this comparison are very much meaningless, aren't they?

 

Not at all, without known others requirement or preference in shooting, why it is meaningless. When you spend money on something at this caliber, it is naturally you want compare the strength and weakness of each system to draw a suitable conclusion.  

 

We could as well be comparing how much better the 50 Summicron APO a lens is as the Hasselblad 80mm f/2.8 HC on a H5D - it is as ridiculous a comparison as an Otus 55mm vs the 70/2.5 Summarit on a Leica S, No?

 

Well, I don’t know this is comparable situation. At least to me, with S/S2/007 37M 1.2X sensor and about canikon size and weight, any top tie 35mm System with OTUS or with good AF lenses should be a consideration if you are in the market to S or not to S.  

 

To me, I enjoy Leica's huge VF, beautiful sensor at low ISO, great set of lens share similar rendering and AF can be vital for many professional and handy for me and this is pretty much the only option you can use a set of awesome leica glass with AF.

 

A big selling point if not the biggest for many is CS lens for flash photography, though I personally haven't try that.   

[Advertisement]

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

[Likaleica]

Do it.

[mwilliamsphotography]

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?

 

 

While others can debate the physical merits of this camera verses that camera, all I can convey is an opinion based on a long term experience using MFD systems as they relate to 35mm DSLR and FF Mirrorless use, various applications of those kit, and the results from each.

 

My current gear consists of the S(006) and CS35, CS45, CS70, S100, CS120 and CS180 ... I usually take 2 or 3 of the lenses for any given application ... also use a M Monochrome with M lenses, and a Sony A7R/A7R-II with some adapted specialty lenses like a M21/1.4ASPH, ZA24-70 and a Sony AF 500 mirror used on the A7R-II with IBIS (for obvious reasons).  I recently sold my entire Sony A99 SLT kit for lack of use after building the S kit over many years. 

 

As I built my S System it gradually took over more and more applications ... which include weddings and events, corporate work, commercial studio & location, some travel, some fashion and a lot of portrait both in studio and on location.  The basis of this selective process were results that consistently pleased my aesthetic sensibilities compared to most anything else.

 

It is here that we get into vague areas of "look and feel" and personal tastes that can't be quantified, bullet pointed, or charted to provide the assurances people seek to intellectually or financially justify their selections.

 

I have used about everything made from everyone. Only a few kit has ever risen to the top of my personal aesthetic proclivities ... the S2P and now S(006) is one of those few. As such, "everything else, is everything less", no matter what the spec's, charts and pundants say. This is my work, not their's ... so I'll be the judge of what pleases my eye, or does not ... this in NOT some elitist or dismissive opinion, it is simply my artistic prerogative.

 

In short, I believe in selecting tools that fit my aesthetic intent, not adjust my intent to fit some tool that doesn't.

 

 

I have also found that despite having other cameras and subscribing to a "Horses For Courses" functional philosophy, I found ways to use the S where it would seem more prudent to use something else ... such is the power of results verses convenience. Where there is a will, there is a way. That said, there is no reason one can't keep a Canon 6D body and a zoom for that sort of "lite" work, and use a S with a few select lenses for wedding formals, portraits, anything to do with lighting or any studio applications.

 

- Marc 

[Likaleica]

My wife won't let me do erotic boudoir photography so I'm stuck with wildlife and landscape.    I'm still evolving but I think my SL is going to have the 280 apo with 1.4X permanently attached and I'll use the S for everything between 30 and 180mm.  Thinking about going back to the X-Vario for light travel.  

[alan.y]

Your wife won't let you do it of her or of anyone?

[Likaleica]

Was kidding.