State of S

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Great discussion. I own an S-E and too many lenses.  Sometimes I just need that extra stop or two. ISO 800 often doesn't cut it for me... ISO 1600 overexposed by 1 stop and then pulled back in LR doesn't cut it for me either.

 

Options: sell S-E and purge some M & R lenses to get a 007....

 

or keep S-E (since resale is low), purge some M & R lenses and just buy an SL.

 

First world dilemma, yes.  Thanks for comments.

 

I first exchanged S006 with S007 - and finally still couldnt resist to get an SL with the 24-90 Zoom.

My thoughts:

The S with S lenses has another IQ (tonality/color/transition in OOF-areas) which the SL can not touch.

 

On the other side the SL with the 24-90 offers a flexibility, the S can not reach.

Specially moving the AF-point around works great, also you can put long Tele on the SL, and when you ut an M lens on the SL it becomes a quite compact camera.

Face detction and dynamic AF can be usefull as well.

 

I still love the S and its lenses so much that I try to use the S as often as possible. The 45/70 and 100mm are the lenses which I use here 90% of the time.

If it was either or I would keep the S007 and some primes over the SL.

[ZHNL]

I have OTUS 55 and have used 85OTUS as well. in term of raw performance, I have to say no Leica Lens (S or M) approaching that performance at similar aperture. I haven't try 50 APO though. It(OTUS) is really a statement lens in term of speed at the same time with superb color correction. I wish it comes from Leica as a huge Leica fans.  

 

The clarity of OTUS at f1.4 is insane to the extreme corner of D810. Bokeh is fine and beautiful too. I wish I can use it on S006 sensor. 100 cron is good as a good candidate for its speed but still not as good as OTUS. CA can be seen else where, and SA still can be seen at portrait distance (may not be a bad thing) and it never be as sharp, at long distance, 100cron is sharp everywhere at wide open, but the definition of detail still not as good as 55 OTUS at f1.4.  (focus transition and rendering are beautiful, I have to say.)

 

I like S glass. they are great performers but not without peers IMO.  

[RVB]

Minority indeed, hehehe, I have both S and Otus, of course S and S lens combo is very good, but I ended up using the Sony A7R2 and Otus combo more....

 

Can't argue with preferences but I love the look of S glass ., I also look forward to seeing how S glass performs when Leica eventually use a sensor with pixel pitch of 4.5 like the A7R2!! I spoke to Ming Thein about this same comparison and he is a big fan of the Otus ( I almost like these lenses) but did concede that S glass was also very special!

[RVB]

I have OTUS 55 and have used 85OTUS as well. in term of raw performance, I have to say no Leica Lens (S or M) approaching that performance at similar aperture. I haven't try 50 APO though. It(OTUS) is really a statement lens in term of speed at the same time with superb color correction. I wish it comes from Leica as a huge Leica fans.  

 

The clarity of OTUS at f1.4 is insane to the extreme corner of D810. Bokeh is fine and beautiful too. I wish I can use it on S006 sensor. 100 cron is good as a good candidate for its speed but still not as good as OTUS. CA can be seen else where, and SA still can be seen at portrait distance (may not be a bad thing) and it never be as sharp, at long distance, 100cron is sharp everywhere at wide open, but the definition of detail still not as good as 55 OTUS at f1.4.  (focus transition and rendering are beautiful, I have to say.)

 

I like S glass. they are great performers but not without peers IMO.  

 

 

This might interest you ..  https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7/   .

[Photoskeptic]

Too bad LensRentals dropped the S. Their test of the 50mm focal lengths is quite interesting. I have the Otus and the 'Lux - no complaints. It would be interesting to see a test of the S lenses versus the SK's and Rodie's. I have compared MTF charts but they all use different criteria so it's a bit hopeless.

FYI, I shot an ALPA/CFV-50c/ 40 HR against my 810/Otus last year. It took a Hoodman loupe at one inch away from a 20" inch print to tell the difference in resolution in favor of the Rodenstock.

However, there was no comparison between the MF image and DSLR image - larger sensors and pixels really produce!

I have never shot any of the Leica's I have owned against a DSLR. There just never seemed to be a point to it.

[ZHNL]

This might interest you ..  https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7/   .

Saw that report, actually that report is the reason I postpone my OTUS purchase plan for almost a year as I am pretty happy with my Summilux M ASPH performance to be honest. (still think it is the best 50mm lens ever made overall consider how balance it perform after take all the trade off. ) 

 

Since I never used 50 APO, I will not make any comment about its performance. But having used so many top of line Leica M, R and S glass and almost all good Zeiss ZF and nikon glass. I feel OTUS has a step above all, there are many super lenses out there but it is one of few lenses that really WOW me at the time I view the image 100% at f1.4. It is not just sharpness, but everything, overall clarity, flare control, color response, bokeh etc... I only talk about f1.4 performance as I feel that is the area it really outperform other fast glasses I tried. 

 

I know 50APO is great lens, wish one day I can have it, it is 1/10 of size and weight,  at the same time, don't forget it is also 1 stop slower with less APO correction. 

 

At this caliber, there might be copy variation in OTUS is the only explanation I can make the sense out of Roger's test.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Saw that report, actually that report is the reason I postpone my OTUS purchase plan for almost a year as I am pretty happy with my Summilux M ASPH performance to be honest. (still think it is the best 50mm lens ever made overall consider how balance it perform after take all the trade off. ) 

 

Since I never used 50 APO, I will not make any comment about its performance. But having used so many top of line Leica M, R and S glass and almost all good Zeiss ZF and nikon glass. I feel OTUS has a step above all, there are many super lenses out there but it is one of few lenses that really WOW me at the time I view the image 100% at f1.4. It is not just sharpness, but everything, overall clarity, flare control, color response, bokeh etc... I only talk about f1.4 performance as I feel that is the area it really outperform other fast glasses I tried. 

 

I know 50APO is great lens, wish one day I can have it, it is 1/10 of size and weight,  at the same time, don't forget it is also 1 stop slower with less APO correction. 

 

At this caliber, there might be copy variation in OTUS is the only explanation I can make the sense out of Roger's test.

 

Interesting discussion ...

 

My take is that it is a personal choice ... do you want clinically perfect resolution or a less perfect lens that has a character that is emotive and evocative ....

 

I had both the 85 and 55 OTUS with a D 810 ... wonderful landscape combination ... with the Live View nailed all of my captures and indeed was a wonderful workflow.

 

Traded it all and returned to the less perfect S lenses with the S 006.

 

Perhaps a bit of personal reflection will help explain this ....

 

Perfect imaging is great if one is trying to duplicate a bible  or a work of art ... and it works well for medium to long distance landscapes ...

 

But for me it is a bit sterile ... like the perfect model who seems to lack a soul. Nothing that captures your emotions or desires.

 

For me the S lenses are somewhat like a flawed but captivating musical performance. Captures that inner sense of life and energy ... not just a window 

that is without flaw but oh so mundane.

 

So yes OTUS is max ... but without much soul.

 

Give me S any day. Tango versus the Virginia Reel ....

 

Bob

[mwilliamsphotography]

Good analysis Bob. 

 

It is not easy to put words to aesthetic preferences.

 

I would offer that using the term "flawed" may not be the best choice because it lends credence to the notion that the highest end objective is sterile rendering over a particular type of alternative or balanced rendering.

 

Aesthetics is a moving target that is defined by the user ... no one can dictate how one thinks and feels about anything despite attempts by marketing, or fanboys of any lens be it Leica, Zeiss, or any brand.

 

I think people gravitate to logical analysis just because it is so hard to define aesthetics in an artistic sense. Attempts to describe a "look and feel" are difficult and can't be charted and scientifically defined. 

 

The closest I've seen someone describe the S results in a single word was "Organic"... where all the aesthetic elements of imagery work in concert, and no one image aspect dominates, (i.e., S images are very sharp, but sharpness doesn't jump out at you; Color and tonal rendering is wonderfully natural looking, but it doesn't do so at the expense of acuity; ... and so on ).

 

In the same spirit as your analogies,

 

It's like a description of an Orchid written by a botanist, verses a poem about one.

 

The science of photography has become so prevalent and pervasive that perhaps, just maybe, we need more poetry?

 

- Marc

 

[mgrayson3]

Perfection killed classical music. A modern concert feels like looking at a photo of a test chart. Listen to something recorded before 1950 and it's more like good jazz.

I owned a Leica M2/35 Cron for a few years before shooting with it. I had gone digital and wasn't interested in film. When the M8 came out I figured I'd shoot a roll so I could continue to dismiss the Leica mythology. Result? "Oh Goddammit!! It's real!" I was quite upset, happy as I was with such great lenses as the C/Y 21/2.8, Canon 85/1.2L and 135/2L. I don't know what it is, and it's not every Leica lens (I'm immune to the 50 Lux pre-ASPH), but more than half of them make me smile (or jaw drop, depending). The two S lenses I've used, 70 and 120, both make me very happy, indeed. What else matters?

--Matt

[ZHNL]

Interesting discussion ...

 

My take is that it is a personal choice ... do you want clinically perfect resolution or a less perfect lens that has a character that is emotive and evocative ....

 

I had both the 85 and 55 OTUS with a D 810 ... wonderful landscape combination ... with the Live View nailed all of my captures and indeed was a wonderful workflow.

 

Traded it all and returned to the less perfect S lenses with the S 006.

 

Perhaps a bit of personal reflection will help explain this ....

 

Perfect imaging is great if one is trying to duplicate a bible  or a work of art ... and it works well for medium to long distance landscapes ...

 

But for me it is a bit sterile ... like the perfect model who seems to lack a soul. Nothing that captures your emotions or desires.

 

For me the S lenses are somewhat like a flawed but captivating musical performance. Captures that inner sense of life and energy ... not just a window 

that is without flaw but oh so mundane.

 

So yes OTUS is max ... but without much soul.

 

Give me S any day. Tango versus the Virginia Reel ....

 

Bob

I am not try to persuade anyone that OTUS is the one for you or fit you better. I didn't cover usability of that lens as nail focus at f1.4 under time pressure has been harder and harder for me to maximize the resolution potential of 36M FF sensor. (However, AF of S system can be frustrate as well.) Obviously, we all know no matter what system or gear you use, the final images mostly come from the one behind the gear, but that is not the point of thread of talking technical spec of the lens. 

 

My post is purely FYI type that trying to pass right and true information about certain lens since it got mentioned here. And information about the lens is not what I saw from my own images. I don't blindly complement any lens if they don't deserve that. I avoid use subjective comment but only technical term such as CA, SA and sharpness etc  

 

To say OTUS is clinical and soulless is unfair statement, what I see is a pure high class photographic instrument. Nothing more, nothing less. 

 

To any other system users, S glass can be attribute flawless. Actually, that is what happen at the time of Leica introduce the system. They claim these are world best lenses. And I mostly agree, they are almost flawless. ALMOST.... and I agree the rendering of whole system (Sensor and glass) that is whole reason I love the system. Saying the truth about OTUS doesn't change anything about it.   

[ZHNL]

Good analysis Bob. 

 

It is not easy to put words to aesthetic preferences.

 

I would offer that using the term "flawed" may not be the best choice because it lends credence to the notion that the highest end objective is sterile rendering over a particular type of alternative or balanced rendering.

 

Aesthetics is a moving target that is defined by the user ... no one can dictate how one thinks and feels about anything despite attempts by marketing, or fanboys of any lens be it Leica, Zeiss, or any brand.

 

I think people gravitate to logical analysis just because it is so hard to define aesthetics in an artistic sense. Attempts to describe a "look and feel" are difficult and can't be charted and scientifically defined. 

 

The closest I've seen someone describe the S results in a single word was "Organic"... where all the aesthetic elements of imagery work in concert, and no one image aspect dominates, (i.e., S images are very sharp, but sharpness doesn't jump out at you; Color and tonal rendering is wonderfully natural looking, but it doesn't do so at the expense of acuity; ... and so on ).

 

In the same spirit as your analogies,

 

It's like a description of an Orchid written by a botanist, verses a poem about one.

 

The science of photography has become so prevalent and pervasive that perhaps, just maybe, we need more poetry?

 

- Marc

I agree what you said and your description match what I see from Leica S file. I can't put them together better.

I do love my S system. There is no conflict between that and giving complement to OUTS it deserve  

[ZHNL]

Perfection killed classical music. A modern concert feels like looking at a photo of a test chart. Listen to something recorded before 1950 and it's more like good jazz.

 

I owned a Leica M2/35 Cron for a few years before shooting with it. I had gone digital and wasn't interested in film. When the M8 came out I figured I'd shoot a roll so I could continue to dismiss the Leica mythology. Result? "Oh Goddammit!! It's real!" I was quite upset, happy as I was with such great lenses as the C/Y 21/2.8, Canon 85/1.2L and 135/2L. I don't know what it is, and it's not every Leica lens (I'm immune to the 50 Lux pre-ASPH), but more than half of them make me smile (or jaw drop, depending). The two S lenses I've used, 70 and 120, both make me very happy, indeed. What else matters?

 

--Matt

The only perfection OTUS bring to the table is it achieved level never happened before at f1.4. which indeed wow me. After f2.8, the difference between it and any other good Leica lens is small. after f5.6, the difference between it and any good lens is VERY small. Great lens will not ruin an image other than wider your shoot envelop or satisfy your personal enjoyment viewing something never happen before. You know, just like seeing a S image   

 

Leica use to claim for modern Leica lens, aperture is only to control DOF. OTUS made that claim happen. That is it. I hope my comment can make Leica go to another level, I am looking forward to see how SL50 looks like.  

[ocean2059]

It is difficult to argue the optical quality of Otus lenses on any one of the specific measures. (I have been using one with the D810, along with Zeiss ZF 25/2 and 135/2 APO, as a travel set). However, looking at images, as a set, taken by D810 with Otus/ZF lenses and by Leica S2 with 35/70/120 S lenses, I much prefer the images taken by Leica lenses, by a good margin.  This is also true when I compare Sony A7/r(II) and Leica S images. Last summer, I took my Nikon, Sony, and Leica system, on three trips. Upon progressing over a thousand images, it is very clear to me that I prefer images from Leica S. I made 20 large prints (20x30), one from Sony A7/r with 35/2.8 Zeiss lens, one from D810 with Otus 55, and the rest (18) from Leica S2.

[xiaubauu2009]

I am not try to persuade anyone that OTUS is the one for you or fit you better. I didn't cover usability of that lens as nail focus at f1.4 under time pressure has been harder and harder for me to maximize the resolution potential of 36M FF sensor. (However, AF of S system can be frustrate as well.) Obviously, we all know no matter what system or gear you use, the final images mostly come from the one behind the gear, but that is not the point of thread of talking technical spec of the lens. 

 

My post is purely FYI type that trying to pass right and true information about certain lens since it got mentioned here. And information about the lens is not what I saw from my own images. I don't blindly complement any lens if they don't deserve that. I avoid use subjective comment but only technical term such as CA, SA and sharpness etc  

 

To say OTUS is clinical and soulless is unfair statement, what I see is a pure high class photographic instrument. Nothing more, nothing less. 

 

To any other system users, S glass can be attribute flawless. Actually, that is what happen at the time of Leica introduce the system. They claim these are world best lenses. And I mostly agree, they are almost flawless. ALMOST.... and I agree the rendering of whole system (Sensor and glass) that is whole reason I love the system. Saying the truth about OTUS doesn't change anything about it.   

 

That's what I don't get, a lot of the comment is saying "being Clinical and perfect = soulless...." That's a bit harsh. When Leica S marketing blurp came up, sharpness and perfection is the terms, and clearly, it is not the case in most circumstances... Admiting that Otus is better doesn't take anything away from it, just mean Leica has to keep their games up or they will be left behind... soulful or not.

[Paul J]

pretty aesthetic words that rhyme is not poetry, it's a Hallmark Card.

 

a lens that reveals a picture as sterile, is a sterile picture to begin with.

 

There is a great gift in that...

[Paul J]

The allure remains for me. I'm hoping to see proof of life at Photokina.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Great choice. The 100s is the best lens I've ever used.

120 here

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

 

Important information about the goodwill arrangement for Leica S-Lenses

In rare cases, a defect may appear in the autofocus drive unit of Leica S-Lenses. Under certain unfavourable conditions, this may lead to a complete loss of the autofocus function. 

For products affected by this problem, Leica Camera AG offers a free replacement of the autofocus drive unit within the terms of a goodwill arrangement. This goodwill arrangement is independent of the age of the lens. Should this defect occur in one of your S lenses, we recommend that you to send it directly to Leica Customer Care or the authorised Customer Care department of your country’s Leica distributor.

As a premium manufacturer, we consider it our obligation to provide only technically faultless products. We therefore particularly regret that the functions of one of your S lenses could be impaired in any way. We hope that the goodwill arrangement mentioned above will allow us to remedy the problem as soon as possible and rebuild and maintain the trust you have always placed in our brand.

[MarkP]

Does the 'goodwill arrangement' extend to a fast turnaround time?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Does the 'goodwill arrangement' extend to a fast turnaround time?

 

My 70mm took 3 months, which is basically BS