State of S

[Photoskeptic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just finished up a test of the H5D-50c. It is a very nice camera and I learned it quickly. Nice bw conversions, but no better than my D810. And I suppose my point is that both cameras mentioned use Sony chips. I have come to really detest Sony color. It is a bit better in the Hasselblad, but still green dominates. I didn't shoot a color checker for it as I didn't have enough time, but color images from both require individual adjustments. I have heard from many of you about the color, tonality, tonal roll-off, and general MF "presence" of the S. And I have seen some wonderful bw conversions on several different forums.

So I pulled the trigger and bought an S006 and a 100S. I'll have them next week. I'll report back when I have something helpful to say.

[RobertGeorge]

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

[Advertisement]

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

[dritz]

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.

[Jeff S]

I recently tried the S006 and the 30-90 zoom for a week to see if the convenience of the zoom could outweigh its slowish speed (and weight/size) limitations relative to primes, and whether the limitations of the 006 compared to the 007 (ISO, DR, lack of LV, etc) would be meaningful.  And I wanted to make prints, not just compare operational aspects.  The dealer overcame my potential cost/reliability concerns with an offer too good to resist.

 

In the end, while I found it to be a fine combination, the limitations outweighed the benefits.  For me, it worked with a dedicated tripod setup for best results, but the lack of LV features hindered that experience.  The split screen in low light and longer FLs with the zoom was also a bit annoying as half becomes blacked out....not a huge deal, but just another reminder of the speed limitations.  Prints were clearly superior to the M in some aspects (although I would need to print even bigger than I prefer to really differentiate), but the lack of versatility and the bulk with this particular pairing made it hard for me to justify the expense, despite the bargain.

 

The dealer has offered a free demo using an 007 with a prime or two (notably the smallest 70).....but I fear I might actually like that experience enough to really drain my wallet.  

 

I'm considering options, including the SL, but while that would offer significant operational advantages, the currently limited native lens line is a deterrent, and I don't think my prints would be notably different than those from my M.   And in that case, there are other far less costly options like a Canon 5DSR, with a much larger range of lens alternatives.

 

In any case, trying out some of these options is fun and informative.  No rush, as the M still does its job...but I'm still searching for the best complementary system for me.

 

Jeff

[dritz]

I recently tried the S006 and the 30-90 zoom for a week to see if the convenience of the zoom could outweigh its slowish speed (and weight/size) limitations relative to primes, and whether the limitations of the 006 compared to the 007 (ISO, DR, lack of LV, etc) would be meaningful.  And I wanted to make prints, not just compare operational aspects.  The dealer overcame my potential cost/reliability concerns with an offer too good to resist.

 

In the end, while I found it to be a fine combination, the limitations outweighed the benefits.  For me, it worked with a dedicated tripod setup for best results, but the lack of LV features hindered that experience.  The split screen in low light and longer FLs with the zoom was also a bit annoying as half becomes blacked out....not a huge deal, but just another reminder of the speed limitations.  Prints were clearly superior to the M in some aspects (although I would need to print even bigger than I prefer to really differentiate), but the lack of versatility and the bulk with this particular pairing made it hard for me to justify the expense, despite the bargain.

 

The dealer has offered a free demo using an 007 with a prime or two (notably the smallest 70).....but I fear I might actually like that experience enough to really drain my wallet.  

 

I'm considering options, including the SL, but while that would offer significant operational advantages, the currently limited native lens line is a deterrent, and I don't think my prints would be notably different than those from my M.   And in that case, there are other far less costly options like a Canon 5DSR, with a much larger range of lens alternatives.

 

In any case, trying out some of these options is fun and informative.  No rush, as the M still does its job...but I'm still searching for the best complementary system for me.

 

Jeff

Hi Jeff.  For me, I already have S lenses. So, I have all the native lenses I could want (the 100 is my favorite)

 

However, the SL would add a really useful range to what the S is missing:  a long zoom.  Funny, but the SL 24-90 weighs the same as the S 30-90.  I suspect the SL primes will be pretty large to support their focus mechanism and OIS. Hence, S lenses may be all I need for the SL (other than the long zoom).

 

And, you should borrow the 007 and a couple of primes! What a great way to spend a weekend.

[Jeff S]

 

  Funny, but the SL 24-90 weighs the same as the S 30-90. 

 

Yep, pretty close (135g less), but I suspect my issues would dissipate with the benefits of a faster lens, higher ISO capability, image stabilization and focus aids.  It wasn't just the bulk of the 30-90, but the bulk in combination with the other limitations.  In the end, for me, it's about the print....as long as the process to get there suits.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 Hence, S lenses may be all I need for the SL (other than the long zoom).

 

 

And the adapter!

 

That 90-280 is a beast, albeit stellar optically, I'm sure.  I wonder if Leica is done making S lenses, or if we'll ever see a prime beyond 180.  A wide T/S lens would have been attractive as well, but that seems dead.

 

Jeff  

[sog1927]

I guess I'm a little different from most of the users on this forum, since most of you seem to be working pros. I stopped being a part-time pro several years ago, so I'm purely shooting for my own enjoyment. I've been primarily a Hasselblad V-system user for the last 25 years or so (except for those occasions when I either haul out the 4x5 or use one of the IIIf-s I inherited from my grandfather), but I've been looking at digital solutions mainly for travel photography (since traveling with film is becoming more and more difficult). I've used a Leaf back with my V-system and found it really clumsy (too many cords).

 

I got a ridiculously good deal on an S006 from someone who upgraded to the S007. So far, I've only used it with my existing V-system lens stock. I guess I don't really consider it to be truly a medium format camera - more of a "Super 35". I think it's a good compromise for that. It's certainly more ergonomic than what I'm used to ;-).

 

I haven't really dived into the system, because frankly it's very hard for me to tell how serious Leica is about continuing development of the platform. Accessories seem pretty hard to come by, and my one extended exchange with Leica support (about compatibility with SCA 3000 flashes) was really pretty unimpressive. I can get around the absence of any serious macro capability by using my existing V-series bellows, tubes, and Luminar/Photar adapters - although TTL flash is really useful for some of that.

 

The sensor's nice. I wish it were larger, but the body form factor and (probably) the lens coverage won't support that. I understand Leica's wish to not get dragged into a megapixel "arms race", but I think they'll have to come out with something higher resolution as a response to the 100MP sensors from Hassy and P1 within the next 12-18 months.

 

It will be interesting to see what Hasselblad has in mind for the "prosumer" market. I might, for example, find a FP mirrorless body with the H6D-100 sensor pretty appealing (depending on the quality of the EVF) - particularly if it came with a robust set of lens adapters.

[Photoskeptic]

Hello sog1927, apparently Hasselblad still has something up their sleeve as there have been numerous hints of a mirrorless MF camera, probably developed together with Fuji, which is to debut "soon". "Soon" could be as late as Photokina. I suspect something with the form factor of a Mamiya 7. It would be a huge move and I think they would sell all they could make. I also suspect this new camera is behind all the discounted Hasselblads which have been tempting many as of late.

Immediately buying an S006 after testing the H5D could be considered weird by some, but frankly the Hasselblad lenses (made by Fuji) can't touch the S glass. And as someone once said, "it's all about the glass, baby!"

[xiaubauu2009]

Hello sog1927, apparently Hasselblad still has something up their sleeve as there have been numerous hints of a mirrorless MF camera, probably developed together with Fuji, which is to debut "soon". "Soon" could be as late as Photokina. I suspect something with the form factor of a Mamiya 7. It would be a huge move and I think they would sell all they could make. I also suspect this new camera is behind all the discounted Hasselblads which have been tempting many as of late.

Immediately buying an S006 after testing the H5D could be considered weird by some, but frankly the Hasselblad lenses (made by Fuji) can't touch the S glass. And as someone once said, "it's all about the glass, baby!"

 

you are saying that Fuji made lens are no good compare to leica's? really? My experience is different from yours.

[Photoskeptic]

you are saying that Fuji made lens are no good compare to leica's? really? My experience is different from yours.

I didn't say Fuji lenses were no good. Please re-read my statement. S lenses are in a different ballpark. And they should be for the prices!

[Stuart Richardson]

I also just read this topic and found it fairly interesting. I agree in principle with a lot of people who say that 37mp is enough for the vast majority of users. That said, the S is not operating in a vacuum, and Leica has a responsibility to bring in new customers and keep existing customers from leaving the system. To the faithful, we may believe that the camera is good precisely because it has a conservative number of megapixels for its sensor size, but in reality, I think there is plenty of room to increase the resolution without otherwise harming the aspects of the camera. The S has been at 37mp since introduction, which was eight years ago, if you can believe it. I am not saying we should use the Sony sensor, but sensor technology has come a long way, and we should be able to make a significant increase in resolution while maintaining the quality of the camera. 

 

In my own photography, I have been producing 40x60", 1mx1.5m prints for museum display, and the S is at 127dpi full frame at that size. That is not a lot, and while the prints look fantastic, they are visibly soft on very close inspection. Higher resolution would improve the print quality...it is as simple as that. I also printed a book recently, and most of the images in the book were with the S. The images in the book were fairly small, but the resolution of the press is so high (600dpi), that images that were cropped or from the M9 had to be interpolated into larger files. I only bring this up to say that this is not just a factor for printing huge images, but sometimes printing in very high resolution media at moderate sizes, or cropping significantly. 

 

The first response that defenders of the current S resolution will say to me is that, "well, if you need such high resolutions, then you should be shooting Phase One or Hasselblad". It is a fair point, but it is also very dismissive and completely ignores a lots of the strengths of the S system. I am an exhibition printer in addition to my photographic work, and I have seen that the Phase and Hasselblad cameras are held back by their lenses (not always of course!). It seems to my eyes that the Leica lenses draw better and perform better. The kind of imagery I make is often done outside in Iceland, and the reliability and weather sealing of the S are not comparable to the Hasselblad and Phase, at least from my experience. Finally, I know that I can trust Leica as I have worked with them for years, and they have always taken problems seriously and worked hard to fix things for me. My experience with Hasselblad was the exact opposite...there is only one dealer here and they are problematic (also the only Phase and Leica dealers), and Hasselblad headquarters will not even talk to the end user, let alone help them directly. I also look at how they have dealt with my X5 scanner, and I realize that I would never buy another product from them. They still sell them brand new for over 20,000 dollars, and they have not so much as upgraded the software in six years...for software that is extremely buggy and is functionally 15 years old. So while I appreciate the technical specs of their new camera, I would never consider one. 

 

What I would really like is an S008 with higher resolution builds upon the technical foundations of the 007 and SL. Give us 60-80mp, 4k internal recording, HDMI 2.0 so we can stream 4k to an external recorder (not possible in the S007) and hopefully a high quality full frame 4k image (pixel binned of course) in addition to the super 35 4k. 

 

Another option would be to go a route similar to the Pentax K1, and keep the actual resolution lower, but add some sort of multi-shot or pixel shifting technology. As Monochrom users know, the bayer array is one of our biggest resolution killers. It would be nice to see an S that could improve on this. I realize this is very unlikely, and personally I would prefer a 60-80mp standard S. 

 

The good news is that since Leica has been so conservative on the resolution front and has created such stunning lenses, the S really could easily add the extra megapixels without adding a large penalty. I really think Leica should go in that direction, and I don't think they can continue to grow their user base if they do not. It appears they do not either, as each successive S body that has been released has been significantly less expensive than the previous one. That is not a normal trend for Leica!!! 

[Jeff S]

 It appears they do not either, as each successive S body that has been released has been significantly less expensive than the previous one. That is not a normal trend for Leica!!! 

 

The 007 price was significantly reduced in part due to a change in warranty.  The 006 came new with a 3 year plan; the 007 came with a 1 year plan, with an option to extend, at a significant cost.  There are also differences between the standard warranty and plans that include loaners, etc.  The S-E, apart from some minor cosmetic changes, also had a lower price point primarily due to warranty differences between it and the stock 006.  One must shop carefully when looking at different models, especially if  QM2, certified pre-owned or used.  Even experienced dealers are often confused.  

 

Jeff

[Stuart Richardson]

Regardless of how it is packaged in pricing, the MSRP went from 25000 to 21000 (later less) to 16900, meaning that Leica's idea of what the price of entry should be has dropped significantly. When they released the S2, there was nothing else like it and all MFD pricing was still very high. Shortly after we got the Pentax 645D and D800 etc, so the pricing had to compensate a bit. But clearly the trend is downwards, and that is not because Leica is being charitable...

[Jeff S]

They were also competing with the Pentax 645Z, which dramatically shifted the price point in an already small market.  And, as I said, they got there in part by eliminating two years off the warranty at the same time they significantly reduced the price (the extension now costs several thousand dollars).  It was a discreet way to market at a more competitive rate.

 

Jeff

Edited May 21, 2016 by Jeff S

[RVB]

I didn't say Fuji lenses were no good. Please re-read my statement. S lenses are in a different ballpark. And they should be for the prices!

 

I tested all the H glass against S glass and while H glass was mostly very good stopped down the S glass was on another level at wider apertures.

Edited May 21, 2016 by RVB

[xiaubauu2009]

I didn't say Fuji lenses were no good. Please re-read my statement. S lenses are in a different ballpark. And they should be for the prices!

 

Sorry, I did misread. But my point is that Leica S lens is not that special, in terms of resolution it's nowhere near as sharp as Rodenstock HR lens series, in terms of other characteristic like distorition, CA control etc, it's nowhere as good as Zeiss Otus... But the price is right up there with the rest. I guess that little red dot does command some premium. Hehehe

[RVB]

Sorry, I did misread. But my point is that Leica S lens is not that special, in terms of resolution it's nowhere near as sharp as Rodenstock HR lens series, in terms of other characteristic like distorition, CA control etc, it's nowhere as good as Zeiss Otus... But the price is right up there with the rest. I guess that little red dot does command some premium. Hehehe

 

"it's nowhere as good as Zeiss Otus"   that would be a minority opinion, and Otus glass is as large and expensive as S glass with no option of CS or AF!! 

[Paul J]

Sorry, I did misread. But my point is that Leica S lens is not that special, in terms of resolution it's nowhere near as sharp as Rodenstock HR lens series, in terms of other characteristic like distorition, CA control etc, it's nowhere as good as Zeiss Otus... But the price is right up there with the rest. I guess that little red dot does command some premium. Hehehe

The Otus lenses are indeed exceptional, but limited by the smaller sensor. again, there is something really quite special about the lens/sensor combo of the S. If only Zeiss made medium format lenses once again and had a platform to use them on such as a reborn Contax 645. as a long time Hasselblad user, I've never warmed to the Fuji Blad lenses and have always felt this was Blads mistake. They are very sharp and have good colour but the bokeh and rendering is often quite ugly.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[xiaubauu2009]

"it's nowhere as good as Zeiss Otus"   that would be a minority opinion, and Otus glass is as large and expensive as S glass with no option of CS or AF!! 

 

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....