Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[Peter H]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This would be a good start. Leica is almost there, but I remain somewhat nervous about Leica's ability to support existing products into the future. Why? Well, the M8 LCD and M9 sensor issues spring to mind. To be fair, they have solved the M9 sensor problem - I'm holding off sending my Monochrom in for replacement, but I'm not sure for how long.

 

I'm happy with the level of technology I have. I accept that Leica will probably not be able to replace the viewfinder on my M3 if is gives up the ghost, but that is reasonable. I want the same level of support for my Monochrom, M60 and M-A. Unrealistic? Well, I think that is what I paid a not insubstantial premium for - they were advertised as "cameras for life" when I bought them. That is, actually, a promise which it is possible to keep, provided there's a will to do so. Suppliers will keep producing components, provided someone will pay for them.

 

Cheers

John

I agree, and I think it is this question of continued long-term support that distinguishes a serious and high quality product from an expensive lifestyle indulgence. I believe Leica's heart is much closer to high quality than lifestyle, but it does love to flirt.

[Advertisement]

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

[ramarren]

This would be a good start. Leica is almost there, but I remain somewhat nervous about Leica's ability to support existing products into the future. Why? Well, the M8 LCD and M9 sensor issues spring to mind. To be fair, they have solved the M9 sensor problem - I'm holding off sending my Monochrom in for replacement, but I'm not sure for how long.

 

I'm happy with the level of technology I have. I accept that Leica will probably not be able to replace the viewfinder on my M3 if is gives up the ghost, but that is reasonable. I want the same level of support for my Monochrom, M60 and M-A. Unrealistic? Well, I think that is what I paid a not insubstantial premium for - they were advertised as "cameras for life" when I bought them. That is, actually, a promise which it is possible to keep, provided there's a will to do so. Suppliers will keep producing components, provided someone will pay for them.

 

Cheers

John

 

 

(bolded) This isn't the case, really. Electronic components are created in batches because the electronics industry drives the prices down to where we can afford them using economies of production scale. Generally speaking, all the components for a modern camera's perhaps multi-year production run usually exist the day production starts. Once they have been closed out, the component manufacturers (having themselves a limit on their resources) tear down the multimillion dollar production line to replace it with the line needed for the next product. 

 

So if Leica wanted to keep M8 LCDs in production, they'd have to pay literally millions of dollars per year to keep that line in operation. This is simply not worth it for the scant couple of hundred devices, maybe, that they'll ever need in the future, nor could they afford it. Same for sensors, primary circuit boards, etc. 

 

I consider my Leica M cameras, film or digital, to be a 10 year purchase at maximum. If I haven't used them enough in ten years time to get all of my value out of the purchase price, then I probably over-spent for the privilege. They could well last longer than that—my lovely Olympus E-1 is now 13 years old and still going strong—but I simply don't expect serviceability to extend beyond a decade other than by unusual chance. The same goes for nearly any device which is dependent upon mega-industrial, volume oriented, manufacturing processes to be delivered at an affordable price. 

 

It's the direction of products in today's world. Leica does better than most to provide top notch build quality and long term service, but there are limits to what can be provided given how things are manufactured today. The fact that they went back to re-engineer the M9 sensor coverglass and sensors to handle a significant, unforeseen problem and take care of their customers properly was a measure of how much value they put on doing the right thing for their customers. 

[IkarusJohn]

I don't think that is entirely accurate.

 

When drafting long term supply agreements, one thing I am particularly keen to ensure is the continued supply of components for the product life. Most suppliers will accept this, on the basis that the quantity and price warrant the continuity.

 

Any supplier who says they will make the entire component supply in the first year, then nothing after that wouldn't last long. Sure, there's batching and inventory, but to stop supply altogether in the hope the products would be out of use really only applies to cheap consumer rubbish. Similarly, holding the entire product life inventory is a very poor use of capital.

 

I certainly hope Leica was better advised by their legal team than to cover the entire costs of re-engineering the M9 sensors without a contribution from the manufacturer. It's one thing to limit liability to a reasonable period (typically shorter than the 6 year limitation in contract), and quite another not to obtain long term technology guarantees - I write those for a living ...

[ramarren]

Remember that the M9 sensor was originally manufactured by Kodak, now long gone, and later supplied by whomever Kodak sold the plant to (the name escapes me). Whatever sensor manufacturer picked up the contract is certainly not going to keep manufacturing for a 2008 technology sensor going almost a decade later; that would be an waste of resources with little return. I would bet that Leica assumed the vast majority of the cost of that rework. 

 

Some components are part of continuous production, that's true, but the key ones unique to a particular camera's design and customized for it (LCD, sensor, controller devices, circuit boards) are generally batched up at the beginning and the run completed to the contractual limits long before a particular model's production ceases. 

 

That's been my experience with other devices of a similar nature. 

[IkarusJohn]

Our experiences differ, I guess. When a company invests its reputation in a new product, such continuity guarantees are pretty much the norm.

 

When Kodak got out of the digital sensor game, its long term obligations (such as they may have been) did not disappear in a puff of smoke. There are three driving issues (1) even in liquidation, directors and owners cannot walk away from liability (it's more complicated than that), (2) contracts go with the company, including sales of undertakings, and (3) regardless of legal obligations, reputations and relationships are of critical importance. Leica will never tell us, but I'd be amazed if they carried the M9 sensor cost alone - if they did, their commercial and legal advisors seriously let them down.

 

We can reasonably accurately guess what the situation was from the way Leica behaved around that time - there was the Imacon disaster with the DMR, Kodak M9 sensors, then they went with CMOSIS and the Israeli manufacturer, to their design and specification. The situation is nowhere near as simplistic as many have suggested in the past (no, Godfrey, I'm not calling you simplistic). The M(240) product line has, surely, gone on for longer, and the sensors put into more cameras, than anyone can have predicted. The supplier will continue to manufacture the sensors for as long as Leica orders sufficient batches - that's the supplier's business. They don't care how high or low tech it is, so long as the order is large enough.

 

It appears Leica owns the intellectual property rights on the M(240), SL & Q sensors, so they can take production where they like, provided the batch quantities are big enough.

[Guest]

LuLa Kevin Raber's review is finally out.

[steppenw0lf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Finally the production level reviews come out, here another one: http://gearpatrol.com/2017/01/13/hasselblad-x1d-camera-review/

They talk about beauty: I agree that the camera is nice, but the lenses are not really. (compared to the older Zeiss and Schneider)

This one is earlier, but interesting because from the point of view of a cyclist: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-10-11/hasselblad-x1d-review-hands-on-with-the-medium-format-camera

More:

http://www.gadgettify.com/hasselblad-x1d-50c-shooting-experience/

http://cameradecision.com/review/Hasselblad-X1D

http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/tag/hasselblad-x1d/

 

 

P.S:: Is 33x44 a giant-sensor ? (Well I know the stories (children books) about "Der kleine Riese", the small giant    )

And every review is talking about the 14 stops of dynamic range (how impressive). Well first of all, Nikon has this already since several years (D800 and 810) and hardly anybody is mentioning it there - I did not know about it until the X1D crowd was bragging about it. And I also believe that nobody has seen it, because typically the computer screens cannot deliver. So hardly anybody really knows what it means. And other camera sensors have 13 stops or 13.5 stops, so that gap is not so terribly impressive. (OK. compared to film that often has only 6 or 7 stops, the difference is noticeable, but who does this comparison ?)

Edited January 17, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[Guest]

Finally the production level reviews come out, here another one: http://gearpatrol.com/2017/01/13/hasselblad-x1d-camera-review/

They talk about beauty: I agree that the camera is nice, but the lenses are not really. (compared to the older Zeiss and Schneider)

This one is earlier, but interesting because from the point of view of a cyclist: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-10-11/hasselblad-x1d-review-hands-on-with-the-medium-format-camera

More:

http://www.gadgettify.com/hasselblad-x1d-50c-shooting-experience/

http://cameradecision.com/review/Hasselblad-X1D

http://www.cameracomparisonreview.com/tag/hasselblad-x1d/

 

 

P.S:: Is 33x44 a giant-sensor ? (Well I know the stories (children books) about "Der kleine Riese", the small giant    )

And every review is talking about the 14 stops of dynamic range (how impressive). Well first of all, Nikon has this already since several years (D800 and 810) and hardly anybody is mentioning it there - I did not know about it until the X1D crowd was bragging about it. And I also believe that nobody has seen it, because typically the computer screens cannot deliver. So hardly anybody really knows what it means. And other camera sensors have 13 stops or 13.5 stops, so that gap is not so terribly impressive. (OK. compared to film that often has only 6 or 7 stops, the difference is noticeable, but who does this comparison ?)

 

These are all older reviews which I have seen. The LuLa was the one I was waiting for. I won't be drawn on what you say about in your P.S. apart to say I disagree. There are also still quite a number still using film, so they will do the comparison.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Guest

[wellfleet]

These are all older reviews which I have seen.

 

 

+1000

[Guest]

Interesting what Kevin Raber says about the shutter lag and noise. On my two demos I found it 'different' noise-wise but not too discerting. I wonder with animals (pets) whether the shutter lag would cause an issue. It certainly would not with Jewellery and static cars. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I was disappointed with Kevin Raber's review at least on first viewing/reading.  There was a lot of menu review and discussion of its user interfaces, and not much on image quality.  And I was amused to see him kvell over the trick by which the battery drops partway out when you flick its lever, then falls the rest of the way out when you give it a little bounce.  Kinda like the SL, wouldn't you say?  I guess there is a supplier somewhere that provided this feature to both cameras.

 

scott

 

PS:  I was curious to see how the X1D manages its two cards, so I went to the users' manual which is available online (Thanks, Google).  All they say is that you can choose which card is written to first, with the second as the overflow.  No UHS II, no mention of video only to one of the cards, no possibility of separating the raw files and the jpegs, each to its own card, writing simultaneously.  It sounds like there may be bandwidth issues in writing the images out.

Edited January 17, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[LocalHero1953]

The issues I noted from the review were:

- shutter noise (but other reviewers in recent months have not seen this as a problem. Perhaps it depends on the lens?)

- AF point selection. Using the back touchscreen will be slow unless you use zombie mode. Kevin Raber doesn't mention using the dials. And the AF "points" looked like big blocks to me.

- shutter lag.

- battery drain overnight.

- random over exposure. Other reviewers haven't seen this happen, or the battery drain.

- heating up. I wonder if this is a mirrorless/LV issue with FF and bigger sensors; if so, then the SL has probably solved it by having a big body.

 

I was also disappointed by the lack of comment on IQ, but I guess that will come from other reviewers.

[steppenw0lf]

Probably it is not so much the intensity of the noise, but the slowness of the shutter reaction (resulting in 2 "steps" as the noise suggests). With the SL the shutter noise is very nicely dampened and a quick single beat.

Strange that there is no continuous mode (they talked about up to 2.3 images per second). Does that mean it is necessary to press and release the shutter in that frequency ? Very strange.

 

IQ is probably not such a big question, most expect it to be close to that of other cameras with that sensor (in ordinary conditions). More interesting would be the high ISO IQ. (especially if the sensor gets hot, maybe an influence of the small camera body ?).

I would also like to know about the time of charging an empty battery. In the manual they say up to 6 hours. One of the testers said 1.5 hours. I wonder which is closer to reality. The  X1D battery is larger than others and there usually 2-3 hours are common (or even more).

Edited January 17, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[helged]

The Fuji GFX tests/reviews are coming - looking good - it will be interesting to learn/see how Leica will respond with their S and SL-systems.

Edited January 22, 2017 by helged

[Joshua Lowe]

After doing some reading up on the Fuji I'm much more interested in it than I am the Hassy.  Can't wait to get my hands on one for a weekend, hopefully in time for spring.

[Peter H]

After doing some reading up on the Fuji I'm much more interested in it than I am the Hassy.  Can't wait to get my hands on one for a weekend, hopefully in time for spring.

 

 

There are a few reviews of the GFX out.

 

Here's one:

 

https://jonasraskphotography.com/2017/01/19/the-fujifilm-gfx-50s-review-portable-beast/

 

I think the Fuji and the Hasselblad are quite different cameras, excellent for slightly different uses, and it might turn out to be a bit like comparing an DSLR with an M.

[helged]

 

I think the Fuji and the Hasselblad are quite different cameras, excellent for slightly different uses, and it might turn out to be a bit like comparing an DSLR with an M.

 

 

or comparing the SL with the M...  ?

[steppenw0lf]

It is still early days, but as the sensor of the X1D is already there since 3 years, it is also important/interesting to think about the sensors following it.

This is a bit strange, since the H6D-100c sensor is probably the successor, but has a different format - it is actually larger. ( 53.4x40.0 vs 43.8x32.9 )  So the question that arises is, if the X1D could also use this sensor in a few years, or if this sensor is simply too big for the X1D mount and/or the lenses. The size difference is quite large (48% larger area), so probably it won't fit. And then the question is what will be the next sensor for the X1D - does it already exist, or will Sony have to develop/construct a new one in similar size (33x44) ? Or will only the central area of this sensor be used ?

The same question also arises for the Fuji GFX or any other camera explicitly built for the 33x44 format.

 

So it would be interesting to hear what Fuji or Hasselblad are planning for the future. They will be reluctant to talk about the next steps, but their internal planning teams need to come up with an answer sooner or later.

Edited January 23, 2017 by steppenw0lf

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ski542002]

This has been lightly discussed in the SL threads.  It'd be great if the manufacturers would design a body where they could update a sensor as new technologies arise.  We're talking about a 3-year obsolescence cycle for some of these bodies. The just-released X1D body with a 3-year old sensor?   We'll never go back to the Nikon and Canon F1 bodies that would last for 10-15 years, but having some upgrade flexibility in the digital world would be of benefit.

[Peter H]

It is still early days, but as the sensor of the X1D is already there since 3 years, it is also important/interesting to think about the sensors following it.

This is a bit strange, since the H6D-100c sensor is probably the successor, but has a different format - it is actually larger. ( 53.4x40.0 vs 43.8x32.9 )  So the question that arises is, if the X1D could also use this sensor in a few years, or if this sensor is simply too big for the X1D mount and/or the lenses. The size difference is quite large (48% larger area), so probably it won't fit. And then the question is what will be the next sensor for the X1D - does it already exist, or will Sony have to develop/construct a new one in similar size (33x44) ? Or will only the central area of this sensor be used ?

The same question also arises for the Fuji GFX or any other camera explicitly built for the 33x44 format.

 

So it would be interesting to hear what Fuji or Hasselblad are planning for the future. They will be reluctant to talk about the next steps, but their internal planning teams needs to come up with an answer sooner or later.

 

 

 

Yes, interesting, and I've thought about it a bit.

 

Hasselblad say there will not be a 100mp version of the X1D, but that the XCD lenses are designed to work with 100mp sensors. So I deduce, perhaps completely wrongly, that the X2D will be a new and probably slightly larger body. But there are other possibilities. 

 

I have no idea about the GFX50S but I fully expect to see a GFX100 at some point, depending I suppose on the success of the 50.

 

Obviously no one will tell us what next. Perhaps they'll do a Leica and settle in mp terms for what works for enough of their customers for as long as they can get away with it!