AlanD Posted July 6, 2018 Share #21 Posted July 6, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) To translate, CMOS is really good at very low read noise. This means that if your flash fails to fire, you can still recover 4 or 5 stops on a GFX or X1D and have acceptable 16x20 prints. In fact, you also recover 2 or 3 stops overexposed too. So from the standpoint of photographing that decisive moment or that fleeting emotion in the studio, when you know that you actually can have a catastrophic strobe failure or incorrect setting and still get a shot, you will end up with more “keepers.” The next issue is focus accuracy. On sensor focusing is the most precise, including the contrast detect AF (CDAF) of the SL, CL, as well as the GFX. You cannot do contrast detect AF because it is hard to do live view with a medium format sized CCD with good frame rate and low enough heat. The other fast focusing technique is phase detection on sensor (PDAF) like the Sony A9 and A7 lineup. PDAF is rumored to be utilized in the next generation GFX and X1D. Again, this requires a CMOS sensor. So the same thing for the ability to hit critical focus when your split prism or rangefinder patch is slightly out of calibration, CMOS will get you the shot. CCD therefore requires all of the stars to align. If that happens, you get an extra 5-15% in image quality. For most people that 15% isn’t worth all of the hassles. For many, including myself, it is totally worth it. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 6, 2018 Posted July 6, 2018 Hi AlanD, Take a look here Low light comparison: Q vs 007. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Deliberate1 Posted July 6, 2018 Author Share #22 Posted July 6, 2018 To translate, CMOS is really good at very low read noise. This means that if your flash fails to fire, you can still recover 4 or 5 stops on a GFX or X1D and have acceptable 16x20 prints. In fact, you also recover 2 or 3 stops overexposed too. So from the standpoint of photographing that decisive moment or that fleeting emotion in the studio, when you know that you actually can have a catastrophic strobe failure or incorrect setting and still get a shot, you will end up with more “keepers.” The next issue is focus accuracy. On sensor focusing is the most precise, including the contrast detect AF (CDAF) of the SL, CL, as well as the GFX. You cannot do contrast detect AF because it is hard to do live view with a medium format sized CCD with good frame rate and low enough heat. The other fast focusing technique is phase detection on sensor (PDAF) like the Sony A9 and A7 lineup. PDAF is rumored to be utilized in the next generation GFX and X1D. Again, this requires a CMOS sensor. So the same thing for the ability to hit critical focus when your split prism or rangefinder patch is slightly out of calibration, CMOS will get you the shot. CCD therefore requires all of the stars to align. If that happens, you get an extra 5-15% in image quality. For most people that 15% isn’t worth all of the hassles. For many, including myself, it is totally worth it. Alan, brilliant translation. Now I have a very scientifically demonstrable explanation for a mis-focused shots with my S 006. I fear that the same excuse can not be used with the M9. I will find another. Cheers. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted July 6, 2018 Share #23 Posted July 6, 2018 Alan, for the record, I came to the same conclusion. The GFX and S006 are very close to each other, but I preferred the color of the Leica. Fuji has what appears to be ten points extra clarity in the raw file, so it has more snap out of the camera, but I think the 006 looks more natural. Detail is close with an edge to the GFX in many situations, and it has less moire. Ergonomics are not even close for me...the S and OVF win every time. But the overall size and weight of the system are a win for the Fuji. I did not compare high ISO, because it is nearly irrelevant to me...pretty much everything I photograph in low light uses either long exposure or flash. If I need high ISO, a 35mm up to date camera with a CMOS sensor and a fast lens is a better option. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geetee1972 Posted July 7, 2018 Share #24 Posted July 7, 2018 I'm still serisouly thinking about an S (006) so am interested in this thread. My local shop has one in second hand with a 70mm Summarit. It's been sat there for a few months now and I can't see it selling soon (it's way too specialised for their typical buyer). They currently want £5000/$6650 for camera and lens and have given me the option of buying it on use or return, i.e. I could buy it today, use it tomorrow for my Brighton Beach project and then return it if I don't like it with a full refund. The unit is imaculate and was owned by an employee of the shop but I don't know anything else about it. What are the things I need to be aware of; what are the issues that need to have been dealt with? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted July 7, 2018 Share #25 Posted July 7, 2018 (edited) The most important would be that the lens has had its AF upgraded by the factory. S lenses are prone to autofocus drive failure because of a part in the lens that breaks, leading an inability to autofocus. Leica fixed the lenses for free, but now the grace period is over, and sometimes they charge a fee to do it. The S006 otherwise is pretty trouble free. The batteries are quite great, so I think that is probably still going to be fine. Some S006 bodies have had CCD failures not unlike the M9, but it does not seem to be as common. Overall, they are a pretty easy to deal with camera, still with impeccable performance. The other issue is perhaps your lens and camera upgrade path. The S system is still expensive, even at the lower price point of the used market. It would probably be more expensive for you to put together a few lenses or later upgrade to a newer camera than it would if you went with a Sony or GFX instead. Edited July 7, 2018 by Stuart Richardson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted July 7, 2018 Share #26 Posted July 7, 2018 I'm still serisouly thinking about an S (006) so am interested in this thread. My local shop has one in second hand with a 70mm Summarit. It's been sat there for a few months now and I can't see it selling soon (it's way too specialised for their typical buyer). They currently want £5000/$6650 for camera and lens and have given me the option of buying it on use or return, i.e. I could buy it today, use it tomorrow for my Brighton Beach project and then return it if I don't like it with a full refund. The unit is imaculate and was owned by an employee of the shop but I don't know anything else about it. What are the things I need to be aware of; what are the issues that need to have been dealt with? Coming from Mamyia 7, and the from M and SL, I bought the S006 (with new sensor) and a few S-lenses used some time ago. I am very happy with the S, I shoot mostly at low ISO, and the files are better than enything I have seen. If anything, the S006 rendering reminds me about the M9. I will certainly keep the 006 for years to come... Why not test the 006+70mm? Check, in partcular, if you like the oof rendering of the 70mm (since you typically shoot wide open). The 70mm is a smallish lens, so you can easily bring the 006+70mm with you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted July 7, 2018 Share #27 Posted July 7, 2018 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm still serisouly thinking about an S (006) so am interested in this thread. My local shop has one in second hand with a 70mm Summarit. It's been sat there for a few months now and I can't see it selling soon (it's way too specialised for their typical buyer). They currently want £5000/$6650 for camera and lens and have given me the option of buying it on use or return, i.e. I could buy it today, use it tomorrow for my Brighton Beach project and then return it if I don't like it with a full refund. The unit is imaculate and was owned by an employee of the shop but I don't know anything else about it. What are the things I need to be aware of; what are the issues that need to have been dealt with? The Leica charge to repair the AF mechanism is somewhere in the $300-500 usd range. Rob Edited July 7, 2018 by ropo54 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted July 7, 2018 Share #28 Posted July 7, 2018 Coming from Mamyia 7, and the from M and SL, I bought the S006 (with new sensor) and a few S-lenses used some time ago. I am very happy with the S, I shoot mostly at low ISO, and the files are better than enything I have seen. If anything, the S006 rendering reminds me about the M9. I will certainly keep the 006 for years to come... Why not test the 006+70mm? Check, in partcular, if you like the oof rendering of the 70mm (since you typically shoot wide open). The 70mm is a smallish lens, so you can easily bring the 006+70mm with you. Greg, Should you take the plunge, you might also look at the S 100 f2. I did yesterday, and it is 'noctilux-like'. Size wise it is on a par with the 70mm too. Rob 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted July 9, 2018 Share #29 Posted July 9, 2018 I have an S(006), S(007), Q, and Hassy X1D. I just shot a bunch of dusk captures with the last three of them. There isn't a clear winner or loser, although the ability of the Q to go to f/1.7 and its IS give it more flexibility than the larger cameras. If anyone wants a comparison with the S(006) included, I can try to more carefully fix the exposures and ISO of each camera. I could also throw in the TL2 and SL but that's getting to be real work . Sorry, no digital M bodies left at home. Pics or crops if anyone really wants them, Matt 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 9, 2018 Author Share #30 Posted July 9, 2018 (edited) Matt, OP here. I am very interested in your observations, especially as between the the 006 and 007 in low light situations. I have the Q as well. And no doubt it performs very well in low light situations that would send my S 006 scurrying for the light. But I confess that, since shooting with the S for the past three years, I have become addicted to the qualities of the MF files that the S produces, especially in print. Since getting the S I have not even picked up my M9, even after getting it back from Wetzlar with a new sensor. I got the Q as a low light travel camera. And it served its purpose admirably. If it were 35mm or 50mm, I would have fewer thoughts about selling it. But 28mm is just not my perspective, I guess. And I have used the Q very little since returning from my travels earlier this year. It is no small amount of coin to have wrapped up in a camera that sits on the shelf, along side my M9 which I keep for sentimental reasons - the worst of all reasons. So my thought is to see what happens to the 007 market once the 008 (?) is released. If it goes the way of the 006 when its successor was released, I would be in the market for one, especially if it gets close to the Q in low light situations, as you suggest above. In the meantime, I would be very pleased to see the results of a low light shoot out between the 006 and 007 under identical test circumstances if you do not mind going to the trouble. Even throwing the Q in there as well, if you like. I do think that it would be very helpful not just for me but for others facing the same question. If the 007 dramatically outperforms the 006 and gets even close to the Q, I could see parting company with the little one. Beyond that, i find that trying to learn the ins and outs of two or more camera, given their functional complexity and different characteristics is a distraction - and frustration sometimes. Cheers, David Edited July 9, 2018 by Deliberate1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John McMaster Posted July 9, 2018 Share #31 Posted July 9, 2018 You say low light, do you mean high ISO? If so, the 007 is far better.... john Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted July 9, 2018 Share #32 Posted July 9, 2018 (edited) All shot under as close to identical conditions as I could. All hand-held. All f/8. All sharpening and NR left at LR defaults, which I think makes the X1D shots look sharper and noisier. First, 100% crops: Q ISO 1600 1/20 sec Q defaulted to ISO 5000 1/60 sec Hasselblad X1D 30mm (no Q or S35 equivalent, sorry) ISO 1600 1/25 Hasselblad X1D 30mm defaulted to ISO 3200 1/50 Leica S(007) S35 default ISO 3200 1/25 Leica S(007) S35 ISO 1600 1/15 Leica S(006) S35 ISO 1600 1/25 That 006 is surprisingly usable, especially in B&W. No question it's noisier. Full images next... Matt Edited July 9, 2018 by mgrayson3 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted July 9, 2018 Share #33 Posted July 9, 2018 (edited) Actual pics, but not at 100%. All pictures were white balanced off the door frame. Q ISO 1600 1/20 sec Q defaulted to ISO 5000 1/60 sec Hasselblad X1D 30mm (no Q or S35 equivalent, sorry) ISO 1600 1/25 Hasselblad X1D 30mm defaulted to ISO 3200 1/50 Leica S(007) S35 default ISO 3200 1/25 Leica S(007) S35 ISO 1600 1/15 Leica S(006) S35 ISO 1600 1/25 Matt Edited July 9, 2018 by mgrayson3 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deliberate1 Posted July 10, 2018 Author Share #34 Posted July 10, 2018 Matt, I am obliged for your efforts. The comparisons are very telling. You describe the 006 shot of your "medicine" as "usable" and I suspect it would be with some noise reduction applied. As I studied them, I recall AlanD's comment earlier in this thread: "The M9 and 006 will look like the true yellow and red box that you then threw some sand on it. There is grain but the color is accurate. The new CMOS sensors will look like UV faded yellows and reds with the absence of noise." Your samples show just that. Clear the "dust" off that image and it would be workable given the preservation of detail and color fidelity. That said, an image with this presentation could be better worked in B&W. Cheers. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted July 10, 2018 Share #35 Posted July 10, 2018 David, The 006 colors are still my favorites. With some work, I can get the 007, and even the X1D, close. But I never get it right. Most of my work has been BW lately, so it matters less. There’s a reason I still have the 006 body... Matt 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted July 11, 2018 Share #36 Posted July 11, 2018 Thanks Matt. What is going on in the shadows of the fireplace in the 007 pictures? The magenta and purple look a bit oversaturated and strange...they look great in the 006, and I am not saying that just because I am an 006 fan. The speaker on the stereo seems better too...is it just darker because it has less dynamic range? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xiaubauu2009 Posted July 11, 2018 Share #37 Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) the S007 look OOF compare to the mirrorless X1D. while the S006 look on target... Edited July 11, 2018 by xiaubauu2009 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted July 11, 2018 Share #38 Posted July 11, 2018 (edited) Ah, the joys and difficulties of making tests shots. Upon review, I found a few of these had a number of slider changes. I reset everything and then matched the brightness on the wall near the door frame, as well as WB on the door frame itself. I think the fireplace now looks more consistent. Thank you for pointing it out! As for the 007 focus, these are all shot at the limits of hand-holdability (one 007 shot is 1/15 second!). And the 007 default processing seems to have less sharpening/more NR/less clarity or some combination of the above. Or it could just be OOF. The same lens was used on the 006 and 007 pics. Here are the new FF images: Q ISO 1600 1/20 sec Q defaulted to ISO 5000 1/60 sec Hasselblad X1D 30mm (no Q or S35 equivalent, sorry) ISO 1600 1/25 Hasselblad X1D 30mm defaulted to ISO 3200 1/50 Leica S(007) S35 default ISO 3200 1/25 Leica S(007) S35 ISO 1600 1/15 Leica S(006) S35 ISO 1600 1/25 --Matt Edited July 11, 2018 by mgrayson3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now