Medium Format Decisions

[Acekerman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Life long Leica M shooter but Im in love with Medium format at this point. With falling used Leica S prices especially with the S3 on the horizon I've been contemplating at a used Leica S. I love the rendering of the CCD sensor 006 but wonder about relibility of the sensor. Theres the 007 which is twice the cost for the money I could get a newer Hasselblad x1d for the investment. (The Fuji doesn't do it for me rendering wise). Wondering what folks have experience with 006, 007 and Hasselblad x1d interns of daily carry and shooting of portraits and landscape. Looking for a an All rounder really. Also How reliable are the Leica S lenses? or would it be prudent to pursue the SL at this point to stay? Thanks for any input.

 

Best

 

Brian

 

 

[Jeff S]

SL for reliability over S or X1D. S lenses make the difference for that system; just be sure to get those with ‘permanent’ AF motor fix. None of the S or XCD lenses have OIS like the two longer SL zooms. And the S006, while great IQ, is best in good light or on a tripod. But you can get one for less than the price of a new M.

 

Trade offs, depending on your goals and preferences. Best to try them first and see what YOU think. I learned a lot by doing that.

 

Jeff

[ropo54]

Life long Leica M shooter but Im in love with Medium format at this point. With falling used Leica S prices especially with the S3 on the horizon I've been contemplating at a used Leica S. I love the rendering of the CCD sensor 006 but wonder about relibility of the sensor. Theres the 007 which is twice the cost for the money I could get a newer Hasselblad x1d for the investment. (The Fuji doesn't do it for me rendering wise). Wondering what folks have experience with 006, 007 and Hasselblad x1d interns of daily carry and shooting of portraits and landscape. Looking for a an All rounder really. Also How reliable are the Leica S lenses? or would it be prudent to pursue the SL at this point to stay? Thanks for any input.

 

Best

 

Brian

 

I have tried all 4 options.

 

The X1D is certainly more portable that the 006/007, had beautiful files that really popped, but had a very long shutter speed. Great for static shots, but not very usable for any kind of movement. Also, the slowest lenses. 50 mp (vs 37.5 for Leica).

 

The 006 has a faster shutter than the X1D, AF is relatively good, but shooting above iso 800 can be very frustrating.  Best used on a tripod, or handheld in only excellent lighting conditions.  Sensor replacement costs $5K, if Leica does not handle it under warranty. I am told that once replaced, the sensor should be fine. Best price on the pre-owned market. (Leica Miami has the one I owned for a short while and it is in super condition with documented sensor replacement. They are asking $4250 for it, and if you are going to get one, I would highly recommend this one based on its condition).

 

I traded my 006 for a 007. Certified pre-owned from Leica with one year warranty. ISO range is far better than the 006 and 3200-6400 images can be quite usable handheld.  AF is perhaps the same speed or a tad faster than the 006, but shutter speed is better.  Will shoot up to 3.5 frames per second (vs 1.5 for the 006).  

 

I am an amateur.  I wanted to explore medium format primarily using the camera handheld. For that reason I went with the 007. (I also have a SL). The 007 is big and heavy, and moreso than the X1D, but its usability for 'quick' shots was much better than the X1D.  Also, the Leica S lenses are faster than the Hb lenses.

 

The SL is a wonderful camera. Most versatile. Better for low light options. More portable that the Leica 006 or 007. About the same portability as the X1D. Great lens options; SL lenses are just superb. But . . . its not medium format, albeit close.  I should add that when using handheld that camera shake is definitely more noticeable on the medium format systems.  

 

Leica lenses should have the AF mechanism updated as there was a problem for a longtime. If Leica has to repair it out of warranty I have heard it may run $400-500.

 

Leica S lenses can be used on the SL with an adapter, with great results, but the AF mechanism on the SL works much more slowly than the native SL lenses.

 

Hope that my input has been of some help for you. Good luck.

 

Rob

Edited August 22, 2018 by ropo54

[mgrayson3]

I would not use the X1D for portraiture. The existing lenses, and, more importantly, the camera operation are too slow. For landscape/architecture, it's a much easier system to carry around than the S. 

[albertknappmd]

The key to the S system are its lenses. NOTHING comes close. The AF issue is long over...Just make sure lenses were upgraded with permanent fix.

Albert     

[kparseg]

The key to the S system are its lenses. NOTHING comes close. The AF issue is long over...Just make sure lenses were upgraded with permanent fix.

Albert     

How many other systems have you used, Albert?

[Deliberate1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Brian,

I cannot imagine a better buy than an 006 with a 70mm at this time. Three years ago I bought mine (around $6500) because, like you, I wanted the same look as my M9 but in a bigger format. And I have been thrilled by this camera, like no other. I still shoot some MF (6x6 - Rollei 6008) and LF with Toyo 45 and Rodenstock lenses, scanned with Scitex flatbed. The 006 exceeds the Rollei output and approaches the quality of 4x5, with so much less hassle.

I use mine as a walk around rig. I recently traveled to Asia where it was a joy to use. It is not light, especially with a couple adjunct lenses. But it is still lighter than the Rollei rig. Despite its heft, it feels better in the hand than the M9, the Q I own or any other camera I have ever held. Beautifully balanced, and the optical viewfinder is a revelation. I print with an Epson 7800 to 24" on the short end, with splendid results. No question that a tripod makes it all that much better. The Achilles heel is clearly its low light limits. For that, the 007 would better.

You can also get the Hasselblad and Contax adapters that open up a world of other glass that woks seamlessly with the 006 body.

You know the market. I think the 006 is an absolute steal at current prices. You can get Rob's (Ropo54) 006 with a replaced sensor for $4250. And from Leica Miami which is a top notch outfit. If you need something after the sale, they will tend to it. That is worth the price of admission.

I loved my M9 - and it has not seen the light of day since the S came into my hands. It really is that good.

Happy hunting.

David

Edited August 23, 2018 by Deliberate1

[geetee1972]

There's little I can add here that others, particularly Rob, haven't already said and which I agree with entirely apart from the comment about the X1D not being fast enough for portraiture, which to my mind doesn't make sense unless you're only shooting candid portraits (and even then the limitations of MF will be a greater issue than any specific camera).

 

What I can add is that having moved recently to the 007 from an extended period of working with the SL (almost exclusively for portraiture) I can say that the results are sublime. Everything that you aspire to in the MF look is here in spades and the IQ is utterly delightful. There is absolutely that natural tonal rendering that makes MF special (especially for portraiture); soft lighting especially makes for truly special images with skin tones that just glide over the page. It is lovely indeed but it comes at a price.

 

I went with the 007 over my original exploration of a very good condition 006 (at about the same price as the one Rob references above, perhaps even a little cheaper in GBP) simply because of the need to access higher ISO values in order to maintain a high enough shutter speed for shooting hand held, which I primarily do.

 

This is a must really since you need to be really careful shooting MF at 70mm lower than even 1/125th and indeed, that would be the lowest I ever shoot at and I try to aim for at least 1/250th just to be sure. For portraiture in averagely bright conditions (middle of the day, light over cast cloud) I would expect to be at f/4-5.6, 1/250th and ISO200-400. I used to default to this all day long with my Hasselblad 501 but then that was a camera that only cost me tenth of the cost of the 007 with lens. For that kind of money, you can justify a camera that is this limited.

 

If you can get a 006 for about $4k maybe you can also justify having a camera with this limitation but that's still a massive chunk of change for such a thing. Honestly, having shot both the 007 and 006 back to back, I prefer the verstaility, in both use and results, of the 007. I thought a lot about the magic of the CCD sensor but I'm not really seeing much difference to be honest.

 

There are however very big differences between an S and the SL in user experience and these are worth highlighting.

 

First is the AF on the SL is a whole order of magnitude better. Obviously you don't buy MF for fast AF but with the S, you are even more limited to only having (auto) focus and recompose as a work flow as there is only one centrally placed AF point. It's also not that accurate; even if don't recompose, focusing on the eye at f/2.5 can often result in the nose being in focus rather than the eye. This is frustrating and kind of negates having fast glass since you'll likely be stopping down a little to make sure you have the whole face in focus. The SLs ability to select focus points quickly and indeed provide for eye AF, which works supremely well, makes it's use a very different experience. This is where speed of use is very noticeable and your approach to portraiture will need to evolve if you go from an SL to the S. But since you're coming from an M, I think you will only find it an improvement in speed.

 

Second, the shutter speed; you do need to keep it higher. 1/250th on the 70mm is a safe bet. 1/125th is risky but achievable if you're really careful. By 1/60th you need at least a good monopod, ideally a tripod. The images will look OK at 5"x7" but any larger than that and you will likely see shake and blur, which kills a big part of what you're trying to achieve by shooting MF in the first place.

 

Third is the size; it is quite a bit heavier than the SL and while the SL with the 50 Summiliux (which is divine by the way) is not much lighter, the SL has the option of working with your M lenses. The SL with 35 or 50 'cron is only a little larger and heavier than an M and about half the weight of the S with 70mm and is therefore a much more versatile beast.

 

Fourth is the viewfinder; OVF on the S/EVF on the SL. This makes them very different in user experience even though the SL's EVF is stunning and in good light looks just like an OVF. The main difference is obviously the WYSIWYG of the EVF, which will always remind you if you've forgotten to switch back to Auto ISO or left the camera in manual and 1/2000th (assuming of course that you have selected preview in the EVF). Again this makes the SL a much less 'taxing' camera to work with, by which I mean you don't have to think as much and can if you wish simply put it into auto pilot. With the S, you will have to be more conscious of what you're doing. Again, coming from an M, this will be second nature any way.

 

Finally fifth is the cost of the lenses; the SL lenses are crazy expensive (but worth it, just) but the S lenses are beyond silly. Only the 70mm Summarit is what you might call 'comparably priced' when contrasted against the SL equivalent. I was only able to afford buying into the S by selling everything else I had acquired (including an SL, SL50, grip and batteries, M240 and ZM35 1.4) and even then I had to go 2nd hand on the lens and put down $3k. I cannot see myself ever owning any other lens with the S (I kept a Fuji X100F for 35mm FOV duties) such is the cost. I would like the 45mm and the 100mm but even 2nd hand that will run me $12k.

 

If you have an M already, then one argument would be that the SL would compliment it very well, as you can use the lenses across both. Personally I wouldn't do this though as I think there isn't enough difference in IQ between the two to differentiate one over the other (the SL does produce better IQ than a 240 but some find it less 'organic') and the user experience may end up being better on the SL as the EVF offers a different and in some ways better focus experience (though I have shot with an M extensively as well and I grew to love the RF approach and understand it can be very fast and acurate).

 

In my opinion, an M and S would be a much better combination. They are so wildly different that you're mood and objective on any given day will mean you're not hamstrung as to which to take out. When I had ther SL and M, I would always end up taking both out and use the SL with the AF SL50 and the M with the 35mm 1.4

 

Best of luck with your choices. If you want to see some portraits with the 007 my Flickr feed has a series of them going back a month or so including some with a 006. You can check the EXIF to see which.

 

[Edit] having said i have little to add, I seem to have done quite well! 'Twas ever thus.

Edited August 23, 2018 by geetee1972

[kparseg]

You know the market. I think the 006 is an absolute steal at current prices. You can get Rob's (Ropo54) 006 with a replaced sensor for $4250. And from Leica Miami which is a top notch outfit. If you need something after the sale, they will tend to it. That is worth the price of admission.

I loved my M9 - and it has not seen the light of day since the S came into my hands. It really is that good.

Happy hunting.

David

 

When you buy a camera, you want to make sure you can afford the possible repairs. Same as with a $100k car that costs $30k in 5 years but the repairs would still be at the level of the $100k car. When you say one can afford a $4k S006, can one afford to have it fixed if it's out of warranty? The same is about any other older MF cameras. 

 

Sorry guys, but there are better and easier options with newer cameras, covered by full warranty and roughly at the same price. No need to say about differences in lenses and "look". They are not there. Horses for course, and that's fine with me if you like this gambling with old cameras. 

[geetee1972]

When you buy a camera, you want to make sure you can afford the possible repairs. Same as with a $100k car that costs $30k in 5 years but the repairs would still be at the level of the $100k car. When you say one can afford a $4k S006, can one afford to have it fixed if it's out of warranty? The same is about any other older MF cameras. 

 

Sorry guys, but there are better and easier options with newer cameras, covered by full warranty and roughly at the same price. No need to say about differences in lenses and "look". They are not there. Horses for course, and that's fine with me if you like this gambling with old cameras. 

 

Sure but the warranty on a new camera is usually only 12 months. A second hand body from a reputable dealer will usuall have a six month warranty.

[ropo54]

When you buy a camera, you want to make sure you can afford the possible repairs. Same as with a $100k car that costs $30k in 5 years but the repairs would still be at the level of the $100k car. When you say one can afford a $4k S006, can one afford to have it fixed if it's out of warranty? The same is about any other older MF cameras. 

 

Sorry guys, but there are better and easier options with newer cameras, covered by full warranty and roughly at the same price. No need to say about differences in lenses and "look". They are not there. Horses for course, and that's fine with me if you like this gambling with old cameras. 

 

The costs for repairs out of warranty may well be more than offset by the discount received when buying pre-owned versus new.  

 

I'm not sure as  to what comparison you are making when you reference "better and easier options with newer cameras covered by full warranty"?  

 

This conversation about trying to put a value on new versus old seems a bit silly if you prefer the performance of the old to the new.

[Deliberate1]

When you buy a camera, you want to make sure you can afford the possible repairs. Same as with a $100k car that costs $30k in 5 years but the repairs would still be at the level of the $100k car. When you say one can afford a $4k S006, can one afford to have it fixed if it's out of warranty? The same is about any other older MF cameras. 

 

Sorry guys, but there are better and easier options with newer cameras, covered by full warranty and roughly at the same price. No need to say about differences in lenses and "look". They are not there. Horses for course, and that's fine with me if you like this gambling with old cameras. 

 

The cost of repairs applies with every purchase, old or new. The warranty just postpones the inevitable exposure, which may result in expensive repairs - or not. Only people who sell their camera - or car - at the expiration of the warranty period can avoid this. But then, they are also absorbing the full measure of depreciation, which would well exceed the cost of most repairs.

Consider the S 006 which debuted in 2012 for approximately $22,000. That is what first adopters paid. Three years later, I bought my 006 from Leica Miami for approximately $6500 - less than one third of the original price. It was flawless. And it was Leica certified which means a three year warranty that expires in two months. If something craps out after that, I own it. But I prefer those odds to the guaranteed depreciation shouldered by the original owner who received less than my purchase price for his trade. Assume that my S catastrophically fails after the warranty expires and is "beyond economical repair." I have already had three excellent years with this camera. But it is more likely that I will keep this camera for years to come. And with each passing year, the amortized cost diminishes. Even if I decided to sell it today for as little as $3000, about half of what I paid, its use has cost me $1000 per year. That is a much more favorable than the original depreciation, and well worth the investment. Consequently, the S 006 I got for $6500 was as good as it was when the original owner paid sticker for it. I, for one, am grateful for guys like him. 

David

Edited August 23, 2018 by Deliberate1

[Jeff S]

Buy insurance that pays full replacement value if it fails completely, and you haven’t lost anything. Mine does that, with no deductible.

 

Jeff

[AlanD]

Buy insurance that pays full replacement value if it fails completely, and you haven’t lost anything. Mine does that, with no deductible.

 

Jeff

Agree 100%

 

If you are not a professional photographer, adding gear to scheduled property is very affordable and gives you peace of mind in big cities or areas you may get mugged.

[kparseg]

Buy insurance that pays full replacement value if it fails completely, and you haven’t lost anything. Mine does that, with no deductible.

 

Jeff

Great, I'd like to see how much your insurance is going to increase after these costly replacements. If someone wants to buy a 5+ year-old camera, I'm fine with that. It's your money. All I'm saying is that buy the new tool that you can afford. Unless you have a great deal on 3-6-month-old camera. 

 

Regarding the comparisons, it's pretty clear what I meant. Are you willing to pay $4500 for a 6-year-old camera vs. $5-6k for a brand new GFX or X1D with full warranty? Let alone the difference in the lens prices. And if you want to add extended warranty, it'll be much cheaper for a new item than for a 6-year-old camera. Or you can pay $6k for a 10-year-old P1 p65+ digital back, would you really do that?

 

If you do, why don't you guys just buy 20-year-old cars? Cost extremely cheap (most of them). They drive, right? Have 4 wheels and 2 windshields. Who cares if you need to fix it every month?

[Jeff S]

Great, I'd like to see how much your insurance is going to increase after these costly replacements. If someone wants to buy a 5+ year-old camera, I'm fine with that. It's your money. All I'm saying is that buy the new tool that you can afford. Unless you have a great deal on 3-6-month-old camera.

 

I buy replacement insurance for all my camera gear, new or used, as well as for an extensive vintage print and book collection, etc. They paid $10k for a print damaged in a house move some time ago.... rate didn’t increase a penny. It helps to have only the best carriers and premium policies.

 

Jeff

[kparseg]

I buy replacement insurance for all my camera gear, new or used, as well as for an extensive vintage print and book collection, etc. They paid $10k for a print damaged in a house move some time ago.... rate didn’t increase a penny. It helps to have only the best carriers and premium policies.

 

Jeff

Good to know that, Jeff. What's your insurance company, if you don't mind me asking? Thanks.

[Jeff S]

I’ve used both Chubb and AIG, separate riders to my premium home policies.

 

Jeff

[albireo_double]

The key to the S system are its lenses. NOTHING comes close. The AF issue is long over...Just make sure lenses were upgraded with permanent fix.

Albert     

 

Well, I use both the S007 and a Fuji GFX and I can assure you that the Fuji medium format lenses come damn close, all of them, consistently. The Fuji 32-64 zoom is even better than the Leica S zoom, in my view.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[kparseg]

I’ve used both Chubb and AIG, separate riders to my premium home policies.

 

Jeff

Thanks, Jeff. I'll check their policies tonight.