A big camera that feels real

[setuporg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After handling the S with a few lenses over a few weeks, I find it very weird coming back to X1D or M.  They feel small.  Their clicks sound tentative after the whirring of the S.  The lenses of S require big hands, you need to grasp them.  Overall it is a very interesting tactile experience that is linked with the OVF.  The camera is present and imposing, commanding complements.  I think if you are a pro and need to impress clients (which I'm not) there's nothing better.  Sometimes, bigger is better!

[Advertisement]

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

[setuporg]

You can shoot much more and much faster with the S.  M required manual focusing and artful consideration.  X1D is just slow to focus and write the 100 MB file.  With S you can shoot as fast as the buffer.  Which feels reliable when you shoot people.

Edited October 21, 2019 by setuporg

[Jeff S]

It’s not the size, it’s how you use it.  So I’ve heard...

Jeff

[ZHNL]

6 minutes ago, setuporg said:

You can shoot much more and much faster with the S.  M required manual focusing and artful consideration.  X1D is just slow to focus and write the 100 MB file.  With S you can shoot as fast as the buffer.  Which feels reliable when you shoot people.

I don't know, somehow, I feel I can shoot/focus faster with M. S's AF is ancient. 

[setuporg]

1 minute ago, ZHNL said:

I don't know, somehow, I feel I can shoot/focus faster with M. S's AF is ancient. 

True, there are cases where I can focus M much faster, such as not at all as it's already focused, often on infinity.   But in many cases a series of fast shots at a medium distance works faster with S, when a person is in mid-range and walking.  You can also do it one-handed where with M you need to put down the coffee first!:)

[ZHNL]

49 minutes ago, setuporg said:

True, there are cases where I can focus M much faster, such as not at all as it's already focused, often on infinity.   But in many cases a series of fast shots at a medium distance works faster with S, when a person is in mid-range and walking.  You can also do it one-handed where with M you need to put down the coffee first!:)

Have you try to zoom in your S images to check focus? I feel S007's AFC is useless most of the time if not all the time.  

I can definitely focus moving stuff with M fast and more accurately especially for anything  wider than 50mm. Sure I can't do what "eye focus" do these day that nail focus with people run into you with M, but S will be hopeless as well under those conditions. 

[setuporg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I get even the S100mm focused quite alright.  I agree it could be better but it is serviceable.

Are you using the original matte screen or the split screen for your manual focusing?

A+

[ZHNL]

10 minutes ago, setuporg said:

I get even the S100mm focused quite alright.  I agree it could be better but it is serviceable.

Are you using the original matte screen or the split screen for your manual focusing?

A+

I had split screen but change it back to stock. It was useless. It slow me down a lot trying to align split images which is very difficult to see under certain condition and also not more accurate. 

I prefer eye ball manual focus and with Ss OVF with S glasses, it is a dream come true feeling. (BTW I am an expert for that and have been doing that with Leica R and ZF on even D700/D810/D850  )

[xiaubauu2009]

10 hours ago, setuporg said:

You can shoot much more and much faster with the S.  M required manual focusing and artful consideration.  X1D is just slow to focus and write the 100 MB file.  With S you can shoot as fast as the buffer.  Which feels reliable when you shoot people.

Actually, if you are well versed with M operation, S is slower... and less reliable in its AF... the whole process is slower...

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

"...M required manual focusing and artful consideration..."

This is one of the exact attributes that attracts many to the M system.

Artful consideration is something which has been very nearly entirely eradicated from modern western cultures.  Perhaps this helps to explain at least in part the draw of the M camera system to more than a few image makers these days.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Herr Barnack

[darylgo]

To the OP: well said.  The M barely gets noticed but the S, especially with the longer lenses gets many comments.  The S is certainly substantial and doesn't give up anything to the solid cameras prior to plastics becoming so common.   My S can focus much faster than an M, not necessarily any more accurately but it definitely takes more time with an M to nail focus well.  The S continues to be a relevant camera, the obsession with greater megapixels rarely addresses the limitations of the available lenses.    

[tom0511]

While I really like the Leica S I must say I would not mind if it was somewhat lighter and the lenses were a little smaller. I never found the x1d too small.

[albertknappmd]

I switched to the split screen years ago on the S2 and have always preferred it on the 006 and 007. Makes focusing much easier. I do not understand why they  don't make it the mandatory screen.

Albert

[xiaubauu2009]

5 hours ago, albertknappmd said:

I switched to the split screen years ago on the S2 and have always preferred it on the 006 and 007. Makes focusing much easier. I do not understand why they  don't make it the mandatory screen.

Albert

so they can charge you extra as a 'optional' extra.... hahaha. I installed on both my 006 and 007 and it was a must have item.

[yudafu2]

I have the split screen on my s2p while the S007 has the original screen. I don't feel one is superior to the other. The split screen is darker, and therefore it can be slower. But it makes focusing slightly more accurate. The original screen is bright and fine. No need to change. 

[Jeff S]

One potential problem with split screens (not just Leica) is that half can go black (dark), particularly when using slower, longer lenses.  I noticed this when testing the S zoom, at the longer end, on the already slowish S006.  Leica Miami confirmed the issue.  

Jeff

[albertknappmd]

Jeff

The zoom is the only one with the darkening issue.

My experience has been that the split screen if far more accurate particularly in portrait photography. 

I have used the same split screen o the S2 then the 006 and now the 007.

Albert

 

[Jeff S]

55 minutes ago, albertknappmd said:

The zoom is the only one with the darkening issue.

 

 

Another example of the zoom as the weak(er) sister in the lineup.  Too bad it couldn’t be faster, or with OIS, constant length when zooming, better edge performance, and less sample variation.  The SL zooms have since narrowed the gap with sister primes.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[peterv]

I’m afraid that’s a pretty comprehensive list of all the complaints I’ve read repeatedly on the forums about the zoom S, I have never used it myself.

Imagine what Leica could do with these modern SL lens fabrication-techniques, implementing all that on an all new S 24-70 or 28-90 equivalent or thereabouts, f3,5 or f4,5 would be fine with the modern sensors. They have good enough high ISO for fast shutter speeds and DOF is still going to be very shallow at around f4,0 on an S sized sensor anyway.

I do understand all that would make the lens big, but if they could make it just big enough for sharp corners too and make it really rugged, then that woud make a hell of a combination with an S3 which would cover a lot of needs for a lot of people without ever having to change the lens. It would be big and heavy, but it could handle a lot of photo opportunities under very different circumstances.

Would there be a market for a big S 15-20K zoom? Sometimes when I look at the medium format thread over GetDPI, I think there is 🙂

[Jeff S]

27 minutes ago, peterv said:

I’m afraid that’s a pretty comprehensive list of all the complaints I’ve read repeatedly on the forums about the zoom S, I have never used it myself.

Imagine what Leica could do with these modern SL lens fabrication-techniques, implementing all that on an all new S 24-70 or 28-90 equivalent or thereabouts, f3,5 or f4,5 would be fine with the modern sensors. They have good enough high ISO for fast shutter speeds and DOF is still going to be very shallow at around f4,0 on an S sized sensor anyway.

I do understand all that would make the lens big, but if they could make it just big enough for sharp corners too and make it really rugged, then that woud make a hell of a combination with an S3 which would cover a lot of needs for a lot of people without ever having to change the lens. It would be big and heavy, but it could handle a lot of photo opportunities under very different circumstances.

Would there be a market for a big S 15-20K zoom? Sometimes when I look at the medium format thread over GetDPI, I think there is 🙂

To put it in perspective, it’s still a wonderful lens, capable of superb results.  But just not quite up to other S lenses.  Keep in mind that SL lenses can benefit from in-camera corrections (distortion, for instance), but the S OVF viewing demands optimum lens corrections from the start. 

I wouldn’t want s bigger or much more expensive S zoom than the current iteration, even if focal length range is sacrificed a bit.  But I suspect all this is wishful thinking, especially if the S3, as some suspect, is the end of the line, at least in its current DSLR configuration.  A mirrorless S would require new lenses anyway, or an adapter for current ones.  The fact that we haven’t seen any new S lenses in a long while makes one wonder where the path leads... or not.

Jeff

Edited November 1, 2019 by Jeff S