Hassy X1D ii + 80/F1.9 or SL2 + 50/F1.4

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 28 Minuten schrieb helged:

Why not shoot in FF mode and crop thereafter? Just curious... 

Do you know if the SL2 actually only displays the images in crop mode but saves the FF file?  In one review, not sure if it was Jono’s, it was mentioned that file size is the same, whether one shoots in crop mode or in FF. 

[Advertisement]

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

[ropo54]

1 hour ago, helged said:

Why not shoot in FF mode and crop thereafter? Just curious... 

One gets the frame lines in the viewfinder, but yes it would accomplish the same result.

Rob

[Tailwagger]

33 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

Do you know if the SL2 actually only displays the images in crop mode but saves the FF file?  In one review, not sure if it was Jono’s, it was mentioned that file size is the same, whether one shoots in crop mode or in FF. 

I havent checked all the implementations, and certainly cant speak to the SL2 yet, but typically,  if you select a crop mode, the EVF will simulate that crop. In some, perhaps most implementations, the JPG output will reflect the crop, but AFAIK, thats never true for RAW result.  It's pretty much exactly the same as selecting the out  to be monochrome JPG + RAW.  The EVF displays monochrome, the jpg result is monochrome, but the raw file is still in full color.  So similar to having to convert back to mono in post, you're left to recreate the crop. That's what I meant earlier when I said you could use X1D crop mode to set the EVF to be 2x3, but there are issues.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

I havent checked all the implementations, and certainly cant speak to the SL2 yet, but typically,  if you select a crop mode, the EVF will simulate that crop. 

To be clear, it seems that the crop for the SL (and presumably SL2) is provided by introducing frame lines (similar to an M), rather than having the cropped image fill the entire VF (as in the cropped sensor M8).  is that correct?

Jeff

[ropo54]

16 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

To be clear, it seems that the crop for the SL (and presumably SL2) is provided by introducing frame lines (similar to an M), rather than having the cropped image fill the entire VF (as in the cropped sensor M8).  is that correct?

Jeff

Jeff:

No, the image in APSC mode will fill the entire screen.

Upon pressing for review of the shot, the image will show the cropped frame lines within the EVF. (My post #42 was inartfully expressed).

Rob

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by ropo54

[Jeff S]

Hmm..maybe more reason to consider more compact TL lenses on SL2...although less weather sealing.

Jeff

[prismstorm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/6/2019 at 8:04 AM, Tailwagger said:

Personally, I've decided to own both. They are indeed very different cameras which might overlap in terms pixel count, but after that not so much. The upcoming SL is certain to be the speedier, more flexible of the two. I think that it is more reasonably compared to other FFs of its ilk from a features and capability perspective than the X1D. You pay a premium, but its not too hard, assuming cost isn't a first order concern, to justify investment over SoCaNikons in the longer term given the optics available. The L system is, or at least will shortly be, full of options from short to wide, IBIS, OIS, etc.

The X1D, OTOH, is an utterly closed system, somewhat of a desperate experiment and IMO a much riskier investment from a long term perspective. That said, assuming 180mm (ff eq) is long enough for you and you're not longing for zooms, it's a reasonably complete system.  While it is in no way M-like (though interestingly with the 45mm it weighs slightly less than an M with an RRS grip and a 50MM Summilux), it does share some of its core esthetic in that it embraces a simplicity of interface and a deliberate, yet not necessarily overly demanding style of operation. Yes, there's a svelte modern design and touch screen, but in many ways, it's still old school. ie. if you need to shoot at 1/8", best bring a tripod... no IBIS or OIS is on the menu. Compared to my Leicas, in daily operation it's ever so slightly less refined. OTOH, once one recalls the basic differences between MF and FF and how to work with them, its output is about as good as it gets, particularly if you like to limit the amount of time you spend in post. Files arrive fully formed, tempting to just leave untouched, but with a few tweaks the results can be quite stunning. As you reference the XCD 80, I'd point out that with a maximum shutter speed of 1/2000" and base ISO of 100 (yes there is the e-shutter) shooting wide open can be challenging in some situations without filters.

For landscape, given the size, weight, cost, interface and optics, the X1D is IMO, unparalleled. For fast operation on the street the M, and one suspects the SL as well,  kicks its rear, but then you already have that base covered.  For portrait, IMO, it's a toss up. High speed sync, X1D, optics, SL2. Chasing the cat or the kids, the X1D would be quite disappointing, we'll see how the SL2 will do in that regard in the next few days. And of course, if reusing one's M glass is important...

Hi Tailwagger, I am a SL user interested in adding the X1D II 50C to my arsenal, and was quite fascinated when you said that the X1D II files are fully formed and as good as it gets SOOC. The thing is, I have downloaded several RAWs on the official website, loaded them into LR, and the colors were a lot less vibrant than Leica files, very bleak and cool. Is it supposed to look like that (Scandinavian heritage) or am I missing something in post-production? Are you using Phocus or LR or PS, and which color profile did you apply (e.g. camera standard vs embedded) to get the 'Hasselblad Colors' that they termed 'Hasselblad Natural Colour Solution' and which you deemed to be 'fully formed? 

[prismstorm]

On 11/3/2019 at 2:42 AM, IkarusJohn said:

I’m not sure what “usability friction” means as a selection criteria - is it haptics? Or do you mean reluctance to use?

If the SL2 has the same clean user interface of the current version, then I think it will be a fine camera.  I have both the X1D II and the SL, along with the 50 Summilux-SL and XCD 80/1.9.  Both are excellent in terms of image quality - the experts will probably say the Summilux is better for a host of reasons.  In use, I don’t really see a huge technical difference.  The Summilux is huge, but perfection comes at a price, I guess.  As a system, the Hasselblad is smaller and lighter in the hand.  Neither system is particularly fast (particularly AF), but that doesn’t bother me.

At this stage, I have the XCD 80 & 21 and will consider the 135 and 30 at some stage.

For me the difference is in haptics and format.

The SL, with its 4 button layout is fantastic, and intuitive.  But its menus are relatively deep and the camera is multi-functioned.  It’s a complex piece of equipment, presented cleanly and as simply as Leica can manage.  Conversely, the Hasselblad touch screen and menu system is fantastic - direct control from the screen of everything you need is brilliant.  If you don’t like the TL2 or cellphone touch screens, then the SL2 might be a better option - who knows, it’s all smoke and mirrors at this stage.  I prefer to wait for fact from the horse’s mouth.  When it was released, the SL was almost perfect, whereas the first iteration of the X1D was half-baked.  Most of that criticism had been addressed in the X1D II - I don’t see any differentiation between the SL and X1D II.  They’re just different.  I expect the SL2 to be a leap ahead of the X1D II, but only to a certain degree.  We’re guilding the lily at this point.

Format is the real point of difference for me - the 50MP Sony sensor in the X1D remains the reference sensor.  I’m not even remotely driven by the pixel race, and the trade-off in motion blur and noise remains a concern.  There is a benefit in the larger pixel pitch of the bigger sensor.

I’m not sure if this helps you.  The SL is overall a faster camera, but the X1D II more contemplative, in my view.  If the X1D II and XCD 80/1.9 was sitting beside the SL with the 50 Summilux-SL on my desk, I’m not sure which I would grab.  Instinctively, I’d probably take the X1D, but it’s newer.  The SL seems more robust (I’m not about to test that) - I’m going on a three day tramp with family in January.  The area gets 200 days of rain a year.  I’ll take the SL, 16-35 VE zoom and 75 Summicron-SL, I think.  My brother in law (a professional photographer) is taking a Huawei P40-pro ...

Hi IkarusJohn, when using the X1D II, did you find it significantly harder to take sharp pictures / crank out all the 50MP MF sensor has to offer due to no stabilization of any kind either in the body or the lenses and the inherent propensity for the slightest flaw in technique to show in a large sensor format with tons of megapixels. Are handheld X1D II shots possible compared to SL? Did you find the X1D II putting out very 'bleak, flat, cool' RAW pictures lacking the Leica contrast and pop? 

[IkarusJohn]

Not in my experience.

I have only two stabilised lenses (the two SL zooms).  Never has a camera with IBIS.  Hated and sold the D800e and A7r as I couldn’t reliably get a sharp image.  Haven’t had that problem with either the X1D II or the SL.

I don’t do in camera JPegs, so I tend to randomly fiddle with the sliders in LR. I learnt with the Monochrom that flat isn’t a bad thing.  So far, the colours seem very good out of the X1D.

[Tailwagger]

7 hours ago, prismstorm said:

Hi Tailwagger, I am a SL user interested in adding the X1D II 50C to my arsenal, and was quite fascinated when you said that the X1D II files are fully formed and as good as it gets SOOC. 

As always, one man's opinion.  By as 'good as it gets'  I meant better than everyone else when it comes to accurately capturing what was in front of you without editorializing.  Obviously, it's hard to assess color fidelity  processing someone else's random raw file. My point was that where it is easy to bend and kink a straight piece of wire, it's not so easy straightening a mangled one.  If you were expecting I meant nothing to do in post, I apologize for misleading you. It's quite rare that a raw file with 14 stops of range is ever going represent exactly what you want see on a 6 stop monitor SooC. My point was that one will likely spend less time wrestling with color balance, tweaking for skin tone etc... But of course, eyes and sensibilities vary, YMMV.

[prismstorm]

17 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Not in my experience.

I have only two stabilised lenses (the two SL zooms).  Never has a camera with IBIS.  Hated and sold the D800e and A7r as I couldn’t reliably get a sharp image.  Haven’t had that problem with either the X1D II or the SL.

I don’t do in camera JPegs, so I tend to randomly fiddle with the sliders in LR. I learnt with the Monochrom that flat isn’t a bad thing.  So far, the colours seem very good out of the X1D.

I take it that the huge shutter shock produced by both the D800E and A7R are the culprits for the unsharp images, and that the discreet leaf shutters of the XCD lenses help with getting handheld shots sharp even on a 50MP MF sensor with no stabilization function of any kind 😈😈 

[prismstorm]

15 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

As always, one man's opinion.  By as 'good as it gets'  I meant better than everyone else when it comes to accurately capturing what was in front of you without editorializing.  Obviously, it's hard to assess color fidelity  processing someone else's random raw file. My point was that where it is easy to bend and kink a straight piece of wire, it's not so easy straightening a mangled one.  If you were expecting I meant nothing to do in post, I apologize for misleading you. It's quite rare that a raw file with 14 stops of range is ever going represent exactly what you want see on a 6 stop monitor SooC. My point was that one will likely spend less time wrestling with color balance, tweaking for skin tone etc... But of course, eyes and sensibilities vary, YMMV.

No problem, I get what you meant was that the X1DII produces very accurate and neutral RAW files that are a paradise to impose one's own vision afterwards with minimal fuss, just like hi-fi in audio.

[IkarusJohn]

4 hours ago, prismstorm said:

I take it that the huge shutter shock produced by both the D800E and A7R are the culprits for the unsharp images, and that the discreet leaf shutters of the XCD lenses help with getting handheld shots sharp even on a 50MP MF sensor with no stabilization function of any kind 😈😈 

Probably, and the benefit of larger pixels.

[panoreserve]

Am 12.11.2019 um 23:31 schrieb Jeff S:

Hmm..maybe more reason to consider more compact TL lenses on SL2...although less weather sealing.

Jeff

Yep, great results with SL2 & (really tiny!) TL 18mm! But, as you have stated, weather sealing unfortunately isn‘t on par with SL-lenses...