Jump to content

Who is S for?


hirohhhh

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm SL user for a couple years and I'm thinking to upgrade to SL2, even though I don't have much reason except maybe more megapixels. For video I use another camera from L-mount family that is specifically designed for video. I also have almost all SL lenses, so I'd say I invested pretty much into this system.

I never thought about S, not I have ever tried it. I think I just saw it in the Leica Stores. Today I got newsletter about S3 launch and I became curious. I've seen that the price is about 4x higher than SL2, so I'm curious, who is the target market for this camera? I heard professionals - but professionals use SL and whole bunch of other cheaper cameras. So, specifically which professionals? What is the main advantage using this system than SL?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mega Megapixels, latest technology, larger Sensor..  All manufacturers have a high end model, this is Leica's. There are plenty of deep pocketed souls around - users will probably be, high end Society Photographers, Magnum & National Geographic bods..  Maybe even you and me, if we can get a second mortgage - lol --    Quick ? - is the SL a large camera?   L

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hirohhhh,  The S system was and will always be intended for the professional photographer who needs a medium format camera capable of meeting client needs.  The intended use of the S system is studio fashion, on location fashion and portrait photographs.  The offshoot is the landscape photographers who need or want large dynamic range and ability to crop within frame and in all cases ability to print very large if needed.  Based on my many years as a S, SL and M systems user for my business, the S performs in a magnificent way rendering prints for my corporate and private collectors.  I tried in the past, both the Fuji and Hasselblad large sensor cameras and quickly found my clients would not purchase photographs shot with those systems.  In both cases, those systems quickly found new homes via eBay.  It was never an issue with color management either.  Rather, in all cases, Leica lenses and sensors render photographs and also express my vision as I see the scene. The S camera and lenses render photographs IMO differently than the SL or M.  At the end of the day, my clients vote with their wallets as I have expressed in this forum several times before.  The S system is not for the "masses" and you have to be really committed to buying into it too.  Like most digital cameras, they are like automobiles...they depreciate.  Some depreciate faster than others.  Last, professional photographers either lease/rent or buy, but remember when they do so, the expense and depreciation is written off on their taxes.  The S system is magnificent, but expensive for most mortals.  The SL II is a superb camera and will do almost everything if not more than the S...but the S remains in a class unto itself.  Hope this helps.  r/ Mark

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, lykaman said:

Mega Megapixels, latest technology, larger Sensor..  

Well, two out of three, maybe. For instance: SL2... Maestro III; S3...Maestro II; or incorporation of IBIS in the SL2, etc. The S once was the ‘flagship’, where tech trickled down to other product lines, but this is no longer consistently the case. The S007 led Leica in MP before the SL launch. But the SL2 emerged with higher MP than the S007, before the S3 launch. And increased MP seems the main, if not only, significant improvement over the S007, despite a five year gap. The SL zooms are also much better performance-wise than the S zoom, and include OIS. The S mystique as the lead technology platform has dissipated, even though it remains an exceptional system... with the benefits of the larger sensor (and for those who love OVF).

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

Well, two out of three, maybe. For instance: SL2... Maestro III; S3...Maestro II; or incorporation of IBIS in the SL2, etc. The S once was the ‘flagship’, where tech trickled down to other product lines, but this is no longer consistently the case. The S007 led Leica in MP before the SL launch. But the SL2 emerged with higher MP than the S007, before the S3 launch. And increased MP seems the main, if not only, significant improvement over the S007, despite a five year gap. The SL zooms are also much better performance-wise than the S zoom, and include OIS. The S mystique as the lead technology platform has dissipated, even though it remains an exceptional system.

Jeff

The new "S" as a package and as a Platform is superior to the SLll -

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, lykaman said:

The new "S" as a package and as a Platform is superior to the SLll -

I was very specific in my assessment...including added edit at the end before I had time to beat your post. You are free to make an overall subjective assessment, but you can’t argue the technology differences I mentioned, which was my point.  I wasn’t comparing MF vs FF.

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks all for the replies, however, I'm still not convinced why is this 4x price of SL2? Is it 4x better? Based on your answers, I'd say no... it might be slightly ahead of SL2, but I'm still not sure why it cost s 4x. Is it just a status among Leica users, or does it really delivers 4x better photos? I saw couple samples online, but they are shoot mainly for the purpose of reviewing the camera, it's hard to judge and compare based on these images.

Is it more likely that old S users will switch to SL2, or SL users will switch to S, or even S3?

4 hours ago, LeicaR10 said:

The SL II is a superb camera and will do almost everything if not more than the S...but the S remains in a class unto itself.

Mark, can you be more specific, what did you mean by that SL2 can do more than S? I'm just curious. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

I'm SL user for a couple years and I'm thinking to upgrade to SL2, even though I don't have much reason except maybe more megapixels. For video I use another camera from L-mount family that is specifically designed for video. I also have almost all SL lenses, so I'd say I invested pretty much into this system.

I never thought about S, not I have ever tried it. I think I just saw it in the Leica Stores. Today I got newsletter about S3 launch and I became curious. I've seen that the price is about 4x higher than SL2, so I'm curious, who is the target market for this camera? I heard professionals - but professionals use SL and whole bunch of other cheaper cameras. So, specifically which professionals? What is the main advantage using this system than SL?

https://www.adorama.com/alc/faq-what-is-a-medium-format-camera

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hirohhhh,  To answer your question in post #7, the SL2 has many features and capabilities the S cameras to include the S3 do not have.  The SL prime and zoom lenses are state of the art Leica optical and mechanical technology.  The S lenses are state of the art as well and designed from scratch for medium format.  The SL2 camera itself has a good number of features and capabilities the S3 and previous S cameras do not have.  Way too many to list and compare the two systems.  It is like apples and oranges between the two systems.  The main difference is between the new S3 camera is certainly the sensor size, 60 MP.  It is a larger sensor than the SL2.  The pixel size is larger as well.  The SL2 camera meets or exceeds most photographers needs and wants.  Unless you are printing huge prints and need detail within those prints for clients or personal use, I most highly recommend you stay with the superb SL2 camera and lenses.  For most photographers, medium format photography is overkill and would be a waste of money for most.  But if your genre of photography is say; fashion, portrait or landscape photography and you make very large prints for clients to buy, then you might require or justify a Leica S or other MF camera system.  I would highly recommend you look at the Leica Camera AG website and even the link Frame-it placed in his Post #8 above to get a good understanding the difference between full frame (FF) and medium format (MF) photography.  Google:  Leica Camera AG  and look at the two systems.  If this isn't enough, I would suggest you make a visit to your local Leica Store and talk it over with the staff.  I hope this helps.  r/ Mark

Edited by LeicaR10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to both of you. I read the article and I have a better understanding what the MF is. I checked few other MF cameras by other manufacturer, such as Hasselblad and Phase One XT (boy that's expensive) and now I get it, but it's not worth switching for me at the moment. Love my SL!

Link to post
Share on other sites

From my S3 review:

Who should use the S3?

  1. Photographers that choose image quality as one of their highest priorities. This includes landscape, architecture, portrait, fashion and product photography.
  2. Photographers that do not want to fuss with their equipment. The simplicity of the S3 eliminates distractions due to equipment.
  3. Photographers that work with negatives, transparencies and flat art reproduction.
  4. Photographers that print their work. The physical ouput is where the image quality can be clearly seen.
  5. Photographers that are not trying to work at high speed. That means that if one is looking for 10 frames per second, the S3 is probably not the appropriate camera.
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

Thanks all for the replies, however, I'm still not convinced why is this 4x price of SL2? Is it 4x better? Based on your answers, I'd say no... it might be slightly ahead of SL2, but I'm still not sure why it cost s 4x. Is it just a status among Leica users, or does it really delivers 4x better photos? I saw couple samples online, but they are shoot mainly for the purpose of reviewing the camera, it's hard to judge and compare based on these images.

Is it more likely that old S users will switch to SL2, or SL users will switch to S, or even S3?

Mark, can you be more specific, what did you mean by that SL2 can do more than S? I'm just curious. Thanks.

Nothing anyone says can convince you one way or the other. Try both. They are very different systems. I have an SL (v. 1), Fuji GFX 100, and an S(007). The Fuji is more capable in almost every way. At 120mm or less, I prefer using the S, and its output makes me smile. What is that worth?

Matt

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jeff S said:

you can’t argue the technology differences I mentioned, which was my point

A fair point, but it is quite common for mid-range cameras to have more "technology" than high-end cameras. Think of Canon and Nikon's lineups since 1960. The F1n was more basic than the contemporary AE-1. To this day, people wonder why the D6 has fewer features than the D850 and Z7.

Professionals tend to be more conservative than advanced amateurs, and the SL2 really needs a bit more horsepower under the hood to handle live view AF and 12fps. Also, professionals generally do not care for software helpers, unlike amateurs.

That's not to say that you won't find professionals who shoot JPEG and use program modes, or who use advanced-amateur cameras. Having a "professional camera" is not a requirement in most cases (although many art directors will think less of you if you don't).

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BernardC said:

A fair point, but it is quite common for mid-range cameras to have more "technology" than high-end cameras. Think of Canon and Nikon's lineups since 1960. The F1n was more basic than the contemporary AE-1. To this day, people wonder why the D6 has fewer features than the D850 and Z7.

Professionals tend to be more conservative than advanced amateurs, and the SL2 really needs a bit more horsepower under the hood to handle live view AF and 12fps. Also, professionals generally do not care for software helpers, unlike amateurs.

That's not to say that you won't find professionals who shoot JPEG and use program modes, or who use advanced-amateur cameras. Having a "professional camera" is not a requirement in most cases (although many art directors will think less of you if you don't).

The comments were in response to lykaman’s post #2 that the S was (for those seeking) “mega MP, latest technology, larger sensor”.  And in Leica world, the S did formerly incorporate some of the latest technology (not synonymous with ‘features’) within its product lines, as evidenced by the then new Maestro II processor, which was hailed at the time as being on the tech forefront.  Now the SL2 has the first Maestro III, and the new S3 chugs along with the Maestro II.  That’s all I was saying.  Yes, oftentimes less is more, and one can pay more for that; the philosophy is built into Leica DNA.  But beyond that, the S was once positioned as the lead dog from an innovation and core tech standpoint, both body and lenses. Not anymore, even though it probably still leads in the IQ department, primarily as a result of its larger sensor (which is, admittedly, a nice bit of tech). 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, I think we are basically saying the same thing.

Isn't every new camera promoted as having the "latest technology" though? I don't remember that Leica promised that the S system would be constantly updated to keep the perceived technological lead. That's a consumer marketing technique, where you get a new model every year (4 months if it's Sony), and you are made to feel that your current camera is obsolete. Usually professional camera systems take a different tack, emphasizing support, reliability, and constancy. Maybe David Farka's site has kept some of the old S System press releases archived.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, LeicaR10 said:

Hirohhhh,  The S system was and will always be intended for the professional photographer who needs a medium format camera capable of meeting client needs.  The intended use of the S system is studio fashion, on location fashion and portrait photographs.  The offshoot is the landscape photographers who need or want large dynamic range and ability to crop within frame and in all cases ability to print very large if needed.  Based on my many years as a S, SL and M systems user for my business, the S performs in a magnificent way rendering prints for my corporate and private collectors.  I tried in the past, both the Fuji and Hasselblad large sensor cameras and quickly found my clients would not purchase photographs shot with those systems.  In both cases, those systems quickly found new homes via eBay.  It was never an issue with color management either.  Rather, in all cases, Leica lenses and sensors render photographs and also express my vision as I see the scene. The S camera and lenses render photographs IMO differently than the SL or M.  At the end of the day, my clients vote with their wallets as I have expressed in this forum several times before.  The S system is not for the "masses" and you have to be really committed to buying into it too.  Like most digital cameras, they are like automobiles...they depreciate.  Some depreciate faster than others.  Last, professional photographers either lease/rent or buy, but remember when they do so, the expense and depreciation is written off on their taxes.  The S system is magnificent, but expensive for most mortals.  The SL II is a superb camera and will do almost everything if not more than the S...but the S remains in a class unto itself.  Hope this helps.  r/ Mark

I agree that the S, with S lenses processes incredible images.  I enjoy the M and SL, but the S "Paints a canvas" whereas the other bodies, for me, take great photographs.  For me, the S is artistic and the others photographic.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Well, two out of three, maybe. For instance: SL2... Maestro III; S3...Maestro II; or incorporation of IBIS in the SL2, etc. The S once was the ‘flagship’, where tech trickled down to other product lines, but this is no longer consistently the case. The S007 led Leica in MP before the SL launch. But the SL2 emerged with higher MP than the S007, before the S3 launch. And increased MP seems the main, if not only, significant improvement over the S007, despite a five year gap. The SL zooms are also much better performance-wise than the S zoom, and include OIS. The S mystique as the lead technology platform has dissipated, even though it remains an exceptional system... with the benefits of the larger sensor (and for those who love OVF).

Jeff

Jeff, I wonder if this is sort of like some of the auto manufacturers, who will put the new technology in the lower lines and then, when tested, get it into the luxury lines.  This seems to be happening more as the autos are more 'techie."  Just a thought.  I also wonder if because the S3 does not have an EVF only, that the Maestro II is more than sufficient?

I see your point, that it appears that the new Leica technology is all downstream and not necessarily packed in the S3.  I'm sure we'll learn more as the S3 gets into peoples hands and they produce with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure others have different opinions, but as to who the S is for (or the SL2 is for), this would be my take, based on history , not the current S3 or SL2, neither of which I have used, but on the S007 and SL1 which I have.  Also, not comparing sensor size (35mm vs. medium)

SL1 

- fast focus, fast moving, sports photography
- water sealed - add landscape and documentary work
- lens adapters - use existing M, R, S lenses to add
- main or second body - can be used with an M system and lenses, or S system and lenses
- high ISO - more equal maybe now, but SL1 was the first Leica with fast sensor based shutter speeds and better high ISO
- light weight (compared to S) - meant more for hand held, assumably with new IBIS, more so.

S System

- color depth and dynamic range - 14 bit color in 16 bit DNG, 15 stops of dynamic range (highest range in Leicas)
- also water sealed - landscape work
- fast production time - tuned for output so for studio work, typically less adjusting necessary to get clients images
- large print capability - for magazine covers and newer printers, high density is more important, web less so
- OVF - optical viewfinder is still brighter and has zero delay in viewing also lengthening battery life
- slower focus - IMHO, the S series is really meant for tripod work and the fact the body is big and heavy, dampens the mirror movement

Of course the bodies can be used interchangeably for photographic styles, but my belief is they are geared to quick use, quick action, hand-held (SL) and slower, thoughtful use, tripod (S).

 

Edited by davidmknoble
added water sealed to S
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, davidmknoble said:

Jeff, I wonder if this is sort of like some of the auto manufacturers, who will put the new technology in the lower lines and then, when tested, get it into the luxury lines.  This seems to be happening more as the autos are more 'techie."  Just a thought.  I also wonder if because the S3 does not have an EVF only, that the Maestro II is more than sufficient?

I see your point, that it appears that the new Leica technology is all downstream and not necessarily packed in the S3.  I'm sure we'll learn more as the S3 gets into peoples hands and they produce with it.

I don’t generally like car analogies, but if you force the issue, then I think it’s the opposite in top performance car circles, where the Formula One race vehicles (e.g., Ferrari) incorporate the latest tech, which then trickles down to consumer vehicles.  But F1 now has rules against certain tech... so analogies can quickly break down. 

Analogies aside, I think Leica did as little as possible beyond satisfying the craving, and market ‘requirement’ for additional MP  for the S system. Beyond that, not so much, other than some color tweaks, etc.  Seems that the system either morphs to EVF, chugs along with minimal changes, or dies.  But I make observations, not predictions... Leica can always surprise...although the S3 was hardly a surprise, basically announced 18 months ago with all key specs. The SL line, at least in the meantime, has been significantly advanced tech-wise (Maestro III, IBIS, improved EVF, etc).

Who is the S for? Probably, with the latest iteration, for those who have already bought into the system, for whatever reason.

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...