S3 vs S006 vs SL resolution

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, tom0511 said:

While the SL-lenses might be more perfect in a technical way (are they?), I think the S-lenses are still very (more) special. 

 

 

 

As Toni Felsner, Product Manager for both lines, and David Farkas have pointed out, the S lenses MUST be corrected optically since the OVF would reveal distortions, while the SL lenses can benefit from software corrections after the fact (in addition to superb optics).  

For handheld shooting, the SL system also offers some features than can potentially enhance image quality, including OIS (in 2 zooms), IBIS in the SL2, and off-sensor focus (no camera/lens calibration issues) and focusing aids. On the other hand, the S obviously provides IQ advantages from its larger sensor, higher S3 MP, etc.  

It’s never as simple as evaluating individual components, lens or other. System integration as a whole (not to mention user related issues) complicate assessments.... especially considering potential software enhancements.

Jeff

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I suspect that the S lenses, developed over the period from 2005 to 2015, reflect a different philosophy and design partly as a function of the time when they were created, partly as the last pure optical designs from the Solms/Wetzlar design team.  So of course the MTFs look different than the MTFs that we cheer for the latest SL lenses.  As do the color renderings and the bokeh, and probably other things.  Since the S lenses have been available at relatively reasonable prices, thanks to the slow appearance of new models of bodies, the AF issues, etc, I got the APO 120 some years ago, and have used it with great pleasure on my SL. (I realize I haven't shot with it yet on my new SL2.  I'll try to remedy that.) 

And just recently a very low priced S 100/2.0 caught my eye.  It appears to be new old stock (or "new" long on the shelf) and probably has not had the AF motor replaced.  Is that absolutely to be avoided?  Looking over the "show me your S images" thread for examples with the 100, I see a lot of very appealing images, with portraits dominating, many environmental and not just head and shoulders, with great color.  Looking at the MTFs for that lens,  I think I am seeing a Mandler 80/1.4 with autofocus.  Is that a fair characterization?

Edited April 14, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[tom0511]

When the S appeared on the market years ago Leica promoted, that S lenses are not built with size/weight restrictions, but for maximising IQ. If I see how good most of them work even wide open, including low vignetting wide open, I believe this was not only a marketing slogan.

In any way, in the end it is not a SL vs S question, but IMO more which system works best for which needs. The fact, that we can use S-lenses on the SL-bodies, is also a great benefit.

Specially the 100 and 120 are interesting in this regard.

 

 

[Jan1985]

vor 20 Minuten schrieb scott kirkpatrick:

I suspect that the S lenses, developed over the period from 2005 to 2015, reflect a different philosophy and design partly as a function of the time when they were created, partly as the last pure optical designs from the Solms/Wetzlar design team.  So of course the MTFs look different than the MTFs that we cheer for the latest SL lenses.  As do the color renderings and the bokeh, and probably other things.  Since the S lenses have been available at relatively reasonable prices, thanks to the slow appearance of new models of bodies, the AF issues, etc, I got the APO 120 some years ago, and have used it with great pleasure on my SL. (I realize I haven't shot with it yet on my new SL2.  I'll try to remedy that.) 

And just recently a very low priced S 100/2.0 caught my eye.  It appears to be new old stock (or "new" long on the shelf) and probably has not had the AF motor replaced.  Is that absolutely to be avoided?  Looking over the "show me your S images" thread for examples with the 100, I see a lot of very appealing images, with portraits dominating, many environmental and not just head and shoulders, with great color.  Looking at the MTFs for that lens,  I think I am seeing a Mandler 80/1.4 with autofocus.  Is that a fair characterization?

Where you found the 100? And what it should cost?

[ropo54]

28 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

I suspect that the S lenses, developed over the period from 2005 to 2015, reflect a different philosophy and design partly as a function of the time when they were created, partly as the last pure optical designs from the Solms/Wetzlar design team.  So of course the MTFs look different than the MTFs that we cheer for the latest SL lenses.  As do the color renderings and the bokeh, and probably other things.  Since the S lenses have been available at relatively reasonable prices, thanks to the slow appearance of new models of bodies, the AF issues, etc, I got the APO 120 some years ago, and have used it with great pleasure on my SL. (I realize I haven't shot with it yet on my new SL2.  I'll try to remedy that.) 

And just recently a very low priced S 100/2.0 caught my eye.  It appears to be new old stock (or "new" long on the shelf) and probably has not had the AF motor replaced.  Is that absolutely to be avoided?  Looking over the "show me your S images" thread for examples with the 100, I see a lot of very appealing images, with portraits dominating, many environmental and not just head and shoulders, with great color.  Looking at the MTFs for that lens,  I think I am seeing a Mandler 80/1.4 with autofocus.  Is that a fair characterization?

I am told the cost to repair the AF motor is $300-500.

I've got a few S lenses which have not been repaired as yet, but at the prices I have paid, the extra money to repair the AF motor still makes the lenses quite reasonably priced. But, I'm a hobbyist and so I can deal with the lens being out of commission for several weeks. 

The S100 is likened to a  noctilux or 80 1.4 look.   In comparison to the S120, the S100 has busier bokeh as noted in a post by ZHNL.

A wide open shot of my granddaughter with the S 007 and the S100.

The 2nd and 3rd shots were taken with my SL and S100. 

Rob

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited April 14, 2020 by ropo54

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

And just recently a very low priced S 100/2.0 caught my eye.  It appears to be new old stock (or "new" long on the shelf) and probably has not had the AF motor replaced.  Is that absolutely to be avoided?  Looking over the "show me your S images" thread for examples with the 100, I see a lot of very appealing images, with portraits dominating, many environmental and not just head and shoulders, with great color.  Looking at the MTFs for that lens,  I think I am seeing a Mandler 80/1.4 with autofocus.  Is that a fair characterization?

As David Farkas points out, it’s sometimes called the Noctilux of S lenses.  He includes a few non-portrait pics.

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2020/04/the-definitive-guide-to-leica-s-lenses/

Jeff

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here are two examples of using the APO 120 S on the SL2:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

U1010776 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

U1010773 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr

(within 100 m of the house, the current regulations -- at least we don't live in a neighborhood that has soldiers in the street enforcing the lockdown,)

rendered at 70%, which you can see by clicking thru to Flickr.

Edited April 14, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick