Anyone still buying into/investing in the S system at this point?

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The best bang for the bucks can be subjective, People can argue none of Leica is the best bang for the bucks.

Would Canon, Nikon, or Fujifilm be the best bang for the bucks? For my wife, it could be  LUMIX G97, yes, M43, not Leica, but for me, it could be Coach, not LV, nor Chanel. 

it could be easier to discuss if money is none issue, what is the best choice. But if money is an issue, then the decision factor would be the pocket size, not the camera.  

This could be applied to Lamborghini, Mercedes, Honda, or Kia. You name it.

Edited January 10 by Einst_Stein

[Slender]

7 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

In my experience, the S3 had uncorrectible banding in high ISOs that was visible in strong pushes of even base ISO. I tried other copies and found similar issues. So I would take the S007 if high ISO is a concern. Or dare I say it, the SL2. I have posted it a few times, but here is the SL2 and S3 at max ISO. I don't have an axe to grind, I just owned both and drew my own conclusions. SL2 is on top, S3 on the bottom.

 

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!

Is that at nominal exposure out of camera or after being pushed up? I love the SL2 but I cringe everytime I am forced to go above 10 000 iso with it.

 

Edited January 10 by Slender

[Slender]

36 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

The best bang for the bucks can be subjective, People can argue none of Leica is the best bang for the bucks.

Would Canon, Nikon, or Fujifilm be the best bang for the bucks? For my wife, it could be  LUMIX G97, yes, M43, not Leica, but for me, it could be Coach, not LV, nor Chanel. 

it could be easier to discuss if money is none issue, what is the best choice. But if money is an issue, then the decision factor would be the pocket size, not the camera.  

This could be applied to Lamborghini, Mercedes, Honda, or Kia. You name it.

For me it is especially about the lenses, there is something about the look of it... and they feel great as well. Having an M and an Iphone size isnt the question when we discuss the S obviously.

[Stuart Richardson]

47 minutes ago, Slender said:

Is that at nominal exposure out of camera or after being pushed up? I love the SL2 but I cringe everytime I am forced to go above 10 000 iso with it.

 

Those are both straight out of camera with no noise reduction except for 10 color noise. If people don't believe me, I don't mind sending the DNGs. Obviously my plan is not to go around shooting at ISO 50000, but I saw traces of these issues at even base ISO. It was useful to show what I would call the base noise of the sensor. Basically, if you dig and push the sensor around a lot, you will find what the baseline noise level is of a sensor and what it looks like. I found that the S3 had a lot of latitude in DR, but if you pushed it much or lifted the shadows, there was magenta contamination and banding. The SL2 has more noise, but underlying it color is better preserved and there is no banding. The SL2S is an even better example of this...you can do very strong pushes or high ISO without artifacts. I think the S006 was also quite decent for this, or at least you can lift the shadows a good bit at base ISO and not see anything too nasty. I am not sure what happened with the S3. My suspicion is that Leica had a very small team with more limited resources and that it did not get the extensive vetting that other Leica models got. So while I still think it is a good camera and there are some positive aspects of the sensor, I did not find it a compelling camera to own, despite my love for the S006. I know that Irene and Helge and others really love the camera, so this is clearly a matter of preference and working compatibility.  I will say that if you find yourself clipping your highlights a lot, the S3 is a good choice, as it has excellent highlight recovery. But by comparison, if you are someone who tends to err towards underexposure to preserve highlights, I think the S3 is not as suitable. You can even see that Abode tried to address this. The Adobe Color profile has very desaturated shadows. If you push a file with the Adobe Color profile, the shadows are less magenta than you get with the Leica S3 profile or a custom profile. Profiles from Cobalt and Capture One are better.

[Einst_Stein]

The banding in the bottom dark area around the characters “Eason” on both pictures is visible, though the top picture is less. 
This banding can not be noise. Noise would be random and should not appear in the same location across cameras. 

They look like real pattern of the object.

[davidmknoble]

@Stuart Richardson That is a good description of what you found.I have occasionally had that issue, but it has been pushing deep sand shadows from long exposures an hour or more before the sun comes up (Base ISO to ISO 400).  I rarely shoot more than ISO 400.  I do find Capture One allows me to lift the shadows in general and then mask and target those areas to bring them back down a little, but it is a rare issue for me.  I have seen the same with M’s and SL’s over time, but I typically don’t push the shadows high enough to get the banding.

The magenta used to drive me batty and would come from longer expsosures (> about 5 seconds), but I did two things that helped.  1) I changed my 100mm filter system from Schneider to Breakthrough and later Wine Country.  The ND filters seemed more neutral and better light sealed and 2) I realized I was not covering the eye piece and the optical viewfinder was letting in light, unlike the EVF’s.  I do which the S system had a lever to close it like the R8/9 did.  That tiny little clip disk is too easy to lose and so I never bring it out.

In comparison, I have found the SL3 and M11 have the same banding for me, but only under extreme shadow adjustment.

I really wonder if it comes from the decrease in pixel size or if it was always there and the processing program removed it as the RAW files were made?  I don’t know enough about the technical parts.  I do know that because I use Capture One to fine tune the color, I don’t worry as much about the sensor color, I just find I need less work on the S007/S3 than other bodies.  Except of course my M3 with Porta 160!

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

38 minutes ago, Einst_Stein said:

The banding in the bottom dark area around the characters “Eason” on both pictures is visible, though the top picture is less. 
This banding can not be noise. Noise would be random and should not appear in the same location across cameras. 

They look like real pattern of the object.

The black area is velvet from a shooting background. It is completely featureless.  The banding is visible in other areas too. I am not sure it is “noise”, but it is a clear pattern in the noise that appears when there is a very low signal to noise ratio. I am not sure about the magenta. I can’t remember if I covered the VF. Probably not, but even if I did, it is not a practical solution for normal daylight work. For long exposures, sure. Agree that if it needs this, would be nice to have the R9’s little shutter. That was quite ingenious. 

[irenedp]

I have seen the magenta issue that Stuart mentions a lot with the M9. You raise shadows and suddenly there’s a lot of color noise. Rarely with the S2, but the other day, reviewing an image, there was color contamination in an area of deep shadows I had raised. 
Honestly haven’t seen it with the S3. My major issue is camera shake anywhere below 1/180th-1/90th. It should behave better (the S2 does) but I have taken to respect the limit, raising ISO if needed, or use a tripod. At low shutter speeds with the latter, mirror up and 12 seconds delay are a good idea. Sometimes I get a picture that I thought was perfect and then the level of shake is unacceptable. The S2 is more forgiving. So with the S3 the alternatives are either high ISO or tripod, mirror up and delay. 

[Tirpitz666]

I'm not surprised about that, I've seen myself how much the 006 is sensitive to camera shake, to the point that I'd say that 1/FLx2 should be the minimum one have to shoot with it to be on the safe side and enjoy the bitingly sharpness that the sensor+S lenses are capable of. So being the S3 basically double the resolution, I can only imagine how challenging it should be to shoot it handheld and get perfect results, definitely spot on tecnique would be needed (including of course fast enough shutter speeds, luckily the 007/S3 give much more freedom in that regard).

[John McMaster]

I have said several times that I think 1/FLx3 is needed, my most used lens is the 120/2.5 and I never shoot that at less than 1/500th....

Worst camera I have had for banding is the M(240).

john

[Slender]

I think I the voice of (my personal) reason speaks for the S007... And get as many nice lenses as possible. Unless S3 comes down crashing below the 3.5K£ mark that is lol

[Pieter12]

6 hours ago, Tirpitz666 said:

I'm not surprised about that, I've seen myself how much the 006 is sensitive to camera shake, to the point that I'd say that 1/FLx2 should be the minimum one have to shoot with it to be on the safe side and enjoy the bitingly sharpness that the sensor+S lenses are capable of. So being the S3 basically double the resolution, I can only imagine how challenging it should be to shoot it handheld and get perfect results, definitely spot on tecnique would be needed (including of course fast enough shutter speeds, luckily the 007/S3 give much more freedom in that regard).

Any hi-res camera without some sort of image stabilization is subject to blur from camera shake. When Nikon introduced the D800, they recommended using a tripod whenever possible. The Leica S cameras and lenses are quite heavy and can be challenging to hold steady at lower shutter speeds. The advantage I find of the S3 over the 006 is I can shoot at higher ISOs  (like 6400) giving decent results. 

Edited January 10 by Pieter12
typo

[Stuart Richardson]

In my experience the issue is mirror and shutter shock as well as camera shake. I agree that shooting as much as possible at 1/500th and over is advisable if possible. One good thing there is the S lenses are so good at wider apertures, so it is manageable. I know people tend to look down on Program mode for shooting, but it is balanced towards the S optimal apertures, and it often chooses a good option, as long as it suits your DOF. The SL2 is good with Program too. It tends to keep you at 2.5-4.5 with the APO summicrons, which is where they are really their sharpest.

[irenedp]

I did a quick test this morning with the two Ms at 1/45, wide open (2.0), Iso 400. the 10r with a 28 the 9p with a 50. Equated in post -just Lightroom tweaking with color balance manually) but still there is some difference. The 9 image looks a bit more dreamy, deeper shadows and somewhat brighter colours. I couldn't do the same with the 2 Ss, but the result is quite similar. 

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!

[irenedp]

and here are the two S. No color mod, although the S3 shot at 1/360th, and the S2 had to raise to 1/1000. Both at ISO 100, f8. No color balance tweak, but they are much closer. Still, the S2 was shot at 1000ºK higher, shadows are deeper, and as with the M9 a more contrasty image due to the lower dynamic range. 

 

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 January 11 by irenedp

[Pieter12]

For those interested, Leica Store Lisse in the Netherlands apparently has a bunch of second-hand S gear available. No affiliation, but I have bought from them before. I believe most of the gear is on their eBay page.

Edited January 11 by Pieter12
addition

[davidmknoble]

@irenedp I shoot regularly with the S3 and S007 without the mirror up or timer delay.  I use shutter speeds from 1/4 second up to 1 minute 30 seconds.  However, I also use a gitzo series 3 tripod with 3 inch spikes (because I’m in the sand) and the gitzo large ball head.  I use the RRS bracket on the S as well.  The only times I get a “shake” that causes pixel blur is when the waves hit the tripod on the long exposure.  It’s a little overkill, but I’ve also been successful with 1 second exposures in 45 mph winds the morning after a hurricane.

If using a lighter tripod I could see using the mirror up and I use the mirror up on the R8/R9, but the shake is much more pronounced on the film bodies.

[irenedp]

6 minutes ago, davidmknoble said:

@irenedp I shoot regularly with the S3 and S007 without the mirror up or timer delay.  I use shutter speeds from 1/4 second up to 1 minute 30 seconds.  However, I also use a gitzo series 3 tripod with 3 inch spikes (because I’m in the sand) and the gitzo large ball head.  I use the RRS bracket on the S as well.  The only times I get a “shake” that causes pixel blur is when the waves hit the tripod on the long exposure.  It’s a little overkill, but I’ve also been successful with 1 second exposures in 45 mph winds the morning after a hurricane.

If using a lighter tripod I could see using the mirror up and I use the mirror up on the R8/R9, but the shake is much more pronounced on the film bodies.

David, I use a Gitzo Mountaineer, so a bit lighter than a series III. That might explain why I get some shake and you don’t. With the Phase One  I use the electronic shutter (and it doesn’t shoot until the seismograph is off), but with the S3 there is appreciable shake. I coukd miss focus on manual but the possibility to zoom to 100% and the focusing aids make it more unlikely. The S3 is a great camera -and has wonderful lenses-.  it is a delight to use, but has its nuances. 
 

nevertheless, tripod + mirror up + delay works fine. 

[Stuart Richardson]

2 hours ago, davidmknoble said:

@irenedp I shoot regularly with the S3 and S007 without the mirror up or timer delay.  I use shutter speeds from 1/4 second up to 1 minute 30 seconds.  However, I also use a gitzo series 3 tripod with 3 inch spikes (because I’m in the sand) and the gitzo large ball head.  I use the RRS bracket on the S as well.  The only times I get a “shake” that causes pixel blur is when the waves hit the tripod on the long exposure.  It’s a little overkill, but I’ve also been successful with 1 second exposures in 45 mph winds the morning after a hurricane.

If using a lighter tripod I could see using the mirror up and I use the mirror up on the R8/R9, but the shake is much more pronounced on the film bodies.

I don't recall exactly, but I am pretty sure I saw evidence of minor shake even using my studio stand (which is at least 50kg). But in my experience the most stable platform I have is a Ries wooden tripod I use for 8x10. I have taken to using that for when I need a truly vibration deadening platform and it makes a big difference. It is a huge pain to use, however, as it is so heavy and awkward compared to my RRS TVC33. I use that with a Arca Swiss cube and it is stable enough for most purposes, but for really long telephotos, macro or speeds around 1/15th, the Ries makes a difference. The platform head itself also being better than using the cube, for example. Unfortunately the larger the mating surface between the head and the lower profile it is, the less shake (because of the inherent torsion in materials like aluminum and whatever the composite shell is in the camera. I guess the astrophotographers are probably the best people to listen to for anything like this...I figured it out because when I started 8x10 I had a hard time getting sharp pictures, despite almost 20 years with 4x5. I asked at the large format photography forum and everyone was like "do you have a wood tripod?" and I was like "no, I have this very robust RRS one with a BH55 (at the time)", and they suggested that the tripod was the problem. I took their advice and they were right. Even a fancy state of the art carbon fiber tripod has nothing on a heavy wooden tripod with a good platform and a large plate surface.

Edited January 12 by Stuart Richardson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tom0511]

Am 9.1.2025 um 17:57 schrieb Slender:

Many thanks @tom0511! Could you see any major difference in terms of DR or noise at anything up to 3200 - 6400 ? Curves on Photons to Photos seem close enough, too. It seems more and more for me the S007 would be a logical 1st choice... Is the menu system much different than the S3/SL2 or has it been harmonized since by FW updates?

Sorry for all the questions...

I have not shot enough to give you a reliable answer.

The menu system would not be a reason (IMO) for one or the other. Personally I have not seen major difference. Overall the S007 prices are a real bargain. However if you do plan longterm, a S3 gives you more pixels, maybe slightly better color (that's what they say in regards of reds), and it's a newer camera.

I have to admit that at the moment I am more into Hasselblad x2d because I appreciate IBIS ( I shoot mostly handhold), the smaller lenses, the more accurate AF and the colors are great. I believe the Leica lenses are better though in regard of less ginetting and even smoother bokeh.