What new S should differentiate from SL besides larger sensor and perhaps more MPs?

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If it is just larger sensor and more MPs, can it justify as a major upgrade from SL?

Edited February 1 by Einst_Stein

[Nick Guttridge]

Hi Einst, I guess Leica will deliver 100mp at least. Possibly more. Which is always a headliner.

For me the 007 is perfect. The fact that it doesn't have an EVF helps with the battery life. I can shoot all day in the studio on two batteries (one in grip). I don't want any more MP or mirrorless. I don't even need stabilisation as I shoot everything at 1/1000th. If I had the S3 it would be slightly slower. I need the speed of the 007 to shoot dance. 

I just hope my camera lasts for another five years at least. I also own the SL2 S which I use for video. 

My shopping list would be the SL3 S and the Q3 in both versions. 

 

[Pieter12]

1 hour ago, Nick Guttridge said:

Hi Einst, I guess Leica will deliver 100mp at least. Possibly more. Which is always a headliner.

For me the 007 is perfect. The fact that it doesn't have an EVF helps with the battery life. I can shoot all day in the studio on two batteries (one in grip). I don't want any more MP or mirrorless. I don't even need stabilisation as I shoot everything at 1/1000th. If I had the S3 it would be slightly slower. I need the speed of the 007 to shoot dance. 

I just hope my camera lasts for another five years at least. I also own the SL2 S which I use for video. 

My shopping list would be the SL3 S and the Q3 in both versions. 

 

The S3 would be slower to use, or you would use a slower shutter speed? You must have a ton of light to shoot at 1/1000. Or high ISO.

[irenedp]

Larger sensor is unlikely. It becomes a beast of a camera, very large and heavy. Phase is preparing the IQ5 with the new Sony sensor, but I doubt they will launch a studio camera to replace the XF. And I am not sure if the Schneiders can hold 250 mp. They are trying to steer all business to the XT and the Rodenstock lenses. 

Edited February 1 by irenedp

[Jeff S]

I wish folks would distinguish between larger sensor size… physically bigger dimensions… vs greater MP.  The S4 sensor would obviously be larger than the SL3.  A separate question, however, is whether it breaks 3:2 tradition and instead becomes 4:3.

[irenedp]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

I wish folks would distinguish between larger sensor size… physically bigger dimensions… vs greater MP.  The S4 sensor would obviously be larger than the SL3.  A separate question, however, is whether it breaks 3:2 tradition and instead becomes 4:3.

Most people here know well how to differentiate between the "small" 4x3 mf sensor of Hasselblad and Fuji, the 3x2 Leica one, and the "large" of Phase One and the older Hassies, and of course between those and a FF one. I would avoid making assumptions in this group (maybe in the Leica Q one that would be fully justified...). No disrespect for the Q, I actually use a second hand Q2 as a daily carry, and am pretty happy with it, but like some Ms, it also serves as a luxury fashion accessory.

My comment above is about _TC's comment about "maybe larger sensor", and I was referring to the "large" MF sensor of the old Hasselblads and Phase One. That would imply a larger and heavier body, or a separate back architecture. I agree with _TC that this is rather unlikely.

Edited February 2 by irenedp

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, irenedp said:

Most people here know well how to differentiate between the "small" 4x3 mf sensor of Hasselblad and Fuji, the 3x2 Leica one, and the "large" of Phase One and the older Hassies, and of course between those and a FF one. I would avoid making assumptions in this group (maybe in the Leica Q one that would be fully justified...). No disrespect for the Q, I actually use a second hand Q2 as a daily carry, and am pretty happy with it, but like some Ms, it also serves as a luxury fashion accessory.

My comment above is about _TC's comment about "maybe larger sensor", and I was referring to the "large" MF sensor of the old Hasselblads and Phase One. That would imply a larger and heavier body, or a separate back architecture. I agree with _TC that this is rather unlikely.

I thought you were referring to MP, as many here use the term “larger sensor” to mean that. Drives me nuts.  I’m surprised when someone, like you, uses the term ‘correctly’, or at least as I’ve always understood. 🤪

[BernardC]

One killer feature that's been announced already is full compatibility with all L-mount and M-mount lenses. One camera to rule them all.

Granted, you can force some 35mm lenses to fit on medium format cameras, but that's usually with only a subset of the lens's functionality (no AF, often no aperture control). It sounds like Leica's solution will mean that shooting an APO-SL lens on an S4 will be exactly the same as shooting one on an SL3. The S4 will probably be a little bigger, but it may also offer a sensor-cropped landscape/portrait/square option that many photographers would love.

[Tirpitz666]

There will be for sure a BIG differentiating factor between the S4 and the SL line: the price.. 😄

[Nick Guttridge]

22 hours ago, Pieter12 said:

The S3 would be slower to use, or you would use a slower shutter speed? You must have a ton of light to shoot at 1/1000. Or high ISO.

Hi Pieter, 

The S3 is just a tiny bit slower for fps than the 007. Which is why the 007 is the sweet spot for me. I'm using it in dance studios with Profoto D2's mainly. With CS lenses. 

Dancers obviously move around alot and it's good to be able to take images quickly and have a quick buffer also. 

Going back to the next generation for Leica in medium format. I would hope that they continue to make CS lenses. To compete with Hasselblad. 

Being compatible with C1 is a game changer. That's when I bought into the Leica S system. Before then I couldn't really contemplate it. I recently tested the Hasselblad and thought it was interesting, but couldn't change to Lightroom or Profocus. 

I might buy a S3 body second hand. If I can find one. Although I'm worried about servicing. 

I just loving the fact that my 007 can run all day through approx 2000 frames without me having to stop. I can't imagine any other medium format camera being able to do that. 

Here is an image taken in the studio with the 007.  You can check out more at www.nickguttridge.com/london-dance-photographer

My favourite lens is the 120mm CS. Although it means I'm miles away from the dancer and need a studio about 50 feet long. 

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!

 

[Pieter12]

And it looks like 20 feet high, too! Nice work. You must be putting a lot of light overhead. A second set of lights on the background?

A question, though. Why are you concerned about service being available for the S3 and not worried about the 007?

[Einst_Stein]

Back to film photography, the decisive differentiation of MF from FF, to me, is the interchangeable back and the larger film format, though some FF cameras also have interchangeable backs, such as Rollei 2000/3003, and some MFs do not have interchangeable backs, such as Mamiya 6/7 and Fujifilm GW690. The combination of interchangeable back and larger format film means a lot.

Similarly, the larger format to MF is the movement and the even larger film format. Again, though some MF also have movements, such as Rollei 66, Hasselblad Fkexbody, Arc body, and FUJIFILM GX680, but none of then feels naturally when using movement. 

New, in digital photography, the larger sensor of MF does not feel as compelling as film photography. S3 and GFX100 vs SL3 are the examples.  I can not find much to offer by S/GFX to SL3. Some, of course, but nothing as compelling as in film photography.

So, what is the future of MF? Movement? Or simply do not bother, just stay with FF?

[tom0511]

I am not sure if Hassy xcd lenses are any more ‚boring‘ than sl apo Summicrons.

Sharpness and detail seem to have become the top priorities for lens design.

I hope leica will have the old S lenses style more as a benchmark than the apo summicrons from the sl system.( nothing against the sl apos). i wich Leica was talking a bit what they are planning.

 

[tom0511]

vor 24 Minuten schrieb Einst_Stein:

Back to film photography, the decisive differentiation of MF from FF, to me, is the interchangeable back and the larger film format, though some FF cameras also have interchangeable backs, such as Rollei 2000/3003, and some MFs do not have interchangeable backs, such as Mamiya 6/7 and Fujifilm GW690. The combination of interchangeable back and larger format film means a lot.

Similarly, the larger format to MF is the movement and the even larger film format. Again, though some MF also have movements, such as Rollei 66, Hasselblad Fkexbody, Arc body, and FUJIFILM GX680, but none of then feels naturally when using movement. 

New, in digital photography, the larger sensor of MF does not feel as compelling as film photography. S3 and GFX100 vs SL3 are the examples.  I can not find much to offer by S/GFX to SL3. Some, of course, but nothing as compelling as in film photography.

So, what is the future of MF? Movement? Or simply do not bother, just stay with FF?

For whatever reason I find (digital) medium format offers more smooth transitions from focus plane to background, more room for post processing, and in case of x2d ( the one Immainly use now) verY very good color. I really like my sl3 as a main system, but the iq of the x2d out of the camera is soo good. 
 

[Jon Warwick]

1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said:

….. in digital photography, the larger sensor of MF does not feel as compelling as film photography. S3 and GFX100 vs SL3 are the examples.  I can not find much to offer by S/GFX to SL3. Some, of course, but nothing as compelling as in film photography.

I have come to a similar conclusion after extensively testing my GFX100S vs full frame (M11 and SL3).

I find the difference in resolution and even rendering (when using the latest lenses on both systems) to be very subtle indeed between these systems.

….which is very different to the obvious change by moving from 35mm to 120 film , let alone up to large format. I guess I was obliterating the detail loss from film grain by moving up a film size, but that’s clearly not an issue with digital and 60mp is recording such a high base level of fine detail already, even when viewing (say) a 40x30” print at very close distance, that I am now at a point where lens choice (and post processing and printing technique) has become more important to final image quality than the additional pixel count to 100mp.

I also appreciate the flexibility of the Leica SL3 / M11 in terms of how I can change the look of the images by using different lens options (ie, from super sharp SL/M APOs through to older Ms like the 50 v5 etc), something that I think is more limited in terms of lens choices on the GFX.

Edited February 2 by Jon Warwick

[Einst_Stein]

34 minutes ago, tom0511 said:

For whatever reason I find (digital) medium format offers more smooth transitions from focus plane to background, more room for post processing, and in case of x2d ( the one Immainly use now) verY very good color. I really like my sl3 as a main system, but the iq of the x2d out of the camera is soo good. 
 

I get the same conclusion when I compared Contax 645 120mm f4 with Leica 90mm f2.8 or c645 80mm f2.8 vs 
Leica 50/f2, but Leica 90mm f2 and 50f1.4 are smoother than the C645 counter parts.

[tom0511]

I dont own the 90/2.0, but the 50/1.4 SL lens indeed is something special in my experience and the lens which prduces very pleasent bokeh and transitions. It is just a little bit big for my taste.

[Nick Guttridge]

14 hours ago, Pieter12 said:

And it looks like 20 feet high, too! Nice work. You must be putting a lot of light overhead. A second set of lights on the background?

A question, though. Why are you concerned about service being available for the S3 and not worried about the 007?

I'm worried about service from Leica for both version of the S. I've heard that to get a lens serviced can take six months. 

So far my 007 has been a rock, but at some point it will need to be serviced. I don't know how I will cope without it for six months+

Please someone tell me Leica aren't that bad at servicing.

[Nick Guttridge]

14 hours ago, Pieter12 said:

And it looks like 20 feet high, too! Nice work. You must be putting a lot of light overhead. A second set of lights on the background?

A question, though. Why are you concerned about service being available for the S3 and not worried about the 007?

Hi Pieter,

Lighting set would have been a Profoto beauty dish with a grid above with just two lights on the background. Possibly a broncolor para as a fill light behind the camera. 

I love to light in the studio, all at 1,1000th of a second. Not worried about EVF's or stabilisation. 

All I need is around 40mp and 3fps. Which is almost what my 007 has. 

Not having to stop the shoot to change batteries, which means taking the camera off the stand is a big plus. I've also just bought the AC adapter. So I am future proofed abit. 

As long as the 007 doesn't go wrong, I'll be fine for ten years.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Nick Guttridge said:

I'm worried about service from Leica for both version of the S. I've heard that to get a lens serviced can take six months. 

In my experience it's more like 3 weeks for S cameras and lenses, but you'll need to contact your local Leica representative to confirm.

Some M-mount gear takes many months to service, which is partly due to the increasing popularity of film and of vintage gear. The good news is that a new generation is taking grandpa's Leica gear out of storage and using it. The bad news is that they are ahead of you in the service queue!