Alberti Posted October 14, 2008 Share #41 Posted October 14, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Many lenses of the M already have a wider format than the FF, at least as far as the MTF tells. The Elmarit 90 was even advocated as such and the 90 macro Elmar is displaced from the center even in macro position, as far as I can tell. Some can be mounted on a Visoflex, thus also on the S2. But a long mirror cannot be used with M lenses, as far as I imagine. Or it must slide away and not tilt. Distance finding. There is this remark on the new hair-cross distance finder for the S2 autofocus (see the magazine). Could such a device be used without a mirror? Interesting thoughts anyway of using native M-lenses's on the S2. As regards this Zapp (link??), remember some ideas on live-view in the Forum before? This might give a focus feedback. Though I think an open sensor in a modular system (change lenses every 10 minutes..) is a wild idea, just first close the shutter. And shut it also when overexposed.... albert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 14, 2008 Posted October 14, 2008 Hi Alberti, Take a look here why not modular like the S1?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
reprobit Posted November 8, 2008 Share #42 Posted November 8, 2008 The S1 was designed by intention as an open system. The focal plane of the S1 is close to the front of the camera so that you can use M-, R-, Hasselblad-, Mamiya- etc. lenses or attach it to a field camera with adapters. The S2 introduces an new dedicated lens range. While other manufacuters like Fuji, Sinar, Leaf or PhaseOne fit their bodies to available lenses from Nikon, Rollei, Mamiya, Zeiss ... the new Leica S2 will be a closed system (instead ob beeing compatible with anything that is availabe in the photographers hands). The advantage is that it can be a perfect matched system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted November 8, 2008 Share #43 Posted November 8, 2008 This is what will hopefully be a great move for Leica.Two of my clients have already given tentative orders or the S2 (contingent of course on final pricing)...both of who are location industiral/commercial shooters. I think Leica has thought this out very well manalo...a cumbersome modular camera is not what these guys wanted...they both have Leaf/Hassy systems that are modular. And Leica is realizing that they can't financially survive just by keeping the well healed amateur happy. This camera, if successful, is the only hope that some day you may get what you're wishing for. I agree. It's time for Leica to take a bold leap forward with this camera.....and not be too locked into the past this time. At least not if they want to make serious inroads into the professional market, as they say that they do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 9, 2008 Share #44 Posted November 9, 2008 the new Leica S2 will be a closed system (instead ob beeing compatible with anything that is availabe in the photographers hands). The advantage is that it can be a perfect matched system. Since the S2 has a focal plane shutter, lenses from Mamiya, Hasselblad (ones that can be stopped down manually,) Pentacon, Hartblei and others will be usable on it via an adapter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted November 13, 2008 Share #45 Posted November 13, 2008 Talking of modular.....take a look at the just released specs of the RED Scarlet/Epic DSMC. Top end camera manufacturers may just need to take a peak over their shoulder to see what's creeping up on them. If RED succeeds with its vision of convergence at least part of the traditional still photography market might be vunerable Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted November 13, 2008 Share #46 Posted November 13, 2008 Canon, Sony and Panasonic are thinking the same, and are working in similar solutions. I don't say they will release modular video cameras like the RED, but video/cine cameras with electronic viewfinders based in their traditional mounts. RED has been the first to make an announcement. Just that. It is the way to follow (a system, different applications, from stills to video, from high resolution to fast frame rates, from the smallest body size to the largest, cropped or uncropped formats... ). Leica has 3 different systems for photography now... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2008 Share #47 Posted November 13, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) The RED is really only worth 5 minutes internet fame, lots of hot air ... blah blah poop What can't be done by Canon or Sony? they're dominating the world's broadcasting industry as well as top end Hollywood digital cinematography. The RED's sensor is only 2/3" "big" ... Canon/Sony only need to add more readout channels to their 24x36mm sensor, hook up a hard drive and start dumping data ... there you go. Who is going to buy a 2/3" 4.9MP video camera to shoot still captures? doesn't make sense to me at all. RED is only a little fly, Canon/Sony are the fly swat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 13, 2008 Share #48 Posted November 13, 2008 ...Who is going to buy a 2/3" 4.9MP video camera to shoot still captures? doesn't make sense to me at all. I think you need to see their announcement. Sensor sizes up to 6x17cm. Lot's more. Primarily special for video it seems. RED's Digital Still and Motion Camera System now official - Engadget Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted November 13, 2008 Share #49 Posted November 13, 2008 Oh dear Simon, check out RED's website, it's much more than that now. Some serious forward thinking going on there. And they've already stirred-up the video cinematography industry over the past year or so. I wouldn't discount them so readily. See this initial analysis over on Luminous Landscape The Luminous Landscape Michael Reichman has been keeping a watching brief on this convergence theory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2008 Share #50 Posted November 13, 2008 Alan, Steve .... I have read their site CAREFULLY, and I was only talking about Scarlet. 6x17 sensor shooting motion picture??? give me a break, the sensor will be hot as a potato before they could capture anything called a footage. Oh well, Steve ... you're right, it's only forward thinking. After all it's not that hard ... I have no idea why people only give so much fuss about RED. If Sony/Canon see a market there and decide to jump on this one, it happened long time ago already. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 13, 2008 Share #51 Posted November 13, 2008 ...After all it's not that hard ... I have no idea why people only give so much fuss about RED. If Sony/Canon see a market there and decide to jump on this one, it happened long time ago already. I have no idea about the viability or competitive landscape of any of this. Nor do I care as I have no need to shoot video. I certainly am in no position to comment on the performance capability of cameras that won't be released for months or a year or more. The Red cameras do not seem to make much sense if all you need is still capture. (Although the 6x17 back would be pretty unique for a still camera.) I think the key points was showing that a modular system was possible, and Red seems to be doing that in spades. This thread is titled, "why not modular like the S1?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2008 Share #52 Posted November 13, 2008 Alan, I agree with you on what you say and sorry about sidetracking the discussion ... but that doesn't change my view on this matter and I think it's only internet propaganda and no/low-cost self-promotion. The fact is, even the film industry itself has very limited adoption of these cameras and they are only used for VFX shots targeting a digital post-processing workflow. I'm all for a modular design and don't understand why Leica would lock itself into a closed design with the sensor size limited at 30x45mm either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted November 13, 2008 Share #53 Posted November 13, 2008 .....I think the key points was showing that a modular system was possible, and Red seems to be doing that in spades. This thread is titled, "why not modular like the S1?" Indeed, that was my point, and that (plus still/video convergence) is where RED seem to be innovating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 13, 2008 Share #54 Posted November 13, 2008 Alan, I agree with you on what you say and sorry about sidetracking the discussion ... but that doesn't change my view on this matter and I think it's only internet propaganda and no/low-cost self-promotion. The fact is, even the film industry itself has very limited adoption of these cameras and they are only used for VFX shots targeting a digital post-processing workflow. I'm all for a modular design and don't understand why Leica would lock itself into a closed design with the sensor size limited at 30x45mm either. I'm Palin when it comes to knowing anything about film or video cameras. But looking at the historical trend in pro still cameras, they became modular some time ago. from large format to MF and 35mm. (Some 35s even had interchangeable backs.) So I look at the Red system as a forerunner of where things can go. Everything from the lens, back, viewfinder, grip, electronics, even the format can be changed. Think of the first view camera to do this - Sinar. Completely modular from 4x5 to 5x7 and 8x10. Along with roll film backs,etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 13, 2008 Share #55 Posted November 13, 2008 So I look at the Red system as a forerunner of where things can go. Everything from the lens, back, viewfinder, grip, electronics, even the format can be changed. Think of the first view camera to do this - Sinar. Completely modular from 4x5 to 5x7 and 8x10. Along with roll film backs,etc. Modular design makes a lot sense to the end users but it's going to hurt the camera companies' gross margin in the long run ... there's always much more money to make when you are forced to upgrade the complete kit instead of only one part of it. In most cases the parts which can be reused cost little or nothing to build. I figure that's probably why the Sinar M is so expensive ... because they know they'd only see you once so they better charge you for the rest of the camera's lifetime or anything you could do with the platform. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manolo Posted December 11, 2008 Author Share #56 Posted December 11, 2008 there's always much more money to make when you are forced to upgrade the complete kit instead of only one part of it. I have never been comfortable with this type of thoughts. The 35mm rangefinder has been selling for the longest time and its greatest strength is that you are able to use many parts even from 50 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted December 11, 2008 Share #57 Posted December 11, 2008 The S-System isn't modular because it focuses on compactness and sealing/robustness (less electronical contacts). Every system only works perfectly with one format (usually the biggest), everything else works just as a compromise in terms of sensor/film size, viewfinder, lenses (image circle) or size/weight (compared to the format used). Will the S-lenses cover formats larger than 30x45mm? I don't think so because the idea behind the S-System is offering the best (fast lenses, compactness, weight...) solution related to the format, designing the lenses for a bigger image circle would make them bigger/heavier. It's great that there are modular systems, but it's not always the best solution, a modular RED will always be bigger/heavier in relation to the format and it can't use S-lenses (Leica won't give them the patents/electronic connection). A little bit off-topic on RED: RED revolutionized the prosumer/low-budget-market for cinematography. It's a fantastic tool to imitate the look of 35mm/Hollywood, instead of using video-cameras with small sensors... - But it's not a comparable to the professional film-cameras, which offer a more reliable technology/workflow (it doesn't even have a optical viewfinder). - It's not true 4k, it's bayer-interpolated (like all 4k-cameras on the market right now), in fact, Panavision decided not to use the 12MPixel-Sony-CMOS-Sensor for interpolated but 1080p without interpolation and higher DR - because IQ matters and not megapixels. State-of-the-art film-scanners can oversample with 6/8k and therefore offer real 4k resolution in optimal situations with film =<35mm - rolling shutter (the image isn't taken simultaniously over the whole frame) - They sell a consumer 500€-Sigma-zoom (with better mechanics) and their RED brand label for 6000€... Some big-budget productions will use it, well, George Lucas / Michael Mann use video as well and it looks like... video ;-) Both professional companies for Hollywood (ARRI/Panavison) offer their digital cameras with only 1080p not even 2k! Why? Because they're perfect tools for a digital workflow for TV - not cinema! ARRI works on a true digital cinema-camera with real 4k, optical viewfinder, film-ARRI-like build quality and handling and they will present it when it's ready, when it really makes sense - they're engineers, not business-men, not marketing-guys... Don't believe it? Film is dead? 95% of the big-buget movies are made on 35mm (not even 16mm/70mm counted). Simply look at an episode of House MD (35mm) and compare it to the look of Dexter (HDTV), then you know why... Okay, enough off-topic for today, where are the S2-samples ? ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.