lxlim Posted September 29, 2008 Share #61 Posted September 29, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wonder if the S2's optics being well corrected designs might have translated into a quicker and more responsive camera. After all if the onboard CPU is not busy correcting the distortions and CA, etc it would be devoting itself to other tasks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Hi lxlim, Take a look here Leica S2 compared to MF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mjh Posted September 29, 2008 Share #62 Posted September 29, 2008 I wonder if the S2's optics being well corrected designs might have translated into a quicker and more responsive camera. After all if the onboard CPU is not busy correcting the distortions and CA, etc it would be devoting itself to other tasks. Quicker and more responsive compared to which other camera, I wonder? I am not aware of any medium format camera doing any kind of distortion or chromatic aberration correction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted September 29, 2008 Share #63 Posted September 29, 2008 C1 does this in post. I can correct purple fringing and CA today with more corrections coming in the new Pro version. Will know more on release on the 15th Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 29, 2008 Share #64 Posted September 29, 2008 The Hasselblad H series... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 29, 2008 Share #65 Posted September 29, 2008 The Hasselblad H series... It doesn’t. If you refer to DAC, that is taken care of by the raw processor. No corrections are applied in-camera. The Canon EOS 5D Mark II can do vignetting correction in-camera, but I have yet to see a medium format camera doing this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted September 30, 2008 Share #66 Posted September 30, 2008 The HC lenses aren't slouch either ... I've heard from many folks using H saying that they're more or less visibly better than the CF lenses, Michael's test published in the last issue of Viktor magazine just proved that. The HCD lenses are a different matter, the D clearly specifies that they're only to be used on a cropped sensors. Keep in mind the Xpan body and lenses were built by Fuji too. After all, so many Zeiss lenses aren't built by Zeiss ... and not every "Leica" lens was built by Leica too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted September 30, 2008 Share #67 Posted September 30, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) It doesn’t. If you refer to DAC, that is taken care of by the raw processor. No corrections are applied in-camera. The Canon EOS 5D Mark II can do vignetting correction in-camera, but I have yet to see a medium format camera doing this. Michael: The Hasseblad H series implemented some of the technology in the DMR, such as vignette correction. It was quoted somewhere in the Imakon/Hasselblad literature. If you have access to a DMR, tape over the ROM contacts on a lens like the 19mm, take a picture, then take the same picture without tape on the ROM contacts. The picture where the ROM was disabled, will show more vignetting than the one where ROM is enabled. Robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted September 30, 2008 Share #68 Posted September 30, 2008 Rob, what Michael says still makes some sense ... I remembered you've pointed this out many times before but I never had anything wider than 35mm so I wasn't able to do such a test. Could it be that the DMR can't recognize the 19-Elmarit when you taped the contacts so the files weren't tagged with the proper EXIF? if so, then the vignetting compensation feature in Flexcolor won't be triggered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lxlim Posted September 30, 2008 Share #69 Posted September 30, 2008 It doesn’t. If you refer to DAC, that is taken care of by the raw processor. No corrections are applied in-camera. The Canon EOS 5D Mark II can do vignetting correction in-camera, but I have yet to see a medium format camera doing this. Thanks. I had my facts wrong here, then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted September 30, 2008 Share #70 Posted September 30, 2008 Rob, what Michael says still makes some sense ... I remembered you've pointed this out many times before but I never had anything wider than 35mm so I wasn't able to do such a test. Could it be that the DMR can't recognize the 19-Elmarit when you taped the contacts so the files weren't tagged with the proper EXIF? if so, then the vignetting compensation feature in Flexcolor won't be triggered. You didn't need to use Flexcolor to see the difference. I think I was using ACR at the time. Almost the same terminology as used for the DMR was used in the announcements about Hasselblad and their new backs after the Imacon merger. I tried looking for it on the Hasselblad site, but had no luck finding the press release. Robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted September 30, 2008 Share #71 Posted September 30, 2008 Almost the same terminology as used for the DMR was used in the announcements about Hasselblad and their new backs after the Imacon merger. I tried looking for it on the Hasselblad site, but had no luck finding the press release. Hasselblad always stresses the fact that none of the actual image processing, including but not limited to the DAC corrections, is done in-camera, but delegated to the more powerful CPU of your Mac or PC. If in doubt, you could check recent issues of VICTOR, but since most of the articles on this subject in VICTOR were written by me, eventually it all depends on whether you trust me. Interestingly, it will be the S2 that does image processing in-camera. It has to, since the S2 also supports JPEG whereas medium format cameras are generally designed for a raw workflow. The Mamiya ZD does support JPEG as well, but that’s the exception rather than the rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadeyev Posted October 1, 2008 Share #72 Posted October 1, 2008 "Interestingly, it will be the S2 that does image processing in-camera. It has to, since the S2 also supports JPEG whereas medium format cameras are generally designed for a raw workflow. The Mamiya ZD does support JPEG as well, but that’s the exception rather than the rule." Hello Michael, Actually, the new SINAR 65 eSprit offers internal image processing, with DNG or DNG compressed, JPEG (4 sizes in two compression rates), RAW and SINAR RAW formats. I believe you can choose two of these formats to process simutaneously, but don't quote me on that :-) Ciao, Theodore Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted October 4, 2008 Share #73 Posted October 4, 2008 Guy, some thoughts regarding your original thread: some more pro MF (IMO): -bigger sensor than S2 (if S2 sensor is batter than 35mm-size one, wouldnt one assume that MF would be better than S2-sensor-size?) -MF-feel (is this a pro or a con? I mean also things like felxibility regarding viewfinder optioins etc.) - prooved systems with many lens options (IMO S2 is not the only system which offers shutter in camera and lenses ; still own a 70mm lens with included shuter from Mamiya which would work on a phase body (of course not with AF and automated f-stop) Personally I am still undecided what to think.(also therfore have postboned my MF-decisions) regards, tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 4, 2008 Share #74 Posted October 4, 2008 As far as MF quality , little tough to judge but this is a 6 micron sensor and the P45 is a 6.8 micron sensor at 39 mpx. Now my 22mpx 9 micron sensor is pretty darn close to the P45 which I admit freely it does have slightly better detail. But this is really only going to matter in prints at 20x30 the P25 and P45 look almost identical after that though the P45 will take over . Which it should but my point here is even the 6 micron S2 should come in really close to this even though the S2 is smaller in size . My bet here is this actually maybe the least of our issues. Obviously the P65 which is a 60mpx sensor will kick everyones butt by logic when you get to these size sensors it becomes less of a significant factor. Look how good the DMR and M8 are compared to some of the Canons and Nikons and we soon realize a lot of marketing hype in the mpx. But i am betting this will at least be equal to and most likely better than my 22 mpx 9 micron Phase back. To be honest that is damn good and nothing to sneeze at. Kodak seems to be doing better and better with the lower count microns than in the past. Even the P30 Plus which actually with the crop of 1.3 is pretty close to the S2 and at 31mpx is really nice and also has the micro lenses. i think when we do make the comparisons though in the field testing the P30 plus would be a excellent back up against the S2 . Reason is it is also a 6.8 micron which micro lenses at 31mpx with a 1.3 crop and the S2 which has a little smaller sensor at 6 micron and microlenses but 37 mpx. These two seem like a perfect choice to go at each other in a test. The biggest downside on the S2 is actually two -fold . Some folks will want to shoot tech camera ( view camera's , stitching camera's ) and such . Obviously you can't take the back off to do that so for those folks the MF systems will make the most sense because they can use there tech camera's but also there Hassy, Mamiya etc. bodies also and just switch backs. Now let's face reality mostly landscape and arch. shooters will be doing this so that number of have to have MF for that is pretty small in the market (My opinion) but the upside to this is also the leica has a T/S lens and this maybe enough for some folks plus you can still stitch with it. The other issue is cleaning , MF back the sensor is obviously right there to clean the S2 like a DSLR behind a mirror. Also there is no viewfinder options like WLF which i don't either on my Mamiya body but some folks like WLF. Than always the issue is the body breaks down and in MF just having a back body only you can get back to shooting. Here the whole bread box has to go in for repair. If you look at this as a overview of the different systems the folks that shoot 35mm will feel right at home because they don't have these things anyway the MF does. So they will not feel like there missing something and actually gain leaf shutters but let's leave that out for now. Now the MF shooters it really depends on what you are shooting . Many have no need to take the back off anyway so the S2 is not much of a difference. the tech camera guy's this obviously will not be the one but this may change there options too. Some may dump there say Hassy camera's and lenses and take there back and use on a tech. camera than have the S2 as the camera shooting type because it is faster. I fit in sort of this category. Right now i don't have the tech camera but could use the speed of the leica . So this S2 changes the game plan somewhat and some MF shooter may just add this and dump all there Canon and Nikons too. This S2 will give us some added options that we did not have before and still maintain the quality of file. i think this is the key to it. What will be very interesting to watch is see what folks finally do. There maybe just a heck of a lot of flipping around going on here to get on board with this leica if it proves it has the muscle , which i honestly think at this point it does. So i do feel pretty comfortable at this point but want to see how they do on release of it. The lens setup as I have mentioned is a little off in my book but that's me too so others will feel different. I do try to look at things market and use wise and try hard not to get my personal wants in there. But that 100m is the wrong focal length it should be a 130 or 140mm F2 lens instead. 100 mm is just to close to 70mm and MF is not to be viewed like 35mm DSLR either. Most MF shooters are gapers with only 4 lenses. So the spread is bigger. All I see to gap is 70mm to 180mm that is too big and should be 70mm, 130mm, 200mm than the big gun at 350. But obviously my opinion on that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 4, 2008 Share #75 Posted October 4, 2008 Tom I agree too this does put some folks in the limbo area for sure on MF and waiting to see what happens. Me too Most of us love Leica gear and let's face some facts they make some of the best glass on the planet, so this does make you take notice of it and even some R shooters will just move up. It is not that big and it is very tempting because of that. As time goes on until release i think many folks may wait it out. Obviously I have to keep shooting to eat but certainly watching this thing for sure and when the time comes we will see. I have to be patient though , I am always the damn guinea pig. Not sure my heart can take it or my wallet. LOL I would dearly love to get my hands on this though. So would we all. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikasmg Posted October 5, 2008 Share #76 Posted October 5, 2008 Nice summary Guy. Truth be told, given it's size if the price was not wacky I'd go for the S2 rather than an R10 if that turns out to be anywhere near R8/R9 size. I am assuming the sensor on an R10 have fewer pixels. The S2 has the same aspect ratio so assuming that you can use S2 and (with adapter and cropped sensor) and R series glass with it, why wouldn't one just go with the S2 if the price is not too far off. I think that many, like me, will not need the speed etc that 35mm SLR's provide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 5, 2008 Share #77 Posted October 5, 2008 The system itself looks very good but the make or break points will and I think everyone agrees is price and the biggy for the Pro market is the service with turn times and loaners and such. The pricing on this has to be done very carefully because there target is Pro's that have full 35mm DSLR systems already or complete MF systems already in place. The 35mm folks will have to throw money in with there sales of there gear and the MF folks will also have to throw money in the used MF market pricing is somewhat low. Our backs depreciate like a tank falling into water, so we will have to add funds. The bottom line for both is how much more after that to get in and that can get very sticky for many folks. For myself if I sell it all and get a complete S2 system and than have to throw 15 or 20 k in than I will have second thoughts for sure. Honestly from MY perspective is if this is a new mid system and Leica wants to make sales but more important gain market share in it and get folks (35) moving up and MF folks adding to or making lateral moves than make the body and lens a kit and sell it for a great price. Get people to move on it and keep the costs low for awhile to get this market moving. Leica has the chance and opportunity to make this mid system a real part of the industry before anyone else. It is a great time for Leica to make a statement that they are the leader in this market. You can not do that by pricing it too high, they need to build this market for mid systems first and let folks make a mid system decision over a Pro level 35mm decision. Bad choice of wording but they need to steal the 35mm DSLR world and at the same time give the MF market a warning that they can compete on the same levels. Also they can steal the hearts of the R lovers too and give them a DMSR. Digital Mid System Reflex. New naming > LOL I want royalities Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikasmg Posted October 5, 2008 Share #78 Posted October 5, 2008 Bad choice of wording but they need to steal the 35mm DSLR world and at the same time give the MF market a warning that they can compete on the same levels. Also they can steal the hearts of the R lovers too and give them a DMSR. Digital Mid System Reflex. New naming > LOL I want royalities I think you're right. I've been hoping for a digital R less cumbersome than an R9+DMR but if the S2 was attractively priced (ie not much more than an M8) and if R-glass was usable on the S2 (with cropping of course) I would find it a compelling proposition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 5, 2008 Share #79 Posted October 5, 2008 Pretty sure from Andreas comments from Photokinia that no R adapter to S2 will be available. Not sure how they could anyway since the S2 mount is much bigger than the R. I could possible see the S2 lenses on a R10 though but that remains to be seen down the road. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted October 5, 2008 Share #80 Posted October 5, 2008 looks like a very intersting unit, with grat lenses. The TS is very interesting. They better come out with a good sensor and a great firmware, with no banding. The price is a big question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.