s2 and d3

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

$7,999,95 - ufff! I'll have to stick with Leica...I can't afford Nikon....

 

$8000.: Nikon D3 - D1 / D700 Forum: Digital Photography Review

[Advertisement]

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

[marknorton]

About the same price as the new Noctilux then...

[pascal_meheut]

Yes, I guess the whole planet noticed this recently

 

does this comment reflect your understanding of global economics or did you just want to be funny?

More complex, maybe too for you: I just wanted to reflect your lack of understanding of global economics whilst being funny.

 

to be fair, the RD investment of canikon cannot be compared to leica's, so there is no miracles to be expected from the S2.

Well, the same argument apply to lenses. And yet, Leica can deliver some of the best around. With a much smaller R&D budget.

Same for software: Micro$oft has the biggest R&D budget. Yet, they do not deliver the best software. They just sell it more.

BTW, how come that small companies like Capture One can make an excellent RAW converter and can more than compete with Nikon and Canon ones?

 

What Leica cannot probably do is to design and sell a lot of consumer products and offer a wide range of product.

But nailing the S2 ? No problem. After all, the DMR was as good as the Eos1Ds or the Nikon D2X when it appeared. Leica had a smaller budget even then.

 

i am convinced that the kodak sensor will deliver on base iso and slightly above

Another product you can evaluate before it is available ?

[lct]

$7,999,95 - ufff! I'll have to stick with Leica...

Exactly the same estimated selling price as that of the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II and Mark III when they were launched if i remember well. Difficult to compare to Leica who don't sell pro DSLRs so far. How much more do you expect the S2 will be?

[markowich]

More complex, maybe too for you: I just wanted to reflect your lack of understanding of global economics whilst being funny.

 

nice try. you certainly managed to point out your shortcomings.

 

 

Well, the same argument apply to lenses. And yet, Leica can deliver some of the best around. With a much smaller R&D budget.

Same for software: Micro$oft has the biggest R&D budget. Yet, they do not deliver the best software. They just sell it more.

BTW, how come that small companies like Capture One can make an excellent RAW converter and can more than compete with Nikon and Canon ones?

 

What Leica cannot probably do is to design and sell a lot of consumer products and offer a wide range of product.

But nailing the S2 ? No problem. After all, the DMR was as good as the Eos1Ds or the Nikon D2X when it appeared. Leica had a smaller budget even then.

 

 

Another product you can evaluate before it is available ?

 

repeat: maybe i have seen files before you knew the d3x would ever be available?

best, peter

[markowich]

The price of the S2, as plans now stand, is going to be related to the price of medium format backs (at the time it is launched). The 1Ds Mark III and Nikon D3X may compete with it (or not) but I'm not sure that their prices will affect the S2's price

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

well, the justification might be that it shares the poor ergonomics and noise behaviour with the other medium format offerings. and i know what i am saying, i have H2 + P45 + A75 combos. so far i have accepted their obvious shortcomings in the handling department as a trade off for their superior quality at base iso (and i repeat, i am convinced the S2 will show the same great base iso file quality, maybe better). now i am rethinking and i am sure that others will do too..

so, in a nutshell, i shall use the d3x unless the highest quality is needed. then there is no alternative to a digital view camera (alpa in my case).

cheers, peter

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Excerp of D3x press release:

"Optical viewfinder achieves approx. 100% coverage and 0.7x magnification in FX format"

Again this poor 0.7x magnification. Why are those Godzilla cameras unable to offer at least a 0.85x mag like my tiny R4s?

[pascal_meheut]

repeat: maybe i have seen files before you knew the d3x would ever be available?

best, peter

 

Have been able to compare them with the S2 files?

Do you really think you can judge a camera by looking at some pre-release files?

Did you notice that your price estimation was wrong?

 

And finally, because you seem unable to add 2 and 2, why should we trust your evaluations?

 

The day Sean Reid post a review of the D3x, I'll trust him. Not somebody who believes that with recent math modelling, one can predict stock prices

[SJP]

that with recent math modelling, one can predict stock prices

I do not think that exponential decay is a recent mathematical development:D

 

OTOH this does not allow for negative stock value, that seems a resonable prospect at present. At least for the US automobile industry.

[Overgaard]

Interesting with the D3x files. However, not impressed with the Nikon glass. Wonder how it's possible to shoot a wide angle at f/10 and have only sharpness in front.

 

Personally, reading this thread I became a bit interested in having a look at the Sony a900 with the Zeiss 85mm.

 

But apart from glass, it often depend on how the sensor (and lens) define light and colors. Very basic, but that's the clue. Not size.

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!

[stevelap]

this is a good day for leica fans. the s2 price will drop after the d3x announcement (if leica behaves reasonably). superior everything except pixel count on the nikon side. and as far as pixel count is concerned, i had the P22 before upgrading to the P45 and the difference can only be seen on prints much larger than A1. and if you really want to go beyond that better buy the P65+ anyway (at bet with alpa view cameras). i gather the d3x will sell for around 6K euro, which means that the S2 should be priced under 10k euro.

peter

With respect, I think that you're barking up the wrong tree here. The D3X and the S2 will be different cameras born from different concepts, and probably the only reason to compare them is that both manufacturers have used 'MF' in their press releases (and to be clear, I am not anti-Nikon. I like and have used Nikon equipment and I hope and expect that the D3x will be a superb machine).

 

In reality the D3x will compete on resolution with the existing Canon 1DsIII, in terms of pro-body build and specs, and the smaller Canon 5DMkII and Sony a900. All subject to proven performance, naturally. As for a Leica body in comparison to the D3x, well if and when it arrives it should be the R10. It won't necessarily be a fair or valid comparison of course, other than on IQ, as (unless Leica surprise us) it probably won't have all the bells and whistles, but it will be a full-frame dslr of around 24mpx (based on a scaled S2 sensor).

 

The S2 however is not intended to have dslr like features in terms of high frame rate, multi-point af, ultra high iso etc, etc. It is however intended to have, according to Leica, MF type features such as sensor size, mpx count and (hopefully) IQ, whilst at the same time offering some advances over MF in terms of slightly faster frame rates, higher iso capability and much improved portability and handling.

 

I hope that both the D3x and S2 can be successful in their respective market segments but, other than sharing similar form factors, they probably ought to be considered as different cameras.

[mjh]

this is a good day for leica fans. the s2 price will drop after the d3x announcement (if leica behaves reasonably).

What price? The S2 doesn’t even have a price tag yet. But of course it will be considerably more expensive than a 35 mm DSLR.

 

Anyway, comparing the D3X to a medium-format DSLR like the S2 is silly. There is a new wave of 35 mm DSLRs with 20something megapixel sensors, starting with the EOS-1Ds Mark III, followed by the Alpha900, and now the D3X. 20 megapixels and above once used to be the realm of MF backs, but this has changed; MF territory now spans the 30 to 60 megapixel range and sensors such as Kodak’s venerable 22 MP CCD aren’t even manufactured anymore.

[sean_reid]

well, the justification might be that it shares the poor ergonomics and noise behaviour with the other medium format offerings. and i know what i am saying, i have H2 + P45 + A75 combos. so far i have accepted their obvious shortcomings in the handling department as a trade off for their superior quality at base iso (and i repeat, i am convinced the S2 will show the same great base iso file quality, maybe better). now i am rethinking and i am sure that others will do too..

so, in a nutshell, i shall use the d3x unless the highest quality is needed. then there is no alternative to a digital view camera (alpa in my case).

cheers, peter

 

I've handled a preproduction S2 extensively and don't find the ergonomics to be poor. Regarding the noise performance...wouldn't you perhaps want to actually see the files before making any evaluation of that?

 

In fact, wouldn't it make sense to work with an actual S2 (when it comes out) before making any decisions about it? It seems the cart is being put before the horse here.

 

Cheers,

[sean_reid]

The day Sean Reid post a review of the D3x, I'll trust him.

 

Thanks Pascal. Now if I can only get Nikon to be as responsive (about test cameras) as Canon, Leica, Zeiss, Ricoh, etc.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

I've spoken with several people at Leica about the S2's pricing. The camera is much too far from production launch to set a price and I don't blame them for not doing that.

 

They have said, however, that the price will be in line with MF backs of similar resolution levels. So the best way to predict S2 prices, for now, will be to watch the prices of MF backs.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Interesting with the D3x files. However, not impressed with the Nikon glass. Wonder how it's possible to shoot a wide angle at f/10 and have only sharpness in front.

 

Also...the CV 180/4.0 is a stunner on Nikon.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[AlanG]

Interesting with the D3x files. However, not impressed with the Nikon glass. Wonder how it's possible to shoot a wide angle at f/10 and have only sharpness in front...

 

 

Focus close.

 

 

So the D3X costs $3000 more than a D3. Aren't the bodies the same with the only difference being the sensor? If the sensor adds $3,000 to the price, how come a Sony Alpha 900 camera body that has a very similar sensor, only costs $3,000? Is the Nikon body worth $5,000 more than the Sony's body?

 

Let's assume that that the 12 megapixel sensor in the D3 is worth $2000. (This is an exaggeration as I doubt if the sensor can be worth anywhere near that much.) Then the D3 body without a sensor would be worth $3000. Does this seem reasonable considering what pro film bodies sold for? Does this make the D3X sensor worth $5,000? What does Sony sell them for?

 

I think Nikon priced the D3x at $8000 so it doesn't look cheap in comparison to a 1DsIII. Nikon users want to be able to stick their chests out and show they paid as much as Canon users paid.

 

There will be a lot of wiggle room for Nikon and Canon to lower prices if necessary. This will make it harder for any MF to compete. It won't be too long before Nikon has this or a similar sensor in a lower priced body.

 

There is a pricing concept at work here that is similar to what some restaurants do to set the prices of their menu. Set the price very high for one or two items. This encourages people to spend more on the other items rather than buying the cheapest items.

 

So if the top model is $8000, the $4000-$5,000 model doesn't look bad, and a $1000-$2500 one looks like a downright bargain.

[sdai]

Anyway, comparing the D3X to a medium-format DSLR like the S2 is silly.

 

Someone is gonna repeat this when the S2 is compared to REAL medium format DSLRs such as the H3DII-50 or the H3DII-65.

 

To be serious, I have my own definition on medium format too.

 

The native resolution of the D3x is 6048x4032, printing at 300 dpi I can easily get 20" x13.5" without interpolation, moving further and printing at 150 dpi for increased viewing distance I can get 40" x 27".

 

I can handle this all by myself at home without paying anybody else ... totally changed the way I'm enjoying my hobby.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dfarkas]

While I'm sure the D3x will be a huge hit, looking at the official samples posted, I just don't see the information level of a 24MP image. The 22MP MFD systems I've used have much more per-pixel sharpness and better mico-contrast. Whether this is just how these files were processed, the strength of the AA filter, the limitations of the optics (remember all Nikons up to now have been 12MP), or some other factor remain to be seen. I am a Nikon pro dealer and look forward to getting the D3x so I can work with it myself, particularly with the excellent Zeiss ZF optics.

 

The S2 is in a totally different class. 56% larger sensor, no AA filter, 16-bit capture, referrence class optics, etc. I, for one, don't need more than 2 fps on any regular basis and usually only use one AF point anyway (then recompose). And for fashion work, there is no substitute for a fast leaf shutter flash sync. The option to shoot fast focal plane shutter at the flick of a switch certainly doesn't hurt either. And to compare the S2 to other medium format systems, it is currently the smallest and fastest (even in pre-production) camera. Also, the S2 is the only MFD that offers full weather sealing and the rugged build quality of a camera like the D3x, not to mention other pro features like dual card slots with mirroring, DNG+JPG shooting, etc.

 

The S2 is likely to hit the market in 6-9 months. Guys, we aren't talking years here. Let's see what Leica shows at PMA in the spring.

 

David

[markowich]

What price? The S2 doesn’t even have a price tag yet. But of course it will be considerably more expensive than a 35 mm DSLR.

 

Anyway, comparing the D3X to a medium-format DSLR like the S2 is silly. There is a new wave of 35 mm DSLRs with 20something megapixel sensors, starting with the EOS-1Ds Mark III, followed by the Alpha900, and now the D3X. 20 megapixels and above once used to be the realm of MF backs, but this has changed; MF territory now spans the 30 to 60 megapixel range and sensors such as Kodak’s venerable 22 MP CCD aren’t even manufactured anymore.

 

you should be careful with words like 'silly'. medium format is not synonymous with quality (and again, i am very optimistic that the S2 will produce quality files at base iso).

i have seen files from almost all currently produced medium format backs and from all FF DSLRs and feel in a good position for understanding their virtues. i hope this holds for you too.

peter

peter