SteveYork Posted July 5, 2009 Share #461 Posted July 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) No. Thank you for the wealth of information. When exactly did Leica say this product would be released? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 5, 2009 Posted July 5, 2009 Hi SteveYork, Take a look here S2 under pricing pressure. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dfarkas Posted July 5, 2009 Share #462 Posted July 5, 2009 Thank you for the wealth of information. When exactly did Leica say this product would be released? The S2 will be released in September. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 5, 2009 Share #463 Posted July 5, 2009 Beginning or end of September? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted July 5, 2009 Share #464 Posted July 5, 2009 @guy_mancuso I've seen your noise comparison (p30+, p40+ and p45+) and hopefully the new Kodak-architecture offers the same noise-improvement as the Dalsa-architecture!? I never got the chance to shot the new 6micron Dalsa/Kodak-generation myself but when I compared the per-pixel noise-performance between the 20+MP-class with CMOS-sensors with the P30+ and M8 (very similar technology) I and your results (6,8micron vs. 6 micron Kodak/Dalsa) I would say that they show a quite similar noise performance, although we don't know how much noise is filtered in the CMOS-files before writing the RAW-file. The P40+ seems usable up to 800ASA, the D3x up to about 1600ASA but with microlenses (which added about 1 stop in the past). @wlaidlaw Phase is a tiny company, they just bought two nearly bankrupt companies for a very low price - as far as I know the whole Phase-staff is as large as the R&D-team for the S2. They didn't even want to buy a new tool for the P40+/P65+-housing to use a larger display... Their backs (despite the horrible LCD) are great, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted July 5, 2009 Share #465 Posted July 5, 2009 Georg my final conclusion was the P40+ with the sensor + at 1600 was a little better than my P30+ but it is a lot smaller file with the Sensor +. I would assume the Kodak and Dalsa will be very very similar. The slight differences I see between the Kodak and Dalsa is a profile difference not that one is better than the other they just render color differently. As far as the difference between the P30+ and P40+ . The P40+ is a little faster shooting .8 compared to 1.25 seconds until the next frame, Slightly better detail because of two factors no micro lenses and the 9 mpx difference which as you see in the test a very very slight detail difference. Also the P40+ can be used on a Tech camera and also it does NOT need a wake up cable to shoot on a tech camera. The P40+ does have a edge in features and performance but I still love the P30+ and no other back can give a full res. ISO 800 like it and with a little Noise help no one can do a 1600 full res. like the P30+. BTW The P40+ is 1000-800 normal res. and with Sensor + 200-3200. I would expect the S2 to be the same here with that range. Now the S2 will be 37mpx with Micro lenses and a touch smaller sensor in the Kodak 6 micron chip. Reality they will all be about equal with a slight edge to the P40+ with a little bigger sensor and a couple MPX more. Frankly this part is the least part I would be concerned about. Once you get to this sensor size above 35mm the world changes. MPX don't count nearly as everyone thinks. These 3 are in the same range actually include the H3/31 in that also since it is the same sensor as the P30+. One other note the 6 micron the Moire is very slightly less than the 6.8 and you can see that in the test as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted July 5, 2009 Share #466 Posted July 5, 2009 I was just referring to the sensor-performance, because many people are interested in the noise-performance of the S2 in comparison to the D3x and 1dsMklll. The 70mm-performance at close distance @f2.5 from the Photokina-shots was stellar, I don't know any C/N-lens which shows this 100%-crop-contrast above f2.5, so the sensor is the only real possible "bottleneck" in this regard. Your P45+ @ 400ASA: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17721&d=1244947355 Your P40+ @ 800ASA: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=17723&d=1244947472 Looks quite close to me, so nearly 1 stop gained noise-performance in comparison to the old 6,8micron-architecture? You have the original-files, so you can propably see more than I do without actually having compared both!? But those architectures are 4 years apart in development! The P30+ cannot be directly compared in this regard (sensor-noise), because it has microlenses!?. Does the S2 really have a sensor+-like function? David mentioned that in his blog but I thought it was a special function of the new DALSA-sensors!? 9,3MP @ 3200ASA sounds like fun... MPX are not everything, I shoot tiny 10MP-files with my M8 and thats enough for my 22x33cm-portfolio ;-) but this question will pop up as long as no real-world-comparison is shown - the Mamiya/Hassi-systems can be upgraded to 60MP, the S2 not (well, future models will propably have more resolution). The real problem I have with the below-60MP-models is the simple fact that those are crop-systems, carrying and paying for a 41x56mm-body, lens & viewfinder but taking pictures on a 1,3 crop-sensor? Well, we rangefinder-users have learned to live with that because there is no alternative - but on a >>10k$-pro-system with more than 2kg weight, huge bodies and f4-lenses? No wonder that many pros like their D3x and 1dsMkiii despite their inferior IQ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
like_no_other Posted July 5, 2009 Share #467 Posted July 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is a really pessimistic thread title. 'Hassleblad and Phase One under quality pressure' and 'H and PO impressed by the beauty of Leica pictures' will be the real headlines as of Sept.09. Most people here around can count pixels and noise or know which lenses are sharp or not, but don't know the beauty that Leica lenses usually produce compared to Zeiss or other lenses? Top professional photographers and dentists who appreciate that Leica factor will buy the S2 to differentiate from their competition and will make us happy with more beautiful fashion photographs in magazines than those we can see today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 5, 2009 Share #468 Posted July 5, 2009 Go find someone who will pay you a premium "because" you use a s2 ... perhaps Bayern Munchen will offer you a coaching contract "because" you wear a t-shirt with Klinsmann's name on its back. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
like_no_other Posted July 5, 2009 Share #469 Posted July 5, 2009 Bad boy. S2 photographers will be chosen for their exceptional creativity and the beauty of their picture results. Nobody is payed a premium for extra 30 mio pixels that are not needed. I wanted a fixed income higher than that of the best payed player of their team. That was the real reason I didn't get the job, not the funny t-shirt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 5, 2009 Share #470 Posted July 5, 2009 Surely this relationship must be under great strain after Jenoptik backed out of the deal to sell the majority stake in Sinar to Leica. Apparently it isn’t. Leica and Jenoptik did affirm their ongoing partnership last summer, long after the Sinar fiasco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 5, 2009 Share #471 Posted July 5, 2009 The DSLR market is so large and the products so varied at different price points I dont believe either Canon or Nikon would react to a Leica R10 the way that Phaseone and Hassleblad will react to a Leica S2. Leica is too small a fish to even turn up on Canon’s or Nikon’s radar. But that isn’t really the issue anyway. I mean, what could a competitor possibly do? Send troops? The real issue is the pundits’ verdict. Leica simply cannot compete with Canon or Nikon in the 35 mm DSLR market if they tried to attack them head-on. Yes, their lenses would be superior, but you can use Leica lenses on a Canon now, so why even bother with a more expensive and less capable Leica DSLR? But then there are different ways to slice up markets. It is not like the categorization into 35 mm and medium-format was cast in stone and once you were in one camp you could never leave for another. Even when Leica cannot compete in the 35 mm DSLR market, with the S2 they can still attract some photographers currently working with 35 mm DSLRs, and that’s what they do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted July 5, 2009 Share #472 Posted July 5, 2009 Beginning or end of September? Not sure, but by the end of this month (July) we will know specifics with regard to delivery date and pricing. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 5, 2009 Share #473 Posted July 5, 2009 Canon, Nikon, Phase and Hassy won't have any problem building their own "S" systems too. You think so? Developing for two different systems in parallel would be straining the resources of Hasselblad or Phase One; they certainly know better than weakening their position by diverting resources. And Canon or Nikon? In theory they could, only in practice it wouldn’t make sense. Both have a very profitable 35 mm and APS-C DSLR business and they intend to keep it that way. Apart from the lenses, it is the EOS 500D or D5000 that are the cash cows, not the EOS-1Ds Mark III or D3x. Those professional models are actually quite costly for their respective vendors, given the level of support professional users have come to expect, so the reason for offering professional solutions isn’t so much that it earns them money directly through sales of professional cameras, but because of the prestige it confers on the lower level offerings. Having an EOS-1Ds Mark III or D3x as part of one’s portfolio helps selling the EOS 500D or D5000. Now if Canon or Nikon would introduce a new DSLR system with a bigger sensor, this would send quite the wrong message. Far from promoting sales of the more affordable offerings, it would convey the message that the 35 mm DSLR had reached an impasse and that further improvements in image quality required a larger sensor. Why would they do that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 5, 2009 Share #474 Posted July 5, 2009 Leica is too small a fish to even turn up on Canon’s or Nikon’s radar. But that isn’t really the issue anyway. I mean, what could a competitor possibly do? Send troops? The real issue is the pundits’ verdict. Leica simply cannot compete with Canon or Nikon in the 35 mm DSLR market if they tried to attack them head-on. Yes, their lenses would be superior, but you can use Leica lenses on a Canon now, so why even bother with a more expensive and less capable Leica DSLR? I humbly disagree, Michael ... based on your theory, Olympus, Pentax, Sigma, Panasonic et al need not to play anymore, because their market share are all quite trivial when compared to Canon's and Nikon's, and there's Sony. Besides optics, Leica's disadvantage in technology can actually be turned into advantage someone could appreciate IMO, such as the lack of on-board raw data massaging ... which is exactly why Canon's files looking so plastic. The DMR's spec. is quite primitive from almost all aspects judging by today's standard, and people are still willing to pay premium price for a second or may be third hand sample ... many folks on this forum enjoyed and are enjoying the M8/M8.2 with full knowledge of its quirks and defects. Leica hasn't even tried with a R10, how do they know their odds with the S2 are better? If you go for gambling at a casino, will you put your money on something you are familiar with or some stuff totally unheard of? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 5, 2009 Share #475 Posted July 5, 2009 I humbly disagree, Michael ... based on your theory, Olympus, Pentax, Sigma, Panasonic et al need not to play anymore, because their market share are all quite trivial when compared to Canon's and Nikon's, and there's Sony. Indeed compared to Canon and Nikon they're looking for crumbs off the plate, but compared to Leica they're a full apple pie with a dollop of ice cream on top. I assume Leica looked at the development costs, looked at the margins and projected sales and reached their own conclusion regarding the possible success of an R10. In a way they are tied into the S2 given all the statements they've made and how close they are to the product launch. It's one thing to cancel a theoretical project, quite another to cancel a project just before launch if you intend to retain credibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 5, 2009 Share #476 Posted July 5, 2009 You think so? Developing for two different systems in parallel would be straining the resources of Hasselblad or Phase One; they certainly know better than weakening their position by diverting resources. I can't speak about Hasselblad but Phase One already has the ZD, how difficult is it to give it an upgrade or just facelift? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 6, 2009 Share #477 Posted July 6, 2009 It's one thing to cancel a theoretical project, quite another to cancel a project just before launch if you intend to retain credibility. Leica has always made a lot of buzz about sharing technologies among the S2, R10 and M9 so clearly they have planned for it. I think these are actually ongoing projects in parallel. IMO the true reason to cancel the R10 is because it's too close an "internal" competition to the S2 in terms of resources, market etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10dreamer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #478 Posted July 6, 2009 Like it or not the psychology of fear hasn't changed much in the evolution of social vertebrates; in this respect we're not much different from a gaggle of geese. It's what causes panic in a crowded theater and makes mob action seem reasonable to those who'd never mis-behave on their own. The flock is as fearful as the most fearful member of the flock and the fear is amplified, in the fashion of the telephone game, as it's passed from one member of the flock to the next as each individual in turn thinks that he's 'missing something' and should be more fearful than reason dictates. An individual goose I can approach within a few feet, but the same bird in a flock will spook at 100 yards when a neighboring goose gets jumpy. Internet forums are the biggest gaggles I'm aware of, making it very easy to spook the rest of the flock. The contagious fear in this thread and many others is obvious is you're looking for it. I suggest we wait and see what Leica does w.r.t. raw developers for the S2 rather than feeding the fear machine. I think that you are confusing fear with anxiety. Two different things entirely. One real. One perceived. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 6, 2009 Share #479 Posted July 6, 2009 You can be frightened about something that isn't a real problem, you can be anxious about something that isn't a real problem. I don't see much of a semantic difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10dreamer Posted July 6, 2009 Share #480 Posted July 6, 2009 You can be frightened about something that isn't a real problem, you can be anxious about something that isn't a real problem. I don't see much of a semantic difference. Both of your examples are anxiety not fear. Unless, of course, you want to make up your own definition of things. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.