R10dreamer Posted May 10, 2009 Share #81 Posted May 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can you read or not I complain not about the weight, but about the bulky lenses etc LOL. Oh, I'm sorry. You are complaining about the bulk, not the weight. My bad. :rolleyes: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 10, 2009 Posted May 10, 2009 Hi R10dreamer, Take a look here New S2 competitor from Phase One. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 10, 2009 Share #82 Posted May 10, 2009 Gary any Leaf lens will be bulkier than any focal plane lens in general because of the leaf shutter inside. No here is the rub here. The S2 lenses are made from those barrel sizes of 72mm and 82mm as David corrected for me. Now The lenses that have the Leaf shutters and also the focal plane lenses of the same focal length lets say the 70mm for example. The only difference will be is leica will remove the shutter on the focal lens. It will not make the lens smaller it will lose the weight from the shutter but it still will use the same barrel. I point this out because the Hassy 80mm with shutter inside and the Mamiya 80mm without are vastly different in size because Mamiya can make the lens smaller. Leica really has no option here since they will use the same barrel. It can shed some weight but not shed the size. Kind of a downside here for focal length lenses for the S2. The bulk is still there even though it does go on a diet. So for focal plane users only like the Mamiya system in general lenses tend to be smaller and less weight. Obviously though you are only a focal planes lens than. For hikers this maybe of some importance. Depends how you feel on bulk really. MF is just a different ball game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10dreamer Posted May 10, 2009 Share #83 Posted May 10, 2009 Gary any Leaf lens will be bulkier than any focal plane lens in general because of the leaf shutter inside. No here is the rub here. The S2 lenses are made from those barrel sizes of 72mm and 82mm as David corrected for me. Now The lenses that have the Leaf shutters and also the focal plane lenses of the same focal length lets say the 70mm for example. The only difference will be is leica will remove the shutter on the focal lens. It will not make the lens smaller it will lose the weight from the shutter but it still will use the same barrel. I point this out because the Hassy 80mm with shutter inside and the Mamiya 80mm without are vastly different in size because Mamiya can make the lens smaller. Leica really has no option here since they will use the same barrel. It can shed some weight but not shed the size. Kind of a downside here for focal length lenses for the S2. The bulk is still there even though it does go on a diet. So for focal plane users only like the Mamiya system in general lenses tend to be smaller and less weight. Obviously though you are only a focal planes lens than. For hikers this maybe of some importance. Depends how you feel on bulk really. MF is just a different ball game Guy, thanks. I'm just getting tired of some people projecting this or that issue. Let Leica finish the camera, bring it to market and then judge it's qualities. Also, it seems to me, that every manufacturer of any product ever made has had issues with that product. Every car, every tv, every camera, every printer, has issues. Nothing is perfect. I've shot a 400 2.8 and that lens is bulky and heavy but it is what it is and doesn't bother me in the least. Again, I am not pointing the finger at you. You spend an enormous amount of time trying to be helpful and informative in here. I would just like to see the S2 and lenses out before people go crazy tearing it apart or projecting this or that quality to it. It shouldn't be much longer now. Now, the R10, that is a different story. I joined this site three years ago with the moniker R10dreamer and I am still dreaming. Kinda crazy in this - 2 years and done - digital age. http://www.garydwhalen.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 10, 2009 Share #84 Posted May 10, 2009 Thanks and i am getting tired of marketing stuff and not fully explaining how these systems work and how they really function. So hopefully it is not perceived as tearing it apart before release but more tearing apart how things work and how they don't work. Partial stories or functions gets my goat. You can't make something do one thing without affecting something else. Classic case here is how these lenses are made and it is to save money but if it was a 70mm in a focal shutter design from scratch it would be smaller right from the start, Leica in this case to save money is using the same leaf barrel that is needed size wise and just pulling the leaf out. Which is not a bad thing just the way it is done. It basically is saying one thing about something but we don't hear about the other side of the coin. Just trying to balance this out so folks truly understand how this all works. MF is a different ball game in many ways. Just the DOF between the systems is a novel to be written. F8 is not F8 in MF compared to a crop sensor M8 or DMR. Just like corner sharpness is great on the M8 well there is a reason for that besides nice glass the crap is getting cut off and like my 28mm with a almost FF 645 sizing it is not getting cut out but on my new P30 + which is a 1.3 crop my corners are brilliant. See how one thing is said but the other is not. Which is fine just like a fight in the streets there are always two sides to how it started. Seriously if I did not have the Mamiya i would have went Hassy and if I did not have any right now the S2 looks good . Getting me to switch is a lot harder than getting someone from Canon or Nikon to switch and for those folks this is a major step up in quality of file. MF folks are already on this level so it is different we would only be after functions on the S2. This is a great forum but many times I don't see any balance when we talk about this stuff, all I hope for is someone is learning something out of it. It may sound negative but it is not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John66 Posted May 10, 2009 Share #85 Posted May 10, 2009 Guy, thanks. I'm just getting tired of some people projecting this or that issue. Let Leica finish the camera, bring it to market and then judge it's qualities. Also, it seems to me, that every manufacturer of any product ever made has had issues with that product. Every car, every tv, every camera, every printer, has issues. Nothing is perfect. I've shot a 400 2.8 and that lens is bulky and heavy but it is what it is and doesn't bother me in the least. This is a fair statement - but for a lot of people the advanced marketing of the S2 suggests it is launched, just not quite available yet. This has been going on for many months. If a company or its supporters want to talk up a product before it is launched, then it is fair game to judge it. One thing is for certain, products are very rarely as good as the marketing suggests, and the S2 sounds too perfect to not disappoint. There's a real belief that the S2 is going have the quality of MF with the size of 35mm system. I think a lot of people are going to be quite shocked how big it really is when it hits the shops - probably next year. Nothing wrong with the size or the weight, but there is an intimation that it will be small and light, which is probably misleading. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 10, 2009 Share #86 Posted May 10, 2009 Certainly bigger than a DMR if that is anything to go by. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
R10dreamer Posted May 10, 2009 Share #87 Posted May 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It should be bigger. It is MF. LF is biggert than MF and MF is bigger than 35mm which is bigger than a point-and-shoot. Just logical for it to be bigger. I am not expecting it to be smaller or lighter than a typical 35mm. That is not reasonable. I expect it to be pretty similar in size to the Pentax 67. Lenses as well. I can handle that. Some people, maybe not. Regardless, my bottom line is the price, not the size. I hope that it comes in around $12-13,000 - top end $!5,000. GD Whalen Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted May 11, 2009 Share #88 Posted May 11, 2009 Interesting thread, that new Phase back looks great if that is what you need. I think Guy is spot on though, this is new territory and given the current economy, most commercial guys are going to take a wait and see approach to what the S2 system actually does in the real world. I think the S2 concept is really interesting and it just goes to show that we are no longer bound by distinct formats...actually, we kind of never were...you can still get film in enormous sizes if you pay enough. Personally, I am already invested in a nice medium format system for my fine art black and white print making / sales. But it is not digital anymore, they just don't sell as well as silver gelatin. A regional meeting with gallery directors recently confirmed this trend as getting stronger as art buyers prefer a more artisan / computer-free piece of art. So I spent about $6,000 on a 6 lens, 3 body and 8 back Hasselblad V system, chump change compared to even a decent high end DSLR kit. And for what it is worth, I have hauled a 500 C/M with a 50 FLE and 100 CF in a pack weighing close to 80 pounds up cliff faces on a 11 mile approach into extremely remote wilderness without incident. I have also moved to a much larger darkroom finish area and obtained top notch Rodenstock APO enlarging lenses for next to nothing. We can now print up to 52 x 70 with special suspension easels using Ilford Multi-grade paper in 100 foot rolls at 30, 40 and 52 inches wide. So as nice as a S2 system would be for some of this remote area stuff I do, a more robust and battery free film system is a much better choice, especially when clients pay 4-5 times more for hand made prints over digital ones. For all the other work I do, a fully proven system like Nikon, Canon or even the M system is a much safer choice than an unproven system. Once the S2 system is out on the shelves with a price tag and has proven it self as a viable investment for the discriminating pro or enthusiast, then we will have our answers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John66 Posted May 11, 2009 Share #89 Posted May 11, 2009 It should be bigger. It is MF. LF is biggert than MF and MF is bigger than 35mm which is bigger than a point-and-shoot. Just logical for it to be bigger. I am not expecting it to be smaller or lighter than a typical 35mm. That is not reasonable. I expect it to be pretty similar in size to the Pentax 67. Lenses as well. I can handle that. Some people, maybe not. Regardless, my bottom line is the price, not the size. I hope that it comes in around $12-13,000 - top end $!5,000. GD Whalen Photography I agree with you completely, it has to be bigger. However, that is not really what is being communicated - not that it is smaller than normal MF (which it probably is) but that it is as small as 35mm. As Guy correctly suggested, the lenses might be the shock here for many. Again no problem with the weight or the size - it will be what it will be based on real physics. But it's the bullshit factor that irritates me. Claims about equipment long before it is ever released. This used to be OK when equipment had a long shelf life, but the world has changed with regard to production cycles. On a lighter note, I can imagine some photographer going in to buy an S2 when it is finally released, and the friend he's with says "I wouldn't bother, it's been out a couple years and will probably be replaced soon..." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted May 11, 2009 Share #90 Posted May 11, 2009 It is smaller than any professional 35mm-system and their zooms are also really big (24-70...). I don't know the Pentax 67 very well, but I remember it as a much bigger body. The size difference between the central shutter lenses seems quite big, the 2,8/24 and the 3,5/30-90 are much smaller than the 2,5/35CS. That's the lens I'm really wondering about, the vario. The S2 with 30-90 is smaller than a 1ds/D3(x) with 24-70 and only a half stop slower - when it offers the performance of the other lenses and you can live without central shutter you really have MF-quality at 35mm-size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 11, 2009 Share #91 Posted May 11, 2009 ...it will also be able to do most things a 35mm format camera can do as well. In a package little bigger than a D700... Used by photogs little bigger than this err... dwarf? ;) 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83595-new-s2-competitor-from-phase-one/?do=findComment&comment=896100'>More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted May 11, 2009 Share #92 Posted May 11, 2009 Used by photogs little bigger than this err... dwarf? ;) I think that the use of wide angles at trade shows have given the S2 a bad rap. Seriously, this was the AFRIKA demo room at Photokina. In the photo you posted, there is a guy on the computer in the background. That computer is only 10 feet behind the subject and he looks tiny. The S2 is being held very close to the person who snapped this photo, thus exaggerating the perspective. Here is a shot of a normal human using the S2 and 180mm CS, then a shot of me, holding the S2 and 70mm CS, both shot in the same room at Photokina. Judge for yourself. David 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83595-new-s2-competitor-from-phase-one/?do=findComment&comment=896178'>More sharing options...
stephengilbert Posted May 11, 2009 Share #93 Posted May 11, 2009 David, Here's a simple question: what does it weigh, and how bit is it? They have a scale and a ruler at Leica, no? If Leica reps want to tell us it isn't as big as it looks, etc, why not just use numbers? Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 11, 2009 Share #94 Posted May 11, 2009 Leica will release all specs when the S2 is final. No one is making a purchase-decision today based on pre-announced weight and size numbers. By the way, in the latest LFI there is a shot of the S2 which looks much more final, with nice rounded edges, and even the button for autofocus on the back. The button is next to the viewfinder. It looks a bit far left to me, but I will reserve judgement for when I have held the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfarkas Posted May 11, 2009 Share #95 Posted May 11, 2009 David, Here's a simple question: what does it weigh, and how bit is it? They have a scale and a ruler at Leica, no? If Leica reps want to tell us it isn't as big as it looks, etc, why not just use numbers? Steve Steve, I will try to get dimensions for you. The S2 prototype weighs 1.3 kg (same as D3x), but the production model will weigh 1.2 kg. The prototypes (18 of them) were made out of milled aluminum. Production units will be made of cast magnesium alloy, which is a bit lighter. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted May 11, 2009 Share #96 Posted May 11, 2009 @ David does not look too big in your hands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengilbert Posted May 11, 2009 Share #97 Posted May 11, 2009 Carsten, I wasn't intending to make a purchase decision, but it seemed to me that all the "bigger than a breadbox" to and fro could be eliminated by simply saying how big the damned thing is. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 11, 2009 Share #98 Posted May 11, 2009 Sure, but my point is that they may not be sure yet. The physical dimensions may be stable, the weight is probably roughly stable, but much of the rest will not be, and Leica isn't going to make a press release for each spec which is final. It will all come at the end. Until then, we have to be patient and guess from photos and the few specs which David has some knowledge of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 11, 2009 Share #99 Posted May 11, 2009 But it still tells me that 70mm is about twice as big as my Mamiya 80mm. Just no getting around the lenses. Equivalent 35mm Focal Length50mm Angle of View @ Infinity47° Filter Size58mm Elements/Groups6 elements/5 groups ShutterNot Applicable f/Stop Rangef/2.8 - 22 Flash SynchronizationNot Applicable Minimum Focus Distance27.5" (70cm) Dimensions1.9 x 3" (49.5 x 77mm) Weight11 oz (300g) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted May 11, 2009 Share #100 Posted May 11, 2009 Hassy with a leaf shutter just for comparison. This is a 2.8 and the Leica is a 2.5 which really should not be that much difference in sizing Equivalent 35mm Focal Length45mm Angle of View @ Infinity46°/38°/29° (diag/hor/vert) Filter Size67mm Elements/Groups6/6 ShutterElectronic lens shutter f/Stop Rangef/2.8-32 Flash SynchronizationFlash sync at all speeds up to 1/800th second; PC socket for electronic flash connection on camera body Minimum Focus Distance0.7 m - infinity Dimensions(70 x 84 mm) (LD) Weight17oz (475g) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.