S2 available in October / starting price of £15,996

[Guest malland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As was stated - they sold the entire run. The files are probably some of the better files I have seen out there and those who use it, have produced some great work with it.

 

Let's see what kind of disaster awaits Leica, shall we? I dont know why anyone is remotely surprised at the pricing on this. There are high end demographics that lease & rent this type of gear, pros and enthusiasts alike.

I made no comment on the quality of the DMR, only that selling 3,500 untis, whether it was the whole run or not, is not exactly a financial plus for the company.

 

Similarly, I made no comment on the price of the S2 but only noted that a target of 1,000 units p.a. is not going to be a financial success for the company, which makes me concerned, like Charles, about the effect on the future of the digital-M and the future of the company. If S2 turns out to have been the wrong strategy, as many people think, as Andreas Kaufmann, at some point will not put more money into the company if the financial prospects are not good.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Wild Beasts of Botswana

[mooky]

Didn't take long for the back-stabbing and arguing to start.

 

Peace to all and success to Leica.

[StS]

You're forgetting the AA filter in 35mm digital cameras. That's the true detail killer.

Guess, that happens when just regurgitating a companies (self) promotional research findings.

 

(By no means I am inclining that Zeiss lenses are bad or that the company doesn't know what they are doing. Far from that but as with all data like that, one's got to keep the entire picture in mind or the result will be misleading.)

 

Sorry for my remark, I should have also been more accurate. What I wanted to say is most of the MF lenses on the market were calculated for film. In my experience, digital imaging is much less forgiving.

 

Having a good MF lens with a digital back should still be quite an experience (I never had so far). However, having a digital (small) MF system with matching optics should be really stunning.

 

But the proof has still to come. I'm eager to see some S2 pictures

[haribo]

Sorry for my remark, I should have also been more accurate. What I wanted to say is most of the MF lenses on the market were calculated for film. In my experience, digital imaging is much less forgiving.

 

Having a good MF lens with a digital back should still be quite an experience (I never had so far). However, having a digital (small) MF system with matching optics should be really stunning.

 

But the proof has still to come. I'm eager to see some S2 pictures

 

You are absolutely correct, digital imaging is much less forgiving.

"However, having a digital (small) MF system with matching optics should be really stunning." Correct, that why Hassy has HCD and Phase/Mamiya has their 'D' lenses.

[mhoersch]

1.The prices of the lenses is a welcome relief.

2. The price of the body is what they said was the target.

Guy, go on vacation happy that you won't have to replace your current system.

Me, my order is in.

I expect this to compete in quality with a 65+ at much less cost, and water resistant too.

For those of you worried this will hurt the company, they have the bankroll to wait five years for a profit. I suggest you all go back to the M8 forum until the images are available or Guy returns from vacation.

 

Your order is in? You order a camera for which there are no specs, only prices, and nobody has seen a single file? You must be a true believer in the Leica God, indeed!

 

And I thought I was bold when I ordered an M8 in October 2006. I got the first body in December 2006. Three more bodies and half a dozen firmware updates later I had indeed a working camera in September 2008 - the shutter of which crashed a few months later after installing yet another firmware.

 

I can only wish you the best of luck with your courageous purchase!

[sdai]

..., there will be a few millionaires that will pick these up, but not as many as one might think.

 

I am obviously one of the rarests who happen to think that pricing won't be a deterrent to the S2's success ... I have my serious doubt about it quality, reliability and the whole system's long term sustainability.

 

But by staying on topic of this thread, the S2 won't make a good case even for millionaires in terms of price, let's see, if your net worth is 1 million US, you're looking at least 3% for a digital camera bound to be obsolete in a 12-24 month product cycle.

 

I agree with many others who have already pointed out, if one can't make serious money out it then there's absolutely no point. But those who are going to pay for your work probably will never give a damn to whatever you use.

 

I wish I were wrong with my suspicions, but even if the S2 emerges as a technology marvel (and it isn't when compared to peers) I'm afraid that it will create a financial disaster for its mothership.

 

I'm sure I'll pass this one 'cause I've never put my trust in any first generation product especially one from a company who has a spotty history in digital.

 

The whole idea is not about affordability but quality, reliability, support and long-term credibility.

 

There are many cheap cameras, cars out there many folks on this board could pay in cash for and buy a bunch but still ... nobody cares.

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They didn't hope for 10.000 That is a myth. They hope for a double-digit percentage of the market for this kind of camera, which they put at 10.000.... So- I guess Leica will be well satisfied if they sell 2000 units over the complete production run of the camera.

 

 

I wish I could be more optimistic, but I think they'll be lucky to sell 200.

[AlanG]

I don't think many here looked at the Jenoptik link that I posted earlier.

 

Here's the first paragraph, "As a result of the insolvency of the supplier Franke & Heidecke plus the significant deterioration in the business potential for mid format cameras (high-end), the Group has decided to withdraw from this sustainably negative business, and to carry out the associated reorganization of its locations and portfolios at home and abroad. Existing supply commitments have been terminated by mutual agreement with the customer."

 

http://www.jenoptik.com/cps/rde/xchg/SID-26EE34DB-26D2E60E/jenoptik/hs.xsl/4582_6824.htm

[mgcd]

I wish I could be more optimistic, but I think they'll be lucky to sell 200.

 

20 was funnier... you killed my pun in gestation...

[mjh]

the bottleneck typically is the optics, not the sensor. Even an advanced digital back will not compensate for the lower resolution of typcial medium format lenses.

Is that so? Let’s do the math!

 

medium format lenses from Carl Zeiss for Hasselblad achieve up to 280 (250 mm Superachromat f5..6)

A sensor matching that resolution would need at least 2 x 280 = 560 pixels per millimeter. The H3DII-50 and H3DII-39 have sensors measuring 49.1 mm x 36.8 mm, so if the sensor was to match a lens resolving 280 Lp/mm, it would have 49.1 x 560 x 36.8 x 560 pixels – that’s a whopping 566.6 megapixels. Given that the H3DII-50 has just 50 megapixels, even a tenfold increase in the number of sensor pixels wouldn’t challenge the lenses. And that’s the old Carl Zeiss lenses; the newer HC lenses are often even better.

 

Care to compare the results for a 35 mm DSLR?

 

35 mm ZM lenses achieve up to 400 line pairs/mm on film. With ZF lenses we achieved about 300 lp/mm.

A lens resolving 400 Lp/mm would require 800 pixels/mm. A matching 35 mm sensor would have 36 x 800 x 24 x 800 pixels – that’s 553 megapixels, just a little less than the MF DSLR.

 

So resolution-wise, there is no real difference; a MF back matching Zeiss’ best MF lenses would deliver about as many pixels as a 35 mm DSLR matching Zeiss’ best 35 mm lenses. There is a difference in the pixel size, though: 560 pixels/mm is equivalent to a pixel pitch of 1.79 µm – that’s a pixel pitch typical of compact digicams and I don’t think any MF vendor would wish to go there. But it would be even worse for the 35 mm DSLR: 800 pixels/mm would be equivalent to a 1.25 µm pixel pitch, even smaller than the tiniest pixels in current digicams (about 1.5 µm).

 

Matching sensors to the resolution of top-of-the-line lenses would require a vastly higher megapixel count (about 10 times higher for medium-format, 22 times higher for 35 mm). But to achive these extreme levels of sensor resolution, the pixel density would have to be increased to a point where signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range were severely compromised, with 35 mm cameras even more than with MF backs, so it is unlikely we will ever see these megapixel figures.

 

In other words: Lenses are not likely to ever becoming the bottleneck in either MF or 35 mm systems.

[mgcd]

I don't think many here looked at the Jenoptik link that I posted earlier.

 

Here's the first paragraph, "As a result of the insolvency of the supplier Franke & Heidecke plus the significant deterioration in the business potential for mid format cameras (high-end), the Group has decided to withdraw from this sustainably negative business, and to carry out the associated reorganization of its locations and portfolios at home and abroad. Existing supply commitments have been terminated by mutual agreement with the customer."

 

http://www.jenoptik.com/cps/rde/xchg/SID-26EE34DB-26D2E60E/jenoptik/hs.xsl/4582_6824.htm

 

I took good note of it Alan, I thought it was very interesting indeed. However, I figured Leica have done their homework and that they know more than I do in terms of their sales expectations... One should hope. That said, beyond my initial reaction of utter disbelief with respect to the price for the body, I'm still waiting on the complete specs... They're trying a new business model with the S system, I am curious to see how it will work out for them. I think the S2 itself is brilliant, I mean the idea and the concept are great. I have no doubt that it will prove a superb tool. I just can't wait to see an insurance quote on this - specifically for a worldwide location replacement rider...

[StS]

Sorry, I seem to have my hair-splitting evening - would you consider a line to be resolved, when one line equals one sensor pixel?

[mjh]

Sorry, I seem to have my hair-splitting evening - would you consider a line to be resolved, when one line equals one sensor pixel?

In reality you would need even more pixels; for a sensor with a Bayer filter array, 3 pixels per line pair would be a good place to start. But since megapixel figures over 500 are pretty astronomical as it is, using the simpler equivalence of one pixel per line was more than sufficient to make my point. If you want realistic figures for Bayer sensors, just multiply the megapixel figures by two (i.e. about 1100 megapixels).

[Riccis]

Ok, folks please read the following PDN article where Christian Erhardt addresses the S2 pricing (Leica's Erhardt Addresses Criticism Over S2's Hefty Price Tag)

 

Cheers,

[delander †]

He did not really explain the pricing but did reveal that it will ship with Adobe LR.

 

Jeff

[charlesphoto99]

those who are going to pay for your work probably will never give a damn to whatever you use.

 

Truer words have never been said and that fact is lost on a lot of amateur photographers with gear lust and too much money. The shot that has made me the most money in my career (probably an S2 several times over) was taken with a Nikon FM2 and a 24mm f2 Nikkor and a Vivitar 285 flash on Tri-X. That said, it wasn't a car commercial and the gear fit the subject.

 

I love the concept and design of the S2 but the price is ridiculous. esp as one has to pay an extra $5K for a Sapphire screen (give me a break!) and decent service. Shouldn't that be a given on any five figure camera?

[wlaidlaw]

Ok, folks please read the following PDN article where Christian Erhardt addresses the S2 pricing (Leica's Erhardt Addresses Criticism Over S2's Hefty Price Tag)

 

Cheers,

 

Not too convincing I am afraid. One other poster described the camera beautifully as a Tweeny camera between a full 35 frame DSLR and the larger more flexible full MF system camera, where remember you can take the back off and put it on a view camera for studio shots where you need shift, angulation etc.

 

The other point, which others may have mentioned but I may have missed is that Adobe Lightroom seems to be the supplied converter of choice. I hope it works better on S2 images than it did on M8 when I tried it. I had serious problems with moiré and aliasing on images with grids (car radiator grilles etc) on them with Lightroom and I thought the crispness of the images and the colour, was distinctly inferior to C1. I also did not like the workflow or the interface. I did not buy it after trying it out.

 

Wilson

[sdai]

Leica didn't say it uses an inferior sensor when compared to the DALSA chipped Phases and Blads.

 

Leica didn't say it only runs at 14 bit there's much less data to crunch of course it will be arguably faster than peers.

 

Leica didn't say the S2 doesn't have a proper raw converter so all their bet is on ACR? that's a laugh.

 

They did say a lot with ZERO proof.

[andybarton]

Funny about using software of choice. I have never found out how to get C1 v4 to work at all. An amazingly confusing interface - you couldn't make it any worse if you tried.

 

Yet, LR is so simple it's ridiculous.

 

Horses for courses.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[adan]

Just to clarify: Stefan Daniels' projection, as quoted in the summary of the May forum visit, was - a double-digit percentage of 10,000 units PER YEAR.

 

Whether you agree that the MF digital market is 10,000 cameras per year or not is a fair question - but that was the precise wording reported.

 

So Leica's projections are for at least 1,000 S2s per year, unless Daniels was misquoted.

 

As to the price - there were naysayers who were sure it would be $28,000-30,000 per body (go back and read the threads) and dreamers who thought it would be $12,000. Seems like the reality falls in the middle of the range.

 

The US has generally been about 25% of the Leica market - so that means 250 cameras a year in the US. Realistically, the US ain't what it used to be in the global economy - and is only 5% of the population, so what level of US sales translates into 1,000+ globally? 50? 100? 150?

 

Put another way - a goal of 1000 cameras a year is one camera for every 7,000,000 people. That means Leica is aiming for one sale in Hong Kong, 2.5 sales in NYC, 2 cameras in Shanghai, 1.5 sales in Tokyo (or 15 in Japan overall), 2 in Mumbai....you get the picture.

 

Throw in a few Russian Gaz-ocrats or Bollywood producers, and I don't see 1000 units year being a reach. Sure the average Leicaflex SL or R4 user isn't going to switch (we haven't heard Doug weigh in yet) - but so what?

 

Put yet another way - the average person knows about 10,000 people over their lifetime - so take everyone you've ever known, and then find 700 other people who have no mutual acquaintances with you of any kind, and take everyone they've ever known in their life - and Leica needs to make just one sale in that whole group.