S2 and Leica's list of sins

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is what Ctein says about the LCD screen of the S2:

 

So, how seriously would you be using that LCD, in lieu of the optical viefinder? Remember, the camera plus normal lens weighs 2 KILOS! This is not a camera most of us would be able to use in arms-extended position for very long.

 

More pixels in the LCD means lousier image quality-- poorer color, less contrast and lower brightness. At today's technology level, those 900K displays are nearly useless in sunlight.

 

Me, I'll take 300K good pixels over 900K crappy ones any day; I get a lot more useful info from looking at the former.

 

 

The Online Photographer: Leica S System Specs Revealed

[Advertisement]

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

[plevyadophy]

You know what--you're right.

 

I won't retract what I said, 'cos I'm in a foul mood today and some people (not the OP) on the forum have made it worse. But that's *my* fault and my stuff to deal with...

 

But honestly, you would think--wouldn't you?--that someone offering an opinion on a medium format camera would at least do their homework, right?

 

A little bit maybe?

 

OK--so here goes:

 

 

• Kodak CCD - Not exactly known for making ground breaking sensors, and the sensor should have been CMOS so as to provide LiveView
  Actually it's the opposite: Kodak's professional sensors are well-known for being state-of-the-art, and have been in many of the highest end imagers in the world, including Phase and others. The DMR's small size pro Kodak chip still kicks the stuff out of my D3 sensor for colour, clarity, contrast and DR at ISOs under 800. The M8's is no slouch either. In any case, they are noticably better than CMOS chips overall. And when you're shooting tethered, with an art director standing by, why would you need live-view again?
  
• No LiveView - regarded by many an old fart as just a gimmick, but in fact it is extremely useful for work with tilt-and-shift lenses (see the review on this site of the Canon's new 24mm T & S lens) and, if my memory serves me correctly, Leica have a T & S lens as part of the S System roadmap
  Ok, I'm not an old fart, but it's still a gimmick, even for TS. Especially for serious shooters, who are likely to be shooting tethered anyway.
  
• LCD 460,000 dots - pretty rubbish really for a premium product. Ok... but probably good enough to confirm exposure and focus, right? In which case it's functional. Again, I suspect tethered is the primary use case for "preview" here.
  
• Sapphire Glass on LCD only at MUCH greater expense - I wonder how much more it's gonna cost. So far it seems that you can only get this feature if you also fork out extra money for the higher priced warranty package. At that much extra I would be inclined to simply get a piece of perspex cut to size and affix it to the LCD for protection.
  Ok. You only get it with the warranty package, so perspex it is for you!
  
• Shutter 1/4000 - for some considerable time Leica were touting the fact that the S2 is akin to a standard high-end 35mm in size and portability (although they now seem to be changing their tune a little and are making more noises about it's similarities to medium format), if that is so then the cam lends itself to use outdoors in bright light. I would therefore have expected a highter top shutter speed of 1/8000 to compete with the top cams Canon and Nikon have to offer. But to be fair to Leica perhaps there is a technical reason for not providing a 1/8000 shutter speed; perhaps because the shutter is much larger and has further to travel than that on a 35mm cam it can't be done easily.
  It may sound inconvenient, but just stop down the shutter a stop; use a neutral density filter, or close the aperture a stop. 1/4000s is plenty fast for controlled light situations (not many people go street shooting with a MF camera--even an event is relatively controlled, too).
  
• Flash sync: 1/125 (and requires in-lens leaf shutter to get to just 1/500 secs) - wholly unimpressive.
  Again, for the purpose (controlled light), it's more than completely satisfactory and better than any dSLR on the planet without resorting to some multiple flash HSS stuff where you lose light output.
  
• 1.5fps - I appreciate that at this frame rate and moving 14 bit images the camera is moving an impressive amount of data, but I still feel they should have tried harder and gone for 2 fps to make the camera really impressive.
  First, IIRC you mean 16 bit images (not 14 bit) and they're about 100Mb RAW files, essentially. No other camera on the planet moves that much data as quickly (Ok, maybe some of the Phase backs). It's really impressive as it is; I'm sure if they could have reasonably gotten an extra half frame per second they would have; but there's always a tech trade-off when you make these things. The S3 will be faster We're also not shooting sports here, man (not to mention the fact that 99% of the people I've seen with faster than 1fps not pro sports shooters very rarely need it)
  
• Exposure Metering - only 5 fields in so called Mult-Field metering - in this day and age, this is simply not good enough; a joke really
  Actually, it's only a joke if you don't know how to meter manually, which most pros at this level will
  
• Central crosshair AF sensor - so, a camera with a shallow depth of field, that is marketed as being light and portable and brought to market in the 21st century and REQUIRES you to engage in the less than optimal "focus and recompose" procedure. Hmmm, really really unimpressive
  No, really not. Look--no-one using this camera is going to be shooting cross-field sports-like movement with absolute tracking wide open on the lens! High quality AF in this space is for focus accuracy, not tracking ability. The amount of focus shift with a recompose (at typical apertures) is not going to affect anything.
  
• Diopter: -3 to +1 - Not that great really, especially when you consider that the Panasonic G1 manages -4 to +4
  Yes, it's a drag if you need corrective lenses. Did I mention tethered shooting?
  
• Warranty - Plain rubbish.
  In your opinion. MF backs often have many financial options (for pros) that consumers would find unacceptible. But if this is what it takes for Leica to fully support the S2, then good for them for breaking it into levels of service that you pay for (or do not pay for) as the case may be.
  

Is that better, R10?

 

Obviously, I am not R10 but yeah that is much better and an enjoyable and informative read (as apposed to the Leica Cult stuff that went before).

 

• Kodak CCD - I note your well argued point. However, I really don't believe the difference between the latest CCD and CMOS chips, in terms of image output, is really THAT noticeable. To us photo enthusiasts, nerds, fussy pros etc yes but what the CMOS sensors output is commercially acceptable and at the end of the day that is what matters (especially, if to get the better output from CCD you end up paying a lot more for the cam and lose out on other benefits like liveview)
  
• Liveview - hmm that term "serious shooter" not one I have much time for really. Many a serious shooter will and do use liveview. Why does one want to HAVE TO be tethered rather than CHOOSE to be? Further, you're tethered so you are using liveview, why not have it on the camera body and avoid the big pc or laptop. Remember, one of the things Leica are touting as a distinguishing feataure of the S2 is that it is so much more portable than traditional medium format, so why on earth would one want to tether themselves like medium format shooters?
  
• LCD - i disagree with your point here for the reasons set out above.
  
• Shutter 1/4000 - I understand your points but disagree as it seems like a whole lot of faffing around to me all that ND filter stuff. And I note you refer to the camera as MF, well it isn't quite that is it? Rather, what Leica have tried to sell us is a new digital age, and part of that is the portability of the cam. So contrary to what you say people may well be inclined to take this camera out and about, if that is ruled out then they may as well stick to heavy clumsy MF gear.
  
• Flash Sync - Your point is well argued. However, don't you think (I certainly do) that they should have tried a little harder to make it perform better rather than doing just enough? After all this is supposed to be a premium product and the dawning of a new age.
  
• 1.5fps - Again, you seem to be arguing for "just enough". Yes it is an impressive amount of data that is being moved, but to my mind they should have tried to move it faster. They need to wow us with this product not just get a pat on the back from us. And you are correct it is not the camera one is likely to shoot sports with, but it would be nice to have a faster frame rate for a fashion shoot as they tend to work nicer with a bit of pace, a certain rhythm.
  
• Exposure Metering - only 5 fields in so called Mult-Field metering - I note your comments re manual metering. I know I for one will enjoy, for a very short while, playing with manual metering. But I really don't think it is a good showing to produce a camera in the 21st century that kinda REQUIRES it.
  
• Central crosshair AF sensor - So you don't think the "focus and recompose" thing is gonna affect anything? Well, what if you wanna shoot wide open, I would have thought that the wafer thin depth of field might be an issue.
  
• Diopter: -3 to +1 - I note you are promoting tethered shooting again as a solution. But isn't the whole point of the S2 to free us from HAVING TO work in the old medium format way?
  
• Warranty - we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
  

Regards,

[AlanG]

Alan, you don't need a live view if you're tethered. Yes, it's a wee bit more convenient perhaps, but the difference between taking a shot on a large monitor and re-arranging and doing it "real time (with focus lag) is minimal in a studio.

 

If you are moving one or more objects to find the ideal position, or to get a shadow or highlight exactly a certain way, it is nice to see that in real time without taking a bunch of "blind" shots. Especially if you are not near the camera or computer, or don't have a free hand.

 

That being said only some MF backs have even a relatively slow version of tethered live view. but I read of some still life shooters who really want it.

 

I and many others would like to see good live view directly on a high quality LCD on a removable back itself. That way one could use a wide angle or regular view camera in the field and not have to switch between ground glass viewing and shooting. You could compose directly on the LCD and zoom in to check focus.

[AlanG]

This is what Ctein says about the LCD screen of the S2:

 

So, how seriously would you be using that LCD, in lieu of the optical viefinder? Remember, the camera plus normal lens weighs 2 KILOS! This is not a camera most of us would be able to use in arms-extended position for very long.

 

More pixels in the LCD means lousier image quality-- poorer color, less contrast and lower brightness. At today's technology level, those 900K displays are nearly useless in sunlight.

 

Me, I'll take 300K good pixels over 900K crappy ones any day; I get a lot more useful info from looking at the former.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Where does he get this? The view of the LCD on the back of the 5DII is so much better than the old one - especially in sunlight where at least it is pretty usable compared with the old one. I think it will be obvious to anyone who looks at different LCDs. The newest ones are larger, brighter, clearer, more colorful, etc. under all lighting conditions. There is a p&s camera that has a 1.2 million pixel display.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I wasn't overly excited by the announced specs of the S2.

 

Here's my list of sins:

• Kodak CCD - Not exactly known for making ground breaking sensors, and the sensor should have been CMOS so as to provide LiveView
  Actually this is Kodaks latest technology 6 micron sensor which is basically the same as a Dalsa P65 and P40 sensor except Dalsa does not have any microlenses the S2 does plus it is a smaller sensor.
  
• No LiveView - regarded by many an old fart as just a gimmick, but in fact it is extremely useful for work with tilt-and-shift lenses (see the review on this site of the Canon's new 24mm T & S lens) and, if my memory serves me correctly, Leica have a T & S lens as part of the S System roadmap.
   
  Live view is not really very good in any of the MF systems that have it and far better off shooting in tethered mode except the S2 has no dedicated raw processing program like C1 does or Phocus, Exposure or leaf Capture so in this case you can shoot to a hot folder in Lightroom which frankly is not so hot but that is my opinion. There was a statement they had some dedicated program built for the s2 and was somewhere but the latest spec sheet that seems to be missing on it. Not sure what gives on this part of it.
   
  
• LCD 460,000 dots - pretty rubbish really for a premium product.
   
  Supposedly the same as a Iphone but it is 3 inches which is the biggest LCD in MF so we give them credit for that and a big bitch among MF shooters of not having it. Leaf does have a big screen but sucks in bright light. Really personal preference here since many just use it for histo and move on or are already tethered. I seen the prototype and it's nice but I'm very hard to impress
   
  
• Sapphire Glass on LCD only at MUCH greater expense - I wonder how much more it's gonna cost. So far it seems that you can only get this feature if you also fork out extra money for the higher priced warranty package. At that much extra I would be inclined to simply get a piece of perspex cut to size and affix it to the LCD for protection.
   
  Actually saffire glass is expensive and I have it on my Panerai watch but as a LCD surface pick your poison if you want it. Glad it is a option because I would not go for it.
   
  
• Shutter 1/4000 - for some considerable time Leica were touting the fact that the S2 is akin to a standard high-end 35mm in size and portability (although they now seem to be changing their tune a little and are making more noises about it's similarities to medium format), if that is so then the cam lends itself to use outdoors in bright light. I would therefore have expected a highter top shutter speed of 1/8000 to compete with the top cams Canon and Nikon have to offer. But to be fair to Leica perhaps there is a technical reason for not providing a 1/8000 shutter speed; perhaps because the shutter is much larger and has further to travel than that on a 35mm cam it can't be done easily.
   
  Pretty typical in MF but we need to get away from comparing it to 35mm it is beyond that and competes in MF so this is entirely a different league. On a technical side it may not be possible as well given the CS.
   
  
• Flash sync: 1/125 (and requires in-lens leaf shutter to get to just 1/500 secs) - wholly unimpressive. But again, to be fair to Leica perhaps this slowness is due to the much larger shutter that has to be moved accross the sensor.
   
  Hate to say it but no MF camera has above 1/125 and that sucks because 1/250 is a helpful option for sure again you moving a big mirror and a big curtain so very difficult to get the crap out of the way to sync faster. This is a product of MF
   
  
• 1.5fps - I appreciate that at this frame rate and moving 14 bit images the camera is moving an impressive amount of data, but I still feel they should have tried harder and gone for 2 fps to make the camera really impressive.
   
  Pretty impossible here really to get to 2 fps unless it was a smaller sensor , First it is the fastest among 30 mpx plus backs. Your moving a crap load of data very fast and the sensor needs to clear or dump before it can be ready for another . This is where the S2 has the edge . Just for comparison the P40+ is .8 seconds before a shot can be taken again. Also you are fighting the balance between FPS and the buffer sucking battery. Your simple moving large files and pushing big parts around to shoot like mirror and such. Leica actually did good here
   
  
• Exposure Metering - only 5 fields in so called Mult-Field metering - in this day and age, this is simply not good enough; a joke really
   
  Well this is a matter of preference really and what you want but most MF shooters are shooting to a histo anyway. But point taken
   
  
• Central crosshair AF sensor - so, a camera with a shallow depth of field, that is marketed as being light and portable and brought to market in the 21st century and REQUIRES you to engage in the less than optimal "focus and recompose" procedure. Hmmm, really really unimpressive
   
  Don't disagree but that is also Leica's simple approach to shooting but multi points is not the norm. in MF either. So yes a little old tech here and if it had 5 points even a much better AF system
   
  
• Diopter: -3 to +1 - Not that great really, especially when you consider that the
   
  Not sure why it stopped at +1 . That could cause some issue with some folks. I think me for instance. LOL
   
  Panasonic G1 manages -4 to +4
   
  
• Warranty - Plain rubbish. What they provide as the Premium Package should in fact be the bare minimum warranty. If this camera is as robust and well made as they claim why on earth don't they back that claim with a generous warranty, a mere 12months warranty tells me that they aren't too confident about their own product.
   
  Well no one has more than a standard 12 month warranty in almost any camera for that matter . The extended warranties here are some what copied from Phase and some parts are good but the price tag is high here. Phase additional 3 year is 3K with loaner support , free mount swap and some other goodies. Not sure I agree with some of the Leica extra warranty here . Personally I would have made it one extra with loaner service and repair for less than the competition. Your already paying pretty heavy on getting in to start and this is just a little rough on the pocket. I could think of a better plan here and still offer the loaners and such . Remember it is a option though and this is what Leica thought best but O agree it could be a more friendly user option
   
  

If this camera had arrived on the market 3 years ago, or perhaps 2 years ago even, then it would be an exciting product. But in the current market, where one get compact 20+ Mpixel cams from Canon and Sony, which will soon be followed by cameras in the 30 Mpixel region, I really don't see how this boring spec is gonna cope.

 

Yes and no . I guess you have to really have a need here to start with and in sensors bigger size is always better . We are totally beyond 35mm in and MPX war here. I had a 22mpx Phase P25 and trust me it would blow any 35mm DSLR out of the water, no question about it . I have been on both sides of this fence for a long time and all I can say to this age old stupid argument is just trust me on this one. LOL I know but it is a constant war on it and MF will always win the day when it comes to IQ

 

I know some will argue that what matters is the image quality/results, but like a car where what really matters is the result (getting to your destination) one is also concerned about how one arrives at the result e.g. air con, ABS brakes, leather seats etc etc (read: nice LCD, good frame rate, excellent AF module etc etc). And apologists for Leica will no doubt compare the cam favourably with some medium format offerings; well, that isn't good enough really because this cam is supposed to be something new, exciting and modern, a kinda hybrid medium format-35mm cam, so it should do a great deal better (not merely equal, or scrape past) on the spec sheet than medium format.

 

However, having said all that, there is definitely something about the cam that draws one's attention; it just looks so damn gorgeous.

 

Well all I can say to this would you marry a drop dead looking women on the short term or one that will last you a lifetime of pleasure and enjoyment. Sexy maybe nice short term but i will take the longer relationship. I know stupid but happiness rules. Guess you can decide that one on your own. Anyway hope this helps get a little of the MF world out there to understand how some thing have not changed and some have but we really need to give up on the 35mm feature sets and i know that is very difficult but MF was built for quality and working it and not so much the consumer push button stuff if you know what I mean

 

Regards,

 

Hope that helps somewhat, I kind of briefly answered this without long explanations but certainly can . Guy

[sdai]

Where does he get this? The view of the LCD on the back of the 5DII is so much better than the old one - e.

 

I was wondering about the same, Alan ... the Internet is the place where "authorities" get exposed and show their true colors.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you are moving one or more objects to find the ideal position, or to get a shadow or highlight exactly a certain way, it is nice to see that in real time without taking a bunch of "blind" shots. Especially if you are not near the camera or computer, or don't have a free hand.

 

That being said only some MF backs have even a relatively slow version of tethered live view. but I read of some still life shooters who really want it.

 

I and many others would like to see good live view directly on a high quality LCD on a removable back itself. That way one could use a wide angle or regular view camera in the field and not have to switch between ground glass viewing and shooting. You could compose directly on the LCD and zoom in to check focus.

 

It would be really nice to have a great live view on these systems for the tech camera's especially and it is done by some but not very good either. This could use a good B12 shot for MF. Matter of who steps to the plate and does it correctly. We have to remember these MF companies are fairly small. Lame excuse but no one has a answer for it

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Some MF backs have live view that only works when you are tethered. Consider a studio still life photographer trying to get very accurate plane of focus adjustment. (This is often hard to do on a ground glass.) Or using live view to a monitor so that you can arrange the items on the set or adjust the lighting (not strobes) without going back to the camera. (Especially if the camera is in an unusual location like high up directly above the subject.)

 

A lot of times I have to shoot interiors that are so tight that I can't look through the camera. (The camera may be pushed up against a wall.) Now I can shot a series of images tethered to the computer and move the camera a bit via trial and error until I get it aimed and focused the way I want, or I can use live view to the computer and do it much faster.

 

As for Leica service and dealer support, this all remains to be seen. Whereas a Phase One dealer is coming to my office this Thursday to personally demonstrate a Phase P65+ system to me even though I told him I didn't think I was a very likely buyer at this time. Who knows, maybe it will blow me away.

 

Ha you better start ripping up those credit cards bud before he gets there. Talk about sinful. You will be making a deal with the devil just to get one. I want a full report. :)

[AlanG]

Ha you better start ripping up those credit cards bud before he gets there. Talk about sinful. You will be making a deal with the devil just to get one. I want a full report. :)

 

I already made a deal with the devil when I met my girlfriend.

 

I really have no use for the Phase camera but am interested in seeing the back for use on a view camera. I asked if he could bring a 4x5 adapter but haven't heard back. I expect to be shooting some comparison photos. I want to see what a lens shift does to the color. I'm not sure if my regular (pre-digital) view camera lenses are up to snuff for this. But heck, it isn't as if MF digital users haven't been using the same old MF lenses from the film days.

 

I actually still have a Rollei 6006 body and 80mm. A couple more lenses for that wouldn't cost much if I needed an MF SLR. If it had a 3.5 inch 900,000 pixel live view LCD on the back, I'd be a goner. (I better hide the BMW before he shows up.)

[plevyadophy]

Hope that helps somewhat, I kind of briefly answered this without long explanations but certainly can . Guy

 

Thanks very much Guy for your input.

 

However, I have to disagree with you on one thing and that is your view that one should stop comparing the S2 to 35mm.

 

The S2, like the Panasonic GH1 (the only other one on the market), is a hybrid camera; it has a foot in two camps. So to be succesful it has to do a very good job of working like two seperate devices, in the case of the S2 that is 35mm and medium format. And Leica themselves have made great play of it's 35mm-like persona (although, I notice a subtle shift towards comparing more with medium format in the recent press release).

 

I don't expect for example a Nikon-like 51 AF points, or a Nikon like 11 fps (or whatever the super duper speed it shoots at), but I do expect a little more oomph in performance even if only to giving a passing nod to its 35mm format credentials. Therefore, 2fps and a higher res LCD should be there for starters, as well as greater number of AF points etc etc.

 

Regards,

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I know and I really do not disagree with you and it is extremely hard not to look at what Nikon , canon and Sony have on their systems and including the 4/3rds stuff but their just some limitations that are hard to get around and we really should be comparing it on the IQ level and not so much the feature level. I know very very related in one sense but it is a different ball park that has certain rules that cannot be broken per say. I knew full well when I put that in there it would come back in the form you wrote which is and was expected. It really is a hard nut to separate these systems out. But i think we really need to favor the upper side of it as well. Good point

 

Just some give and take in here which is trying to make a Apple somewhat look like the Orange . Totally understand the 35mm comments and comparison.

[redbaron]

Boo, hoo... Don't buy it then.

[wildlightphoto]

Other have adressed these point in detail so I won't repeat thier responses, but for the way I work:

 

 

Kodak CCD - Not exactly known for making ground breaking sensors, and the sensor should have been CMOS so as to provide LiveView

 

CMOS? NO THANKS!, and the gallery owner I visited last week seems to agree. He represents numerous photographers including one of Canon's Explorers of Light and the color quality and detail in the prints I showed him from the DMR (using an older Kodak CCD) jumped out at him. At the end of the visit he selected several prints to show in the gallery, all made with the DMR.

 

No LiveView - regarded by many an old fart as just a gimmick

 

I might be an old fart but it's very useless to me. I wouldn't pay one cent more for a camera with it. YMMV.

 

 

Exposure Metering - only 5 fields in so called Mult-Field metering - in this day and age, this is simply not good enough; a joke really

 

Also useless for me. The histogram in manual mode is much more accurate.

 

 

Central crosshair AF sensor - so, a camera with a shallow depth of field, that is marketed as being light and portable and brought to market in the 21st century and REQUIRES you to engage in the less than optimal "focus and recompose" procedure.

 

I share your distain for focus-lock-recompose, but whether the camera requires it or not depends on the quality of the viewfinder, which has yet to be determined. Until a camera can focus accurately at any point in the picture area I'm perfectly happy with manual focus.

[markowich]

Ahh the end of the Dog Days!

 

The trolls and morons are out in full on the forum. Some saying the m8 is a glorified Lomo; some saying the S2 should have a Canon CMOS sensor (!!) and live view (which is wholly unnecessary when you're tethered!!)

 

It'll be a relief when the M9 gets here and we can discuss how it's not as good as the latest Nikon

 

have you tried to shoot landscapes in patagonia with your laptop tethered to the camera? or in the namibian desert? or in other not so benign environments? when i go to shoot in certain locations i usually take the H3 and the D3x, just to cover the eventual need for live view. it is not an amateur's gimmick but an essential tool.

peter

[Gentleman Villain]

Boo, hoo... Don't buy it then.

 

haha...Right on

 

The never-ending daily attacks on the S2 within forums is nothing short of a phenomenon. I stick around because of a genuine excitement about the camera system (it's the only DSLR that has ever seriously interested me) But, for the love of God, what motivates many of these other people to just moan over and over again if they have no intention of buying an S2....what is their damage? What is their major malfunction? Are there any psycho-analysts out there that can help explain this phenomenon? Is it really as simple as envy of something that is out of reach...or is it more complicated? WTF is this about?

[Jamie Roberts]

have you tried to shoot landscapes in patagonia with your laptop tethered to the camera? or in the namibian desert? or in other not so benign environments? when i go to shoot in certain locations i usually take the H3 and the D3x, just to cover the eventual need for live view. it is not an amateur's gimmick but an essential tool.

peter

 

Essential for you maybe; but you've hardly made your point.

 

Why on earth in adverse outdoor conditions wouldn't you use the optical vf again? I can't imagine a poorer focusing aid than live view (anyone's live view) in the desert sun when you have a great optical SLR option.

 

If you can actually communicate the use case then we can discuss, but as it is, all you've given here is a bunch of rhetorical questions--as if no-one shot in the Patagonian wilds or the desert or other unfriendly environments without live view! LOL!! I guess those Hassy pictures Neil took on the moon were faked after all

 

I'd love to see some of your Patagonian shots, too.

 

But we'll have to wait and see; maybe the S2 VF will be crappy. I kinda doubt that though.

 

@ Alan--I love your idea of a removable panel for tight quarters. Hardly the desert scenario, however

[markowich]

Essential for you maybe; but you've hardly made your point.

 

Why on earth in adverse outdoor conditions wouldn't you use the optical vf again? I can't imagine a poorer focusing aid than live view (anyone's live view) in the desert sun when you have a great optical SLR option.

 

If you can actually communicate the use case then we can discuss, but as it is, all you've given here is a bunch of rhetorical questions--as if no-one shot in the Patagonian wilds or the desert or other unfriendly environments without live view! LOL!! I guess those Hassy pictures Neil took on the moon were faked after all

 

I'd love to see some of your Patagonian shots, too.

 

But we'll have to wait and see; maybe the S2 VF will be crappy. I kinda doubt that though.

 

@ Alan--I love your idea of a removable panel for tight quarters. Hardly the desert scenario, however

 

i forgot to say that i like to shoot landscapes with TS lenses. and there live view is a serious asset. it lets you precisely choose the focusing point.

just because you do not need it does not mean it is useless.

you can see some of my shots in

 

markowich's Photo Galleries at pbase.com

 

and yes, many (including myself) have shot patagonian landscapes without live view. and even with ground glass focusing on viewcameras. but is it so wrong to expect the best and most modern technology from a 30-40 K USD equipment (and here my criticism goes to leica, hasselblad, phase etc)? the medium format world has been asleep for a long time and unfortunately leica did not do the wake up call.

peter

[ccc yyy]

Essential for you maybe; but you've hardly made your point.

i think he has made his point ... in that is it's essential to him.

just as your point is ... that it's a gimmick to you.

 

and my point, FWIW, in certain situations (including some T/S

applications) i find LV extremely invaluable ... even in the mid-day

sun and despite having access to a fantastic optical VF.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[plevyadophy]

i forgot to say that i like to shoot landscapes with TS lenses. and there live view is a serious asset. it lets you precisely choose the focusing point.

just because you do not need it does not mean it is useless.

you can see some of my shots in

 

markowich's Photo Galleries at pbase.com

 

and yes, many (including myself) have shot patagonian landscapes without live view. and even with ground glass focusing on viewcameras. but is it so wrong to expect the best and most modern technology from a 30-40 K USD equipment (and here my criticism goes to leica, hasselblad, phase etc)? the medium format world has been asleep for a long time and unfortunately leica did not do the wake up call.

peter

 

Yes, I agree with you; very well put, asleep indeed.

 

Some will say things like, as has been said in this thread, "why do these people complain about something they are not gonna buy?" and rhetorically "how did people shoot without feature X Y Z"

 

Well, in answer to the first type of rhetorical question, people, myself included, may complain because they were hoping, waiting for a long time, for something that would really excite them only for their hopes to be dashed and therefore gonna have to wait even longer for what they want. The second type of rhetorical question is really one of my major pet hates; in response one could ask a series of similar questions: how did you get to work Sir, by car? Why not walk, or ride a horse like your great-grandfather's generation, they didn't need motor vehicles; Angry that you can't get through to someone on the phone? But why, Sir?!! How did your grand-parents cope, did they not just go over to the person's premises if they wanted to speak to them?!!; Had a nasty crash have you, and thinking of suing the car manufacturer because the ABS braking system failed? Hmm, but why? Did folks not drive cars and avoid accident before all round disc brakes and ABS?! ............ and so on and so on.

 

The fact is, time moves on and new tools are provided to make one's life easier, safer, more efficient etc. So it makes no sense recalling a bygone era as if those who call for change are somehow asking for too much.

 

Yep, you are right the medium format world is really asleep and they need to provide more than just a boast about superior image quality (not many restaurants would remain in business by simply boasting about their superior cuisine, if customers have to wait a "million years" to be served when they could go down the road and get nice food served in a fraction of the time because the other outlets are using modern methods)

 

Regards,

[rosuna]

 

The S2, like the Panasonic GH1 (the only other one on the market), is a hybrid camera; it has a foot in two camps. So to be succesful it has to do a very good job of working like two seperate devices, in the case of the S2 that is 35mm and medium format. And Leica themselves have made great play of it's 35mm-like persona (although, I notice a subtle shift towards comparing more with medium format in the recent press release).

 

 

...because of price...