S2 is a Dream

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ian ... the viewfinder is a substantial element for decision. i always have troubles with SLR viewfinders for some reason, and really dont like almost all d-slr viewfinders.

what is it from your experience ? very bright and clear ? roomy ? how it feels compared to a good mamiya645ii if u r familiar with ?

 

To be honest Vic I only had a play with the S2 (working demo model) for 5 or 10 minutes. I was in the shop to see if the M9 was up to snuff but the salesman couldn't resist showing off the S2. I'm much more of an M shooter than SLR but, for what its worth, the view through the S2 finder did strike me as expansive and very uncluttered - certainly much better than I've found with modern full frame 35mm DSLRs (Nikons and Canons). I couldn't say how it compares to a modern 'Blad or the Mamiya 645 you mention.

[Advertisement]

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

[wattsy]

ARGGHHH! STOP IT!

or is resistance futile?

 

I think it's futile for you, Doug. That said, you are going to need a pretty long telephoto to get anything like the FOV you are used to at the moment. Are Leica even proposing to make anything long enough for you (even with a TC)?

[wildlightphoto]

I think it's futile for you, Doug. That said, you are going to need a pretty long telephoto to get anything like the FOV you are used to at the moment. Are Leica even proposing to make anything long enough for you (even with a TC)?

 

The proposed 350mm APO-Elmar-S would give an angle of view about like the 280mm f/4 APO, so the longest (proposed) S lens is about the shortest that I could regularly use. At minimum I'd also need a 1.4x extender (APO-S of course) and likely an extension tube as well, and neither the extension tube nor extender has been publicly mentioned.

 

To be realistic, the S-system at present is not a good choice for my work even if I could afford it, at the very least because of the limited lens selection at the long end. What grates at me is that if it were shrunken down to 24mm x 36mm so that my existing R lenses and extension tubes would fit, this is very nearly my dream camera: the small camera / big picture concept, the minimal extraneous features, the excellent viewfinder, responsiveness and weather sealing are all on my 'must have' checklist. Shrink it down to R10 size ... oops, I mean R9 size, there's no R10... and I'd be first in line.

[TimF]

I guess we can hope some ingenious third party will make an adapter so R lenses can be used on it after a fashion (obviously all pictures would be circular! )

[Constable]

The proposed 350mm APO-Elmar-S would give an angle of view about like the 280mm f/4 APO, so the longest (proposed) S lens is about the shortest that I could regularly use. At minimum I'd also need a 1.4x extender (APO-S of course) and likely an extension tube as well, and neither the extension tube nor extender has been publicly mentioned.

 

To be realistic, the S-system at present is not a good choice for my work even if I could afford it, at the very least because of the limited lens selection at the long end. What grates at me is that if it were shrunken down to 24mm x 36mm so that my existing R lenses and extension tubes would fit, this is very nearly my dream camera: the small camera / big picture concept, the minimal extraneous features, the excellent viewfinder, responsiveness and weather sealing are all on my 'must have' checklist. Shrink it down to R10 size ... oops, I mean R9 size, there's no R10... and I'd be first in line.

 

Doug,

 

That sounds very like the description of a D3X

 

I don't think the S2 would be much use at the macro end where I work either. But it just looks so cool.....

 

Ed

[wattsy]

That sounds very like the description of a D3X

 

I think Doug will want you to go and wash your mouth out with soap and water.

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Doug,

 

That sounds very like the description of a D3X

 

too freaking big, too many extraneous features, no R mount. Even the S2 is smaller than the D3X.

[lct]

too freaking big, too many extraneous features, no R mount. Even the S2 is smaller than the D3X.

Probably not with the optional portrait grip which is built in the D3.

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!

[sdai]

Body size and mass wise, the S2 is pretty good. I didn't feel it's big nor hefty at all until I picked up the M9+28 cron while still holding the S2+70 in another hand. The M9 really looks/feels like a toy and lacks of all kinds of seriousness. LOL

 

IMO even after the adding the grip most people still shouldn't feel any difficulty handling with it ... or perhaps it's just me 'cause I'm used to hold the 1D and Dx series.

 

My only nit about the S2's ergonomics is the position of its shutter release which slightly falls out of place in my opinion. I had to put down the camera a couple of times and "look" in order to make sure that my index finger is putting at the right place.

 

Otherwise, it's almost perfect.

[wildlightphoto]

Probably not with the optional portrait grip which is built in the D3.

 

Compared to the D3x the S2 still has a 56% bigger sensor. I'd expect a 24mm x 36mm SLR with the same design philosophy as the S2 to be significantly smaller than either, even with a portrait grip. The D3x has many more features that I'd ever want to use ("superfluous" for my uses) and one of the costs of that is size and weight. I'd want a much simpler (from a user POV), yet high-quality camera: M9 simplicity in an SLR. This camera is supposedly unmarketable.

[lct]

OK Doug i'm not a Nikon rep but you said "S2 is smaller than the D3X". Comparing apples to apples i.e. those cameras with both portrait grips, i think it is untrue.

[wildlightphoto]

OK Doug i'm not a Nikon rep but you said "S2 is smaller than the D3X". Comparing apples to apples i.e. those cameras with both portrait grips, i think it is untrue.

 

Only to point out that the D3x is too freaking big. Apples to apples? Scale the D3x up to a 30mm x 45mm sensor and see what you get.

[Martin K]

I wonder how long it will take before somebody shaves a few millimeters off the back of a focusing unit of the Apo-Telyt-R series, fits an S2 bayonet and tries out the longer lenses. The image circle may not be quite up to it, but who knows - and whether the S2 will accept lenses without any electronics may also be problematic.

 

Kind regards, Martin

[wattsy]

Only to point out that the D3x is too freaking big. Apples to apples? Scale the D3x up to a 30mm x 45mm sensor and see what you get.

 

Isn't this a rather moot debate Doug? I would have thought the biggest weight issue for you will be the 350mm telephoto lens - if it ever materialises. It's all very well praising the body for its size relative to a scaled up D3X but having handled the 70/F2.5 I suspect the 350mm is going to be a monster. Combined with a TC of some sort this is surely going to be a world away from what you are used to with the DMR+400?

[paulmoore]

Isn't this a rather moot debate Doug? I would have thought the biggest weight issue for you will be the 350mm telephoto lens - if it ever materialises. It's all very well praising the body for its size relative to a scaled up D3X but having handled the 70/F2.5 I suspect the 350mm is going to be a monster. Combined with a TC of some sort this is surely going to be a world away from what you are used to with the DMR+400?

 

the ergonomics of the s2 feel much better than the r9.dmr, I have not shot with the 400mm but know the new 350 and tc would be easier to handle than my 280 2.8, and the files gained from the s2 make the dmr look second class..NOT an easy thing to do.

[sdai]

FWIW the D3x is NOT big at all, I actually think the S2 without the grip is relatively too small, since the S2 adopts an aspect ratio of 3:2 so anybody who shoots in portraiture orientation as frequently as I do should consider the grip as a must have.

 

A S2 with the grip could be slightly taller than the D3 but that's no big deal.

 

A camera like the S2 are most likely to sit on a tripod all the time, you are not going to get any good result if you use it simply as a point shooter. In these cases, size and weight shouldn't be any concern. It's only my 2 cents of course.

 

As I've posted in other threads, there's only that much one can do with 35mm format when it passes the 30mp and approaches 40mp, it doesn't matter what Leica's original intention was, the fact is that they've pioneered the whole new segment and I think it won't be too long before we see Canon, Nikon et al follow suit.

 

At that time, we shall see whether Nikon and/or Canon can do a uber 35mm format DSLR in a body slimmer and lighter than the S2 or not.

 

The 1d and d3 bodies are all based on dinosaurs from the film days, they've long passed the due to an overhaul.

[deep]

I guess it's highly academic but someone has to make the point - you can't take the grip off the D3x but you can on the S2, which allows you to have an option of a "smaller" body. I have had two fairly substantial SLR camera bodies like this (Minolta 9000 and Olympus E3) and have liked the choice. Out of the four above-named cameras, only the 9000 was anything like "light" with or without the grip!

 

Don.

[paulmoore]

FWIW the D3x is NOT big at all, I actually think the S2 without the grip is relatively too small, since the S2 adopts an aspect ratio of 3:2 so anybody who shoots in portraiture orientation as frequently as I do should consider the grip as a must have.

 

A S2 with the grip could be slightly taller than the D3 but that's no big deal.

 

A camera like the S2 are most likely to sit on a tripod all the time, you are not going to get any good result if you use it simply as a point shooter. In these cases, size and weight shouldn't be any concern. It's only my 2 cents of course.

 

As I've posted in other threads, there's only that much one can do with 35mm format when it passes the 30mp and approaches 40mp, it doesn't matter what Leica's original intention was, the fact is that they've pioneered the whole new segment and I think it won't be too long before we see Canon, Nikon et al follow suit.

 

At that time, we shall see whether Nikon and/or Canon can do a uber 35mm format DSLR in a body slimmer and lighter than the S2 or not.

 

The 1d and d3 bodies are all based on dinosaurs from the film days, they've long passed the due to an overhaul.

 

my 2 cents says..

the s2 will not spend most its time on a tripod.. that is the point of having a traditional slr body styling.. this is not your older brothers medium format camera.. which you could argue belong mostly on tripods.. most shooters will use this handheld..some will use on tripod.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[sdai]

You can of course use it in anyway you'd like but my point is, best results with such a high pixel density camera are almost always achieved when sitting on a tripod.

 

In response to "deep"'s cooment, the D700 is essentially a D3 without the grip, you can also consider the 5d2 a 1ds3 without a grip, it's simply too bad that the rumored non competing agreement forbidding Nikon to adopt the 24mp sensor in a moderately priced D700x.

[dfarkas]

You can of course use it in anyway you'd like but my point is, best results with such a high pixel density camera are almost always achieved when sitting on a tripod.

 

In response to "deep"'s cooment, the D700 is essentially a D3 without the grip, you can also consider the 5d2 a 1ds3 without a grip, it's simply too bad that the rumored non competing agreement forbidding Nikon to adopt the 24mp sensor in a moderately priced D700x.

 

I used the S2 off the tripod for most of my S2 shooting in Germany last month. When I get the time (been a little busy since 9/9/9 with M9 calls/emails/etc.), I will be wrapping up my S2 review and get it online. Then, you can judge for yourself the practicality of hand-held shooting with the S2.

 

David