Interesting read from a good friend of mine:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
-Marc
fotografz;1917 wrote: Interesting read from a good friend of mine:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
-Marc
Marc,
Thanks for the link. Very interesting test. The S2 performed very well under a wide range of conditions. Not sure what was up with the color bleed on the the Aptus, though.
One comment… Irakly was having an issue with how to record DNG to CF card and JPG to SD card simultaneously. This is of course possible. Set File Format to DNG+JPG and Data Storage to Parallel.
David Farkas
Red Dot Forum
Leica Store MiamiMarc, thank you for posting the link to Irakly’s review. It’s a solid review. I learned some technical attributes/descriptions about the S2 image quality that I have loved during my two years with S2 but didn’t know how to describe in technical terms. It’s too bad the Aptus back was acting up (I hope that was the case).
I have always enjoyed Irakly’s work. His photos are ones that invite the viewer to step in and take a look around – there is usually something interesting to discover besides the main subject.
An interesting article, thanks! In regard to his problem with the purple, perhaps it’s coincidence that with a light high and contre-jour, the purple appeared in the lower portion, whereas when he had strong light to the left, purple appeared on the right…
Great link and evaluation …thanks for sharing .
David Farkas;1919 wrote: Marc,
Thanks for the link. Very interesting test. The S2 performed very well under a wide range of conditions. Not sure what was up with the color bleed on the the Aptus, though.
One comment… Irakly was having an issue with how to record DNG to CF card and JPG to SD card simultaneously. This is of course possible. Set File Format to DNG+JPG and Data Storage to Parallel.
Hey David! Thanks for the tip. It is probably the most counter-intuitive setting in the camera menu 🙂 🙂
As to purple madness of the Leaf back, I do have a strong suspicion that something is just wrong with it. However, purple aside, the whole experience was quite underwhelming.
fotografz;1917 wrote: Interesting read from a good friend of mine:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3214761610/leica-s2-against-megapixel-arms-race
-Marc
Marc, you were supposed to be sick in bed! 😀
Thanks for posting the link and get well!Nice review Irakly. I think it is also quite clear that by now, a camera is much more than the sum of its megapixels! For example, I don’t expect to throw away the S2 in favor of the new 41mp Nokia camera phone (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2107496/Nokia-releasing-phone-41-megapixel-camera–sale-Europe-now.html).
I think the real beauty of the S2 is how well it works as a system — the lenses extract every ounce of detail out the very good sensor and are very fast with very low aberrations. The camera is quite quick in processing for such a high megapixel count. Every ISO is usable. Every aperture is usable. The AF works accurately, the weather sealing is very effective (my camera got drenched the other day…no ill effects at all. It’s happened several times now so I am very confident in its weather sealing!), the battery lasts a very long time, the color and detail looks great out of the camera. The ergonomics are great, barring some interface quirks (still don’t like the unlabeled 4 button interface, but I have set up the camera so that it is minimally disruptive). The only real downsides I can think of are the size and weight (comparable or less than most competitors), and the expense (ridiculously expensive, but worth it).
I can certainly see people wanting more detail and how that might improve exceptionally huge prints, but I don’t really see anyone NEEDING more detail. I honestly don’t, not outside of satellite imaging or spying!
Edit: I used “very” six times in the description of the S2. I think that says something…it is a word that applies to many aspects of the S2. It’s a very camera!
Stuart Richardson;1929 wrote: …….
The only real downsides I can think of are the size and weight (comparable or less than most competitors), and the expense (ridiculously expensive, but worth it).
Well, the size and weight is not really a downside of this particular camera. It is just one of pleasant inevitabilities of medium format. The body itself is smaller than most medium format cameras and even some of 35mm pro SLRs. It is the lenses that cannot be made smaller or lighter.
As to the price tag, look at it this way: Leica S2 is a system, which makes 35mm SLR unnecessary for the most part. So, there is no need to maintain two systems. It really saves you 10-15 grand, depending on your lens lineup.
Even for those who shoot wildlife and sports, all you need is one 35mm SLR body and a 300/2.8 lens.irakly;1933 wrote:
As to the price tag, look at it this way: Leica S2 is a system, which makes 35mm SLR unnecessary for the most part. So, there is no need to maintain two systems. It really saves you 10-15 grand, depending on your lens lineup.
Even for those who shoot wildlife and sports, all you need is one 35mm SLR body and a 300/2.8 lens.Irakly,
I agree with you 90%. The only points I would raise are that in the 35 mm system 300 is never long enough for wildlife (in fact no lense is!) and also to lament the lack of a true 1:1 macro for the S system. The 100 is a fantastic lense but is not ideal for insects! Easily solved with close-up filters. Hassy users are better off here?
Ed
constable;1936 wrote: … The only points I would raise are that in the 35 mm system 300 is never long enough for wildlife (in fact no lense is!)…
Depends on the subject and the photographer. My wildlife lens is the Leica 280mm f/4. I’ll use it with an extender as needed, but I sold my longer lenses. I’ve also used 100mm and 180mm lenses for wildlife. Good field technique can often substitute for many mm of focal length.
Doug Herr;1938 wrote: Depends on the subject and the photographer. My wildlife lens is the Leica 280mm f/4. I’ll use it with an extender as needed, but I sold my longer lenses. I’ve also used 100mm and 180mm lenses for wildlife. Good field technique can often substitute for many mm of focal length.
Absolutely. I shot an assignment in Sarasota bird refuge. It took me one day to figure out that there is no such thing as a long enough lens. Then I spent next day figuring out how to make my 300mm long enough. It turns out, if you hide well and do not move around a lot, 300mm can be even excessive 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.