Forum Replies Created
Thanks Bob
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.
The Leica 400mm f/4 Modular APO has been converted to S2 mount:
Should we assume the larger lens head would work too?
David Farkas;241 wrote: As to the more advanced sensor readout options, this is indeed fairly complicated programming and more core features have taken priority, like continual improvement of AF algorithms.
As a potential S2 user the high ISO noise reduction option would be HUGE for me. I am unwilling to sacrifice low-ISO file quality for this feature but I'd gladly go without the faster frame rate for this capability.
David K;231 wrote: Hey Doug… please don't tell us that you're giving up the DMR.
Not until there's something better… which is why I'm following the S2 developments very closely 🙂 From what I can tell I'd have a hard time adjusting to the file quality of mainstream cameras.
These suggested firmware tweaks do not reduce my lust for the S2 in the least, and I'm looking forward to Mark Gowin's long lens blog.
David Farkas;190 wrote: Dr. Zimmer, head of digital R&D, explained that noise could be reduced by either dropping the sensor readout from 24Mhz to 12Mhz or by using a dual readout vs. a quad readout from the sensor. Either of these options would cut the continous frame rate in half and double the time from capture to review, but also would deliver a one stop improvement in noise performance. He indicated that it should be possible to make these changes on the fly in firmware.
I just learned what my jaw sounds like when it hits the floor.
