Forum Replies Created
The question all of us must answer is …
Will our talent, skill and ability be up to this or any other high-end camera available now, and will more/better/best make any difference in the future?
There is a threshold where the addiction to highly heralded, but actually incremental, technological advancements begins reaching the point of diminishing returns or no real returns at all.
Because everything is getting so good, I believe the marketers will resort to alternative technologies that replace current ones, but will not necessarily improve what it replaces. These new things will be made to seem indispensable, and the tech junkies will rush to it with open wallets … and nothing will improve as far as talent, skill, or ability.
A photo taken now will always be better than one taken with vaporware : -)
My 2¢
-Marc
Interesting article in LFI on the new S30mm.
It appears that this 30mm will be the widest lens available as a CS lens. So, I may have to rethink my lens strategy … keep the 35, but get the CS version of the 30 when available. Then a 70CS and 120CS upgrade.
Here's a tech question for the Leica lads … if you use a SF58 with a CS lens can you use TTL … since the flash can only be used in HSS mode, how's that going to work with CS lenses using 1/500th? Won't the HSS cut the flash output anyway and foil the whole purpose of CS with full power TTL flash output?
-Marc
Atanabe;1142 wrote: Cam,
The 120 focal length is ideal for table top product work it allows room between the front of the lens for lights and reflectors. In addition, the slightly longer focal length reduces perspective distortion.The T/S market is limited as is and having one lens is big news and a big investment for whoever is producing it.
Regards,
-AlNot sure this Schneider 120 T/S lens is “Ideal” for table top … unless the subject is larger and the table is big.
Closest focus is 0.84m … 33″ … not exactly macro territory.
For reference:
The S120 macro focuses down to 0.57m … 22.5″, for a 1:2 image scale.
The HC 120 Macro focuses to 39cm … 15″, for a 1:1 image scale.
-Marc
Me wantie.
I've told my dealer that the minute they are available I want to upgrade at least two probably three lenses to CS … 35 and 120 for sure, and the 70 if I can afford it. I don't need the 180 in CS form.
Here's a question for those that have touched the real thing … are they bigger fatter longer? How much more do they weigh?
-Marc
As I understand it, the S2's focal plane shutter will also still be in action as opposed to say the Hasselblad H4D which doesn't have a focal plane shutter, and only uses the leaf shutter in the lens.
But that has to be confirmed when the CS lenses become available. It seems to me that when you switch to CS the focal plane shutter could also be opened and stay that way. Maybe there's a reason it can't, but I don't know it.
Where the CS lenses will bring something to the party is when using flash or strobes. The current top sync speed is 125th which forces you to stop down the aperture when shooting in brighter light, and 1/125th may not stop secondary motion blur of subjects that are moving quickly. Being able to sync flash at 1/500th allows one to open the aperture up more, and does provide less chance of secondary motion blur.
-Marc
Actually it's not really off topic Mark.
There are two aspects to the discussion as it relates to aspect ratios and the related FOV discussion: Personal display of prints and commercially viable display.
Prints and album applications are an important part of shooting with a MFD camera because the benefits are not as readily apparent with sub one meg jpgs in sRGB color space on a computer screen.
@ David, doesn't 2:3 translate into 12″ X 18″ as opposed to 12″ X 24″ ?
I actually chose a coffee table type wedding album that offers 12″ X 18″ spreads with no gutter because most wedding shots are done with 2:3 cameras (35mm DSLR, M9, and the S2). So when I shoot a wide shot of some magnificent cathedral interior, I don't have to chop the WA FOV at all. However, spreads are less used compared to whole pages that are 9X12 … which is a 3:4 ratio
These eye popping spreads are the reason I really want the S24mm, because I will be able to shoot a wider FOV than I need and be able to correct the perspective in LR while maintaining the 2:3 aspect ratio.
The whole print size thing also drive me nuts Mark … as my chart above shows, the most popular print sizes for consumers, and by extension pre-made frames, bear little relationship to the overwhelmingly predominate 2:3 aspect ratio. No matter how many times I lecture my second shooters and assistants to shoot loose, they continue to use the entire FOV when composing, and I'm left to deal with 8X10 print orders that don't work and require time-consuming PS work to add more to the image to make the crop. Grrrr!
David Farkas;1227 wrote: For me, my normal print ratio is 2:3, so I rarely crop my S2 images.
The zoom is slated to be a 30-90mm f/3.5-5.6 and be the size of the 35mm, so not very big and not too slow. Leica had originally planned for a 30-90mm f/3.5 constant aperture zoom, but decided it would be far too large and heavy. Rather, they figured a zoom with a more moderate variable aperture would be better suited to travel and portability.
Well David, end usage does vary greatly depending the application …. and the file size of the S2 is fine, even for severe cropping. However, the most common crop factors do affect the actual FOV being utilized of any given lens.
From a professional stand-point, most commercial print application ratios are not 2:3 … and wedding/portrait clients over-whelmingly order 5X7s, 8X10s, 11X14s, and 16X20s.
Most shooters are used to 2:3 from their 135 DSLR usage … but 3:4 ratio MFD shooters are not.
Attached is a simple comparison visualization of exactly what I mean … if I had extend the Blue 2:3 ratio to reach top-bottom fit, a fair amount of the FOV would have been chopped off.
RE: the S zoom … sounds very nice. I doubt it'll be the same experience as the HCD 35-90/4-5.6 if it is roughly the size of the current S35 … If anything like the similar R zoom in IQ, it'll be a winner. Probably not for me as I have learned that I simply need the fast max apertures of the primes … but you never know, a nice compact travel kit with just one lens is an attractive notion.
-Marc
Seems to me that the 24 due next would be the desired lens for landscape, especially considering that by the time you crop the S2 aspect ratio to normal print ratios, you'd probably end up close to 30mm anyway.
However, I admit that I don't do landscape work, but do get stuck in cramped shooting scenarios and also like to do sweeping environmental portraits for which a 24 would be my choice … sort of landscape photography with people in it : -)
I've gone through this lens exercise with Hasselblad MFD, and am a bit more careful now especially at these prices. I will be very cautious about any S zoom because in MFD they are either huge or snail slow apertures … sometimes both. I have the HC 35-90 zoom which is a terrific lens but slow and big … got to have fat light to use it. I've put it up for sale for that reason. The faster and much smaller HC50-II will be its replacement.
We'll see how Leica goes about it. Should be VERY interesting.
-Marc
Excuse the interruption of the love fest … but what happened to the 30 T/S?
I bought into the projected lens line-up, and while the 35 fits my shooting needs, I had also planned on the 30T/S even though close in FOV to the 35mm for all practical purposes, because the T/S would have brought a completely different functionality to the party making it worthwhile to own both.
Now people are going to dump their 35s for the 30 … and what does that do to the value of the 35 which cost an arm and a leg?
Just sayin'
-Marc
David Farkas;1171 wrote: Pete,
I have the images from the 30mm just about ready to go up…. but of course today I am a little distracted. Doing a test shoot this afternoon with some CS lenses at the beach. 😎
Oh my aching pocket book.
Hope they are coming soon … of course they will probably be made available just as the sun disappears for 6 months here in Michigan … LOL!
-Marc
Kurt Kamka;1184 wrote: Forgot to change that, Jack. Just moved in this week.
How exciting for you. An exotic new location … nothing like a new place to get the juices flowing. I envy you. Best of shooting to you.
-Marc
This is some pretty interesting technology and I hope it continues in development. I've been
following such developments on many fronts, but this design seems to be the most sophisticated in terms of control.While it is true that any continuous lighting resource usually pales in comparison to strobes or speed-lights, there conceivably is a place for this type of light even with still photography … but it will depend greatly on the size of the unit and power source combined.
If you tend to shoot available light, such a unit could be of great value as a supplement rather than as the key light …and extend the range of ambient use of any camera it is mounted on.
Benefits would include easier/faster AF with a S2 which suffers greatly in low light, or manual focus assist … and assistance in bringing the dynamic range of the scene with-in or closer to that of the camera … especially when employing a higher ISO.
Supplemental lighting of any kind, even on-camera, doesn't necessarily have to destroy the mood created by the ambient lighting … one need only to be aware of the ambient direction and use the supplemental unit to assist evening out the dynamic range somewhat.
-Marc
David Farkas;1113 wrote: After using the 30mm a bit I can say that the FOV is noticeably wider, but not a huge amount. Really, it is what you'd expect to be a single-focal length difference.
I will be posting shots next week when I return home.
Marc, yes, the 24mm is planned for release next year. It will be the equivalent of a 19mm lens in 35mm terms. Much, much wider than the 30mm.
That is great news David, I'll start saving for it today : -)
I have the same wide angle focal length spread with my M9 (21/1.4 and 28/2), and ended up selling the M24/1.4 due to lack of use once I got the 21mm)
Really depends on applications I think. The only 24mm I still have is the ZA 24/2 for the A900 … and only have that because they didn't make a ZA 21 or 28, or even a ZA 35/1.4, so it was the only Zeiss/Sony game in town for a WA prime : -(
-Marc
rudlinfineart;722 wrote: I am moving from 35mm to MF. It was recommended that I ask the members of reddotforum for their advice, comments and most importantly, their experience related to why they chose the S2 vs. the H4D-40, Pentax 645D and the Phase IQ140.
I would be particularly interested in comments from those that may have used these systems and decided to switch to Leica.
Thank you.
craig
In my case I didn't switch, the S2 was a supplement to a Hasselblad H4D/40 & H4D/60. After working with the S2, I sold the H4D/40 because the S2 was better suited for the more mobile work I was doing with the H4D/40.
I also tested the two against one another, and found that it was pretty close in terms of Image Quality, with the edge given to the S2 (probably because of the S optics). So I wasn't giving up anything (except Hasselblad's True Focus APL which is amazing), and gained the easy to handle and transport less bulky DSLR type form factor.
Now because of a shift in the type of work I do for money and pleasure (which aren't mutually exclusive : -), the S2 gets more use than the H4D/60.
What is the most important aspect of making a selection this important and expensive is really understanding your applications and how you intend using the system.
The Hasselblad is extremely easy to use and the buttons can be customized to keep it simple and fast to work with. With the last firmware upgrade, the H4D camera became even easier to use and added very useful features like a spirit level in the viewfinder and on the LCD, and the LCD was doubled in resolution and is now is just as good as the S2's LCD read-out.
Other differences include such things as the Hasselblad HC 120 macro that stops down to f/45 to provide DOF needed compared to the S120 Macro that only goes to f/22 … but is the fastest max aperture 120 macro available. Which is better depends on use and creative intent.
The Phase One IQ digital backs are far better suited for more controlled field use, and unlike the S2 can be used on technical cameras sporting the best optics available for MFD photography. Even though the Hasselblad backs can also be used on a technical camera, the back is not self powered and requires a separate power source. In the studio, the Hasselblad works wonders tethered to a computer which provide the power to the back when mounted to a technical camera with full movements.
There is no right answer, just the right answer for what and how you want to shoot.
-Marc
In a practical sense, there isn't a huge difference compared to the S35mm unless you are precisely utilizing the full 30mm FOV … but it also depends a lot on your subject matter and applications.
Normally my subject matter is overwhelmingly people, and the 35 (28mm in 135 terms) is as wide as I like to use for groups and environmental portraits to avoid distortion and horizontal perspective issues.
For other wide applications I prefer a 21mm in 135 terms which would be a 24mm on the S2 … I believe a S24mm is eventually planned, so I think I'll wait.
If someone was just buying into the S2 and wanted a wider optic, then the 30mm would make a lot of sense. 30, 70 120, 180 would be a nice 4 lens spread as is the 35, 70, 120, 180. However, I'm not sure a 30, 35, 70, 120 and/or 180 would make as much sense at these prices … but to each their own.
Good to see them chipping away at it little by little. Fingers crossed that the CS versions will come soon.
-Marc
