This is what 20 grands worth of IQ looks like

peterqd · Expire: 2014-01-04

Let's be honest, quality isn't the real reason many people buy Leica gear. They often use quality to justify their expense (loudly sometimes Smile

) but behind all that they simply want to be seen as someone who owns an expensive camera, just like those who buy expensive houses, yachts, cars, designer handbags, shoes, watches, golf clubs, hi-fi etc etc. It's all to do with the image so they can show off to their "friends".

Leica carved out a niche market and a reputation for quality way back, when there was a huge market and little competition, and now they only need to be reasonably good to maintain this. They won't be getting any of my money, but I don't blame them at all for pandering to the rich and image-conscious people in this world.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Well, let me just say sorry for any offence I may have caused. I got a bit too defensive methinks.

Tony seems to have got what I meant, I was interested in discussing the IQ of the samples. I was talking to a friend about medium format cameras, film ones, about the merits of different formats from 6x45 cams like the Bronica ETRS, Mamiya 645 or Pentax 645 upto something like a MPP Technical with a 6x12 back. We got onto talking about digital MF cams and so were looking at reviews and samples.

Sadly, we didn't find anything that really impressed us, a roll of slide film in a MF film camera still seems preferable to the digital MF gear in many ways.

I've looked intensely at the Leica S2 samples and I just can't see anything there that is above and beyond what I have seen from cameras costing a mere fraction. Sure, 37mp is always going to be fairy impressive and the detail is good all over the frame, but I just didn't see anything that made me say 'ooh that's impressive'.

I have a need to produce huge prints of landscapes so very high MP count images are of great interest to me, throwing money at the problem doesn't seem to be the way t go as the current MF cams just don't seem to be better than the FF and APS-C ones in actual IQ terms.

So it's back to the 120 rolls and a Mamiya for me it seems, allied with some stitching of 14mp images from my NEX.

Couple of 90+mp images I made:

sichko · Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

The S2 is a specialized camera and there are many others just as specialized and expensive.
Is it expensive from the viewpoint of hobbyist, semi-pro, or, the majority of pro photographers... you bet it is.
It's not designed for us. It never was intended to be a camera that is used by folks who read this forum.
If you have the Cast of the latest Hollywood blockbuster gathered together on set with stylist, light engineers... the works.
Does anyone really think a $20K camera seems out of place? The salaries for the shoot will far exceed $20k per hour not to mention other cost.
The one shot that makes it out of that shoot may be used for 3x2 meter billboards in shopping malls and train stations.
What is the DP to do borrow his neighbors Sony Nex or my X100 and stitch together a multi-shot "pano" with heavy highlight and shadow filter (belch!).
It's horses for courses folks. There are Hassle and Phase1 cameras that will do the job and cost even more than the Leica.
If you handed any of those cameras to the photographer who made the uninspired samples the OP presented as proof of the S2's being a $20k POS the result would be the same.
Don't blame the camera (maker) for the photographers/reviewers weakness or lack of attention (dust spots for a review sample is horrible I agree!)

This brings up another point. For many people the equipment used does affect and inspire the photography in a certain way.
That is the Leica "mystique" above all else when a photographer uses a Leica camera (or Hasselblad or Rollei or Holga for that matter).
What you are shooting will inspire you to push to the limits of the tool or to work with the flaws of a different tool. If your NEX inspires you go for it.
To be subjective. I personally am not a high resolution person. I Like to work with lo-fi equipment because it forces me to create beyond the lens not behind it.
I shoot gritty film or wet plates on big dumpy cameras 70% of the time. It's what inspires me and would confuse others .
For others the opposite is true and they want the best reproduction capability available. I'm not going to tell them their tool is "Extracting the Urine" (disgusting) simply because I can't afford to try it.
Post up the best photo you can find from the Leica S2 and then have this same "discussion".
Better yet stand in front of a massive print made by the camera and then decide what you think.

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

Ian, I have deleted your post. DO NOT write about other posters in that manner, it is simply NOT in the spirit of this forum.

You might well take the OP's views of HDR personally, but we are all allowed an opinion. Getting personal is not acceptable.

Farside · Expire: 2013-12-27

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

womble · Joined: 28 Sep 2009 Posts: 987 Location: Hertfordshire

My thoughts at seeing the first sample image was "shame it has converging verticals, should have used a shift lens." As I can never afford one, I haven't spent more than about 0.5 of a second thinking about it. I don't even know what one looks like. For me photography is (a) making images I like preferably with (b) equipment I enjoy using. That's pretty much the main reason I still shoot a lot of film (for fun) and mainly digital (for work). None of this is worth getting wound up about.

K.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

I have enough of this, multiple warnings have been sent but ignored, provocations are continued.
I can not accept this type of trolling here.
Therefore, the last message is deleted, and the thread is locked.