Leica announces "S" system prices

<p>(I can't remember; is Leica "S" supposed to go on the Medium-Format forum? This can be moved if so.)</p>

<p>Available in October 2009. So far I'm only seeing UK prices.</p>

<p>DPReview calls it <strong>"a very competitive starting price of £15,996 (SRP, body only)."</strong></p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09073001leicassystemprice.asp</p>

<p>Of course, that's "Suggested Retail Price" and those prices include 15% VAT, but the current exchange rate of GBP to USD is $1.64, so for US market the multiplier for the prices on that page is something like 1.43 if they don't price it more cheaply in the US. Think <strong>$22,000</strong> SRP, body only.</p>

<p>Seems, um, not-super-"competitive" to me, but maybe Leica knows things I don't about what people are willing to pay for a sensor that's 56% larger than that of the $8,000 Canon and Nikon full-frame standard-bearers.</p>

<p><em>"Customers willing to spend an extra £3,096 will receive an S2-P featuring a sapphire glass monitor screen and 'Platinum Service' support package."</em></p>

<p>So there it is.<em><br /> </em></p>

<p>That is competitive in medium format digital terms, though - which is the market that the camera is aimed at, and the 35mm SLR styling and handling might also tempt someone to move up from their "full-frame standard bearers".</p>

<p>Now, if only I'd win the lottery, I'd get on. Oh, hang on! I don't even play the lottery...<br>

I'll just have to make do with my 5D for now.</p>

<p>I think Leica realizes some people will buy their products simply because it has Leica written on it.</p>

250 quid for a charger? Is that typical medium format pricing? Sometimes I wonder why they don't simply provide a plug for standard ac/dc converters to use.

<p>You have to compare the Leica S2 price versus the Hasselblad H3DII-31 and H3DII-50 prices.</p>

<p>Hasselblad H3DII-39 (39 megapixels, 36.7x49.0mm sensor) $22,000<br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/522927-REG/Hasselblad_70380530_H3DII_39_SLR_Digital_Camera.html</p>

<p>That is basically the same price for a similar spec camera. How is that not competitive? Hasselblad does have a cheaper 31MP and more expensive 50MP version but I guess Leica will add to the line in time.</p>

<p>US prices: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9128</p>

<p>It's very competitive in its intended market...medium format. This is the one thing that will hurt it...all the people that are whining that it is too costly compared to their Nikon/Canon/DMR. They don't seem to get that it's akin to saying the Pentax 6x7 (which had 35mm styling) wasn't competitive with their Nikon F3.<br>

Apples to oranges folks!</p>

<p>I forgot about the H3DII-39. </p>

<p>I would think pros would have other concerns beyond the buy in costs. Things such as service and loaner programs.</p>

<p>Wai-Leong, the GBP 250 is for the "<strong>Professional</strong> battery charger S" - please don't confuse this with other battery chargers, which will charge your battery with second-rate amateur electricity :-)<br /><br />Soeren<br>

P.S.: Seriously, It might be able to quick charge two batteries at a time or something. And in general, I also think that the pricing is OK for a medium format type camera</p>

<p>Yes, but the H3DII-39 is 22,000 with the 80mm lens. Leica wants 6000 dollars more for their equivalent lens (with the central shutter). So it is 28,000 versus the 22,000 of the Hasselblad (buying new). This is 1000 USD MORE than the H3D-II 50 megapixel camera, which also includes the 80mm, and even a free round trip ticket to NASA, two nights lodging, a dinner with Buzz Aldrin and a raffle with prizes. Seriously, I am not making that up...look at the rebate at B&H. So I would not say the pricing was equivalent. The S2 is priced HIGH. The whole thing is expensive even for medium format. I think it will probably be a fantastic camera, but it is not priced properly. <br /> The lenses are the real problem. Just for comparison with the Hasselblad lenses:<br /> Hass 80mm -- 1995 (but it comes with all the kits). Leica 70mm 4495/5995.<br /> Hass 35mm -- 3250. Leica 35mm 5295/5995.<br /> Hass 120 -- 3399. Leica 120mm 6495/7495.<br /> Hass 210 -- 3150. Leica 180mm 6495/7495. <br /> Hasselblad has very expensive lenses compared to Mamiya, which is the other major player in medium format digital (Phase One and Leaf). Even the Rolleiflex lenses for the Hy6 were cheaper (as well as having lots of used ones available). It would cost you 20,000 USD to buy a moderate wide angle, standard lens and moderate tele if you buy the central shutter lenses! You could do that for less than 2000 USD if you buy used in any of the other systems (including the pricey Hy6 system).</p>

<p>Anyway, this is all just to say that you cannot go by the body pricing alone. The S2 will be the most expensive medium format system, and the total system cost for an S2 would be even more than buying a brand new 50-60MP kit when you take into account the lenses.</p>

<p>I want it. It makes sense for me as an SLR form factor shooter to upgrade to it. I get their marketing model.</p>

<p>However, there's no way I could justify an S2, even with the corporate expense account. To me it is genuinely a toy meant for those whom value the name above all else. How many of those folks are still around in this economy? That remains to be seen, (I'm certain their engineers sleep better at night than their marketing folks). My second point is one of reliability in the real world, including support, and longevity in order to reclaim ROI. There are cheaper, more proven systems with high quality results.</p>

<p>I need to see how thing fights in the trenches.</p>

<p>It looks like a lovely camera, but I'd go for a slightly used 39mp Hassy at half the price- look on ebay.<br>

Hassy has the advantage of easy upgrades if 39mp become too few....<br>

Would love to see a shoot-out between the 2!</p>

<p>I wonder what sort of PC configuration is needed to run the files with reasonable speed. Only then can one really know the real cost. Anyone has the spec?</p>

<p>You have to be either a very busy pro or a very well-heeled amateur to affford digital camera MF photography. Leica may have a great system (although they will soon be submerged in the sensor size and pixel race), and a natural evolution from small format photography, but who really needs it?</p>

<p>Digital MF cameras don't make much sense at all for those MF photographers who normally shoot only a hundred or less rolls of film per year, of well visualized and well composed images (the 'meat' of the medium format photographic approach). You can get a very high quality MF film camera system and a few lenses for 5,000 to 10,000 dollars, or considerably less if used, and the quality of the slides or B&W negatives is great. For a few thousand more, or less, you can scan them with high level equipment, or print them in a darkroom.</p>

<p>Quite apart from the limited value of digital camera MF for even the most exacting of amateur photographers (a quite different story for smaller camera digital), the timimg of Leica is very unfortunate. The recession is certainly going to affect the scale of luxury purchases, both for them and the other manufacturers in an increasingly crowded market.</p>

<p>Leica would probably gain more by improving the sensors of their existing digital cameras.</p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>"Digital MF cameras don't make much sense at all for those MF photographers who normally shoot only a hundred or less rolls of film per year, of well visualized and well composed images (the 'meat' of the medium format photographic approach). You can get a very high quality MF film camera system and a few lenses for 5,000 to 10,000 dollars, or considerably less if used, and the quality of the slides or B&W negatives is great. For a few thousand more, or less, you can scan them with high level equipment, or </em><a href="../leica-rangefinders-forum/00U4yw" target="_blank"><em>print</em></a><em> them in a darkroom."</em></p>

<p>No matter how affordable a high-quality medium-format film camera is, it doesn't have one of the biggest advantages of a digital camera: the ability to review and re-shoot if there are problems. This can be a huge advantage that cannot be overcome by a low initial purchase cost.</p>

 

 

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=4542461">Alan W</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"></a>wrote: <em>"It looks like a lovely camera, but I'd go for a slightly used 39mp Hassy at half the price- look on ebay.Hassy has the advantage of easy upgrades if 39mp become too few....Would love to see a shoot-out between the 2!"</em></p>

 

<p>See <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html">http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html</a></p>

 

 

 

<p>Douglas,<br>

Agree about the utility of the review function. This is why my film MF camera is usually accompanied by a point and shoot or digital 35mm that allows pre-visualising exposure, tone and composition before exposing the film, but without the cost of the digital MF camera. </p>

<p>As much as I like to see Leica do well on this, the competitiveness of the pricing has really changed with Hassy's new CFV-39 back. The Hassy sensor is larger that the S2, it's 39 MB, it's in stock now and I think it is selling for like $13K. If you don't want/need autofocus and feel the same way about the new Leica lenses, you can buy a whole lot of Hassy V for $22K.</p>

 

<p>Well, it's obviously a very good camera, so if you can afford it why not? What I'm wondering about is if you compared the photos from this or a MF Hasselblad to something like a Bessa II w/ Color Heliar lens, or a Mamiya 7, is there that much of a difference in the photos? I understand the convenience factor of shooting digital, no rolls of film to change on a shoot, no scanning, no developing, etc. I was just wondering if there is any real difference in quality between the photos from this or a normal, very good MF camera? It would be interesting to compare.</p>

<p>Another big feature is its weatherproofing. Leica claim the camera will easily be able to withstand rain and dust. If your a location industrial photographer (for example), this is huge. I can't imagine taking my Hassey with medium format back, tethered to my Mac laptop out into a rainstorm.<br>

Nope...not at all.</p>

 

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2347092">Arthur Plumpton</a> wrote: "<em>Agree about the utility of the review function. This is why my film MF camera is usually accompanied by a point and shoot or digital 35mm that allows pre-visualising exposure, tone and composition before exposing the film, but without the cost of the digital MF camera</em>."</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Unfortunately this would not help you see if the blink of an eye or turn of head was what you wanted, and it may not accurately indicate a clipped histogram.</p>

 

<p>True, Doug, but those are not always the greatest of concerns (at least no more than when shooting in pre-digital days). </p>

<p>The aesthetic of the photo, and the feeling of it on viewing, are almost always more important to me.</p>

<p><img src="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/mammals/rodents/lech00.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>They're critical for me.</p>

<p>Agreed, of course (your last image example). </p>

<p>For those involved in sports, wildlife and street photography, even the checking of histograms at critical moments is impossible, and one must do that before the critical moment occurs or not at all. </p>

<p>My own photography is genereally of things that are either immobile, or move slowly (clouds, light variations, etc.), so the new S2 or another highly reactive camera system is not the type of imaging machine that will receive much of my attention, Leica lenses apart (which I do own as well, but in smaller format). </p>