The S3, and some thoughts about and around it

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by Karim Ghantous, Oct 4, 2018.

  1. The S3 will be launched next year. Leica is confident enough to announce it now, although I would question this kind of strategy.

    Link: Photokina 2018: The Leica S3 | Red Dot Forum

    But, the spec sheet is quite impressive:

    - 64Mpx

    - 3fps

    - Full frame 4K

    - Clean ISO 6400

    Whats not to like? Clearly, the S system was designed with the future in mind, and 39Mpx was not seen as a fixed specification. Those lenses are expensive for a reason, and part of that reason is excellent performance. You could get that level of performance in a FF35 DSLR, but you'd have to spend the same kind of money (for the most part).

    FF35 bodies like the D850 are about the same size as the S, but the sensor is smaller. That makes you think a little bit. The A7rIII has a high-res mode that delivers MFD-like quality, although that involves sensor shift.

    Leica's reasoning for staying with the SLR form factor is that the bigger body allows for better heat dissipation. Perhaps this is not the full story. Leica would have to redesign all of its lenses for a new body, and the current lenses would have to be used with an adapter. Very clunky.

    I've said it before, but the SL lenses seem to be designed to cover a bigger sensor. Perhaps the S will stay an SLR, and the SL will have the option of a larger sensor. Who knows.

    Many people prefer OVFs to EVFs, and I understand that. The viewfinders of the S bodies are certainly amazing. But look at how much space the eyepiece takes on the rear of the body. The LCD is restricted in size because of that.

    The amazing performance of cameras like this is something to behold. And yet, I wonder if the money you'd need to own this system would not be better spent on a medium format film camera, film processor and scanner. Some 645 systems are going for very little money. You can buy a 6x6 folding camera for $50. A film processor will set you back a few thousand. And for most applications an Epson flatbed for under a thousand will do very nicely. Selected frames can be scanned on a Flextight X5 or what have you.

    With the exception of the X-Trans and Foveon sensors, eliminating the low-pass filter is not necessarily a good idea. Sure, very few people experience problems. Look at the long term reviews of, say, the M9, and you'll find few people complaining about the 'naked' sensor.

    I'm even more skeptical of cinema cameras that does not utilize a low-pass filter, and that's what the S3 will be when shooting in 4K, after all. But I'm open to being convinced.
     
  2. S3?
    Sounds like a knockoff of an old Nikon.....
    ;).
     
  3. I heard when Olympus introduced the OM-1 they first called it M1 and Leica didn't like it so they changed to OM-1. I don't know what Nikon would think if Leica call their new camera S3. But as you have a Nikon S3, I have a Pentax S3.
     
  4. Nikon had to stop using "Nikomat" because it sounded too much like "Ikomat".

    The Navy has an S3- no one confuses it for a Nikon.
     
  5. Sorry I can't follow entirely. - 1st of all: Wouldn't a Jobo for a couple of 100$ process film well enough? Why 6x6 or 645? To homescan competitive IQ even 4x5" doesn't sound that promising and yes, it could be had for kind of cheap too. If you love film: Fine, shoot it.
    Are you seriously mourning the squinty VFs of the old LTM bodies or Super 8 movie cameras' SLR finders? - I don't get it. In a time with still too many people wearing huge black spectacle frames a big FV eye piece on an otherwise also rather heavy and bulky camera isn't a big concern to me.
    I heard of "moire generator" patterned shirts, that shouldn't be worn in front of TV cameras and TV stations stocking alternatives. But where in the stills world do you expect moire to happen, in a way that can't be dealt with? - I'd rather face encountering it than all the data junk low pass filtered sensors are providing.
    Why? Sigma built SLR mount MILCs too.
     
  6. Yes. It isn't fully automated though.

    Leaving aside rangefinder cameras, I prefer EVFs to OVFs. They are more WYSIWYG than optical reflex finders. Not that I'm against the SLR per se, as most of my film cameras are SLRs. The S system is very capable and I would not shun it.

    It's not too common. But I have seen it happen even with low-pass filters.
     

Share This Page