Leica debuts S-system, 37-megapixel flagship S2 camera

[jtk]

Collectors will love it. Wish I still had my Exakta 66.

 

645 died because it was for practical purposs usually inferior to 6mp dslrs.

 

Konica-Minolta blows 37mp away: http://museumofbeauty.biz/

[akochanowski]

John, usually you make sense but on this don't be daft. A well-scanned 645 negative will make a crisper--- well, perceptibly nicer print than a 6MP DSLR. 645 faded away because it was a specialized, usually expensive camera that didn't really fill any niche that a Hasselblad or Mamiya 6x6 couldn't, and 120 and 220 film is expensive, anachronistically packaged, and never really penetrated the amateur market after 135 format SLR's became ubiquitous. Even today a nice Contax 645 with lens will run over $1500 on the used market. It's not all nostalgia.

[akochanowski]

Brad, yes what I'm saying is today's crop of DSLR's generally make the same quality image. Assuming whoever shot images generally knew how to expose and focus, once it's printed up I strongly doubt anyone could truly, consistently pick out whether an image was made with a mid or high-end Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Sony or Pentax. (I haven't seen the new 24MP Sony). Whether you spend $800 or $5,000 for the low end or the pro end, the IQ doesn't really change, you just get more handling and exposure gadgets and a hardier shutter. I've seen printed results from 39MP digital backs, which look perceptibly different. The S2 will likely have that look but in a portable package. Assuming they don't screw it up, it should produce fantastic-looking images.<p>I made reference to Phillip Lorca-DiCorcia above. His work depends on resolution coupled with well-controlled artificial lighting. His prints look different from say Alex Webb's, who uses 135 film, even though superficially both shoot, loosely speaking, street photography. I would like to have the resolution thAT 37 mp offers even for street shooting.

[jtk]

Andy, 645 "faded away" (stopped making practical sense) because of the business practicality of mere 6mp DSLRs to professionals, and amateurs realized they could buy better 6X6 than 645 for the same money while all 120 became fodder for 'bay and KEH.

 

645 was primarily a wedding photographer's format, popular a generation ago. The wedding labs mostly wanted 120 because their package printers were designed around it. 6X6 frames wasted image area vs 645, but they did make vertical vs horizontal decisions less pressing when shooting. Retouching was feasible on 120 negs... 35mm was unattractive for people who photographed a lot of teens. 645 was economical.

 

Yes there's nostalgia for 645 but no, it's not coming back.

[Allen Herbert]

"I would like to have the resolution thAT 37 mp offers even for street shooting"

 

Why? I would have thought it is about what is in the image rather than how many pixels it contains.

 

Don't tell me,let me guess....sharpness,tonal quality,and best of all you can make prints larger than a brick s....

house. I just wonder how those old masters got on with their little cams and grainy slow film....cause we are all going

to better than them now with our 38 million pixels and beyond.......

 

Our super quality photos will glow so bright that who cares a monkeys what the pix is about...pass me my

sunglasses and monocle so i can check that all the pixels are present and proper and are glowing in a sanctified

way.

[joshroot]

Hey, I've got a great idea for a new thread:

 

Let's have pointless arguments about digital vs film and which is better. Then we can insult those who don't feel

the same way with snide comments that accomplish nothing.

 

That should kill some time. After all, you gotta do something 'til dinner.

[Allen Herbert]

Once again Leica is catering for the designer label crowd when they had the opportunity to produce a camera for photographers at a sensible price.

[Allen Herbert]

Josh, i have taken your advice and i'm now using those" squibly things.

 

;)

[peteradownunder]

It all depends on what you intend to do with the file. As Brad has correctly pointed out regaridn my use of lotsa

megapixels - I need them to do two things<p>1. make stitched panoramics of very large scale and resolution <p>2.

Use on technical cameras with movements in still life <p> Having lots of megapixels doesnt mean anything except

digtal overload on your computer and storage systems - UNLESS you need the data sizes to deliver the printed

image you are after. There are some side benefits like broader dynamic range and more latitude to do post

processing with files.<p> The S2 will be a superior alternative for those photographers who shot MF DSLR style in

studio as well - because - well it is smaller and easier to handhold whilst strobes are going pop pop pop - ie

ergonomics.<p> I have no doubt that CaNikon will come out with similar machinery in due course - where Leica

excells is the glass they make - that is a fact. <p>However -as always horses for courses - my Alpa with a couple

of Schneiders for landscape kills anything I can buy from Leica or any other manufacturer for that puprose.<p>

btw - you wont be paying $30K for an S2. - You will probably be asked to pay arond $20K for a body and couple of

lenses.<p> Cheers Pete

[jack_macdonough]

The S2 makes sense for Leica. I will buy two for our studio because it is faster than the H3DII regardless of the futher mega-pixels. I

can take it on location easily. Yet we will have the quality upgrade that the advertisers want, even when they many times don't need it. I

will pay off this new system in 2 months. I do not worry when Canon or Nikon will match it, I only worry about when my competitive studios

will have it. You guys have no idea of what art directors demand in the latest equipment. It is the art directors who will make this system a

success. On a rental basis, it will cost an extra $400 a day...no big deal. Sorry for anyone who isn't shooting enough to justify the cost,

but the competition from Leica's announcement has already driven down the cost of a Hassy, and that you can buy used.

 

The key to this making sense is not price related, it is service related. Leica's move on service for the S2 is a smart move. Now I must

get back to shooting as I am not paid to read this forum. By the way, if you want to understand the quality difference of a larger formal

go to this link: http://www.photoprotips.com/20071024/5d-vs-h3dii/

Juan

[greg jansen]

Honestly, if this camera and a few lenses could replace every piece of camera equipment I own, I'd buy it.

 

By the time I sold all my 35mm film, medium format film, and digital equipment I would be pretty close.

 

Maybe a Canon G10 for back-up and travel. Wouldn't that be nice? All your gear (minus lighting) in one bag.

 

Look out Ebay!

[john_shriver]

The important point Jack's comment makes is that Leica has to offer pro-quality support. They do NOT do that today with either M or R systems -- the horror stories I've read are legion. This presumably is why the partnership with Phase One is important -- they will beat Leica about the head, and probably will have their own repair depots. I suspect no self-respecting pro would trust Leica's service without Phase One involved.

 

Nikon's success in the 1960's came from EPOI's superb pro support. Support will make or break the Leica S2.

[Rob F.]

What an exciting new camera for the working pro! I notice there is no lens that is exactly equivalent to a 50mm on

the 135 format; and then again, no lens that is exactly "normal." A "normal" lens for this 30 x 45mm format would be

equal to the 54mm sensor diagonal; while a 50mm equivalent would be 62.5mm. But I'm sure Leica had the needs of

its pro customers in mind when they settled on the 70mm standard lens, with its 56mm equivalent.

 

Here's wishing Leica every success with this unique camera, as well as with their other new products. The R10 and

the D-Lux4 both interest me!

[david_f._stein]

I agree with John Shriver-service for the pros. Not so sure anyone needs more than today's best full-frame DSLRs, but why not. Would like to see

one in person-looks slippery to hold.

[fred_obturateur]

"The key to this making sense is not price related, it is service related"

 

Wise words : this is what most Leica "users" or Leica flamers overlook. If you only thinkabout using your Leica gear to photograph your kids and your dog therefore you might logic ally think Leica is doomed to failure as A) it's a concept of the past in the digital age B) it's way overpriced and it won't survive long.

 

On the other hand if you use your Leica gear professionally (600 rolls a year or more) you think Leica is a gift from God (no matter what the price is) and you marvel at the news technical prowesses they've been able to achieve

(50mm 1.4 ASPH, 21mm 1.4, **improved** Noctilux etc etc)e

 

Plus you'll be able to look at the digi-guys with a smile on your face ;-))

[hansdans]

I truly hope that Leica AG will offer this later as an upgrade kit -DMR2- to be used together with R9. This would be worth

while not only to the company but to those who have bought and used Leica R9/DMR back and contributed to the product

development and would make them feel appreciated (special price of course in exchange:)). Leica would be still be the only

company with the truly sensible idea of detachable back(s) to SLR cameras and together with top class upgrade this would

boost the sales of R serie lenses too..

[joshroot]

<i>"I truly hope that Leica AG will offer this later as an upgrade kit -DMR2- to be used together with R9."</i>

<p>

I do not think that would be technically possible. But then again, I'm not a Leica engineer.

[hansdans]

This is wishful thinking of course. But you do not have to be an engineer to think to use 30x45mm sensor instead of the the previous one.

Of course, there is work to be done (if not done yet for experimentation). Still, S2 as a system is good advertisement and meant to a

limited number of people. Then again DMR2 would at least make R9 and the series with this modification "a volume product":) not to

mention the cheering DMR owners who would be best advertisement for the company.

[john_shriver]

There won't be a DMR2 because it wouldn't autofocus. They knew that they had to have autofocus, which the R10 will presumably have. Maybe not the best "sports and action" autofocus, but good enough for their target market.

 

Plus, any DMR back has to be crop sensor, since the margin of the sensor has to fit through the film gate. (The front cover of the sensor extends a good way up past the focal plane, and is larger than the sensor aperture.)

[hansdans]

Well, Nikon D3 has FX sensor - so there is no reason to presume that it DMR2 would not be possible?. If you have reference information-

that is then a different story ? Leica AG and any other camera company for that matter is capable of manufacturing complete removable

back/s for their SLRs. It is not just commercially interesting- and never will be.

However, completing a project as R9/DMR, which has already number of users with better sensor (Phase One/Leica can negotiate with

Kodak or Dalsa and they provide a suitable one- so no problems there -does not have to exactly 37Mb- they can choose..) will be good for

the company product line. S2 can be a spinoff for that.. What comes to R10 is an other story. Surely, there is a possibility that it will be

also provided with AF and other goodies..who knows..maybe there is a reference for this as well..;)

[el_fang]

There's also the question of limited and finite resources. The S2, considering its cost (and assuming it's ever released), is irrelevant to 99.999% of current Leica photographers who own 35mm format lenses and are waiting for a viable digital body with which to use those lenses. With all the time, effort and money Leica sank into developing the S2 prototype, I can't help but wonder if they'd have a working full frame M9 or R10 by now if they were paying attention to what their customers actually wanted instead of working on stuff nobody asked for.

[ray .]

99.999% eh? Just another El Fandango confirmed and indisputable factoid... He sees into the future too! Gotta love it!

[EricM]

"I wonder who the S2 is aimed at."

 

A few wealthy fine art photographers perhaps. But mostly the sales will be aimed at rental houses for

their advertising

photographers. Will many buy them given that they are already

kitted up with proven gear that the profession is used to? My rental house said "are you kidding?" and

gave me the

googly eyes.

 

"If they are going to sell a pro camera, it will take more than producing one. And the price is high

enough that nobody is likely to buy two because of service turnaround."

 

Bingo. Leica, in the professional market, has shot themselves in both feet with the only two digi cam's

they've put out, the DMR and the M8. I have no idea who Leica feels is their target audience with this

S2. Now there's the rumored MK IV next spring at 39 meg.

[fran__ois_p._weill]

I've been thinking about what the "S" system can bring to the photographers and what are its chances to succeed commercially.

 

For me, the S system is conceptually (provided it keeps its promise in practice) a first step toward a truly universal photographic system many people have been looking for since the beginning of photography. In opposition to the many polyvalent systems which emerged during the four last decades of the 20th century and which are epitomized by the 35mm SLR.

 

Polyvalence is a quite different notion from universality. It means your camera can be used in a lot of situation and gives you an "acceptable" result, universality means you can cover (almost) all situations but also equal the best specialized tools designed for each of them...

 

In theory digital photography is able to offer the photographer such a universal camera (of course by using proper accessories) the only remaining question being when will it be a reality...

 

Conceptually the S2 seems to be a first step toward this kind of camera : it offers the MF quality with the compactness of the small format camera. It has the ergonomy and, hopefully, the speed and ease of use of the latter, while keeping the uncompromised IQ of the latter.

 

If Leica produces some lenses authorizing the same kind of movements (tilt and shift) a view camera has and the camera can be tethered or Wi-Fi linked to a computer on which screen the image can be magnified to control focus and movements, then - again conceptually - you've got the universal system.

 

On the other hand, there are still lingering doubts concerning the possibility to cram all these pixels (even with a larger than 24x36 sensor) without loosing the benefits of high ISO performance for press and street photography. There are still no report on the model limitations.

 

Now, there are also many questions related to the economics of this camera...

 

Everybody seems to agree it will be beyond the reach of most customers (even professional ones, sorry Ilkka), but it might be less a handicap for Leica than for the M8, considering the targeted customer's panel which is deliberately limited in number by the the very essence of the product.

 

As a number of participants already mentionned, the question of a proper professional grade service is of pime importance to the commercial success of this system, although it might be easier for Leica to properly handle the demands of the comparatively small number of owners of such a system than to handle - as limited as it is - of the many times more numerous M8 customer ones. Hopefully the S2 will also be more reliable and better individually controlled before being sent to the retailers.

 

However, at the present time there are still a lot of practical questions which are still remaining unanswered. The camera is still at a prototype or pre-production stage and its actual performances remain unkown.

 

To what extense will it actually perform as advertised... Leica is not a non-profit organization and like any other manufacturer will tend to present its products as the best even if they know about some shortcomings or limitations. Moreover when you consider the way they treat their customers since some years...

 

How many of the potential customers will accept to pay not only an expensive body, but also a new set of no less expensive lenses, in a time most MF format market actors are deliberatly renouncing to a proprietary approach regarding lenses and backs compatibility and are issuing more and more ergonomically designed and automated bodies compatible with most existing MF lens range (even "old" manual ones) which are generally already owned by the S2 potential customers?

 

The high ISO performance is also a somewhat limiting factors... In the studio or in controlled exterior conditions, where the studio flashes reign, the theoretical advantage of a speedier, better ergonomy comparable to the one of a small format camera is minimized. This advantage only makes its full sense when the availble light (even with some reflectors) is used. In such situations, better to be able to exploit the potential of higher ISO settings and - why not - the newly open "available darkness" potential of some small (but full) format DSLR's. So, to fully justify the switch from an existing MF system able to be gradually improved simply by exchanging the digital back as the performance of the sensors grows and to replace existing expensive high quality lenses by an entirely new and proprietary system, you need to have something really different and able to perform not only like an MF but just like the cream of the best small format DSLR's where those shine. With the pixel density of the S2, unless Leica has made with its partner a remarkable breakthrough in digital technology, I doubt the high ISO performance will even approach the ones of these DSLR's. Which leads to this fundamental question : is not such a concept too much in advance considering the present state of the art ?

 

Regarding Leica place on the market, is the choice of this camera the best way to :

 

1 - Regain a place in the professional world ?

 

2 - Solve the financial difficulties of the company to prepare for a brighter future ?

 

The first problem depends both on the actual performance of the camera versus the competition and the ability of Leica to offer the users a top class professional service.

 

The second is more complex to answer... Most camera manufacturers have a flagship camera which serves more as an advertisment for the rest of their range than anything else. But Leica has no comparable product to offer to a broader panel of customers and the M8 as the digital continuator of the M series which used to be the brand flagship is neither an affordable camera nor particularly successful technically (even if some people use it with satisfaction) and fails below the expectations of many M film camera users (lack of full format, lack of high ISO performance, lack of reliability in demanding conditions, lack of proper QC when leaving the factory, lack of proper service...) ... So it appears to me legitimate to have doubts regarding the usefulness of this remarkably advanced concept as a leverage to re-instate Leica as a major competitor on the digital market. Experience with other manufacturer's flagships showed time and again these flagships to cost more than they actually bring in cash and their value usually lay more in the image they bring to the brand than anything else...

 

A lot of people here in this forum have said time and again Leica is a small entity and as such cannot directly compete with the major brands to justify the price of Leica products and - to a certain extent - their lack of advanced features and shortcomings. With the S2, Leica, once again, seems to want to tackle a niche market, hopefully this time with valuable technical arguments. But they are also entering an unknown territory for them : the MF market.

 

I do appreciate this attempt and its boldness. But I'm not convinced this is the "right" bold movement. They cannot rely on Leica legend and history to promote it. The funds invested in the R&D of this camera and the accompaining lenses might well have been better employed creating a full format (24x36) "M9" solving all the problems of the M8 regarding its use in press and street photography, loaded with the relevant features already present in available DSLR's and fully compatible with existing M and LTM (with a conversion ring) lenses (except perhaps those with goggles and those of the collapsing variety)... Even if this camera had a high retail price, at least people already having Leica (and other M-LTM compatible) lenses in their bag should have accepted to pay the price for this body, knowing they won't have to spend anything more to cover the FOV range in term of new lenses. Let's imagine someone buying a Nikon D3 or a D700 and having to buy lenses to go with it while having already a bunch of Leica glass and compare the total cost of this Nikon with appropriate glass and the cost of the imaginary M9 body alone... I don't think the total budget to invest would have been so different. Moreover, this total budget would have been far more accessible than buying the S2 system so the customer's panel would have been far larger. And as for the image of the company, the legend would have been easy and fair to use again as a selling argument. Yet, the market would not have been large enough to overflow the brand production capabilities. What Leica has done with Phase I, they could have done with any reliable partner and with such a partner, may be, it would have become possible to lower the price to an even more acceptable level...

 

Time only will tell if Leica has made the right choice to recover its place as premium image making tool manufacturer.

 

FPW

[albinonflickr]

François, your well-considered contribution is appreciated, as usual (here, and in the Nikon forum)!

 

"For me, the S system is conceptually (provided it keeps its promise in practice) a first step toward a truly universal photographic system many people have been looking for since the beginning of photography." ...It crossed my mind too.

 

I do hope that the R10 accepts not only the old, but also the S2 lenses (a double bayonet should be the answer), to bridge the gap between the systems.