Leica S2 Accessories

[michael_zeleny1]

<p>I just bought <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170560769981&ssPageName=ADME:L:PMR:US:1123">this</a> Leica S2 kit, including an S2-P, a 70MM Summarit-S lens with a lens hood, an adapter to use Hasselblad lenses on the S2, a cable release, an extra USB, an Extra Battery, and a Leica SF-58 flash. I have an old Gitzo tripod on hand and plenty of dimly remembered experience using the M system up to and including the M6, but next to none with professional digital gear. My first order of business is to set up for high quality gun photography. I would be very grateful for any advice on how to proceed. </p>

[steve_solomon2]

<p>Pat yourself on the back for being able to obtain this $30K+ system! The question would be...What kind of output are you planning for that you think justifies this particular system? I am curious, since I've not yet seen test results or image samples from this new system. It would be very interesting to see what Phil Askey's tests show, and how it compares to other medium format systems, and indeed, the Nikon flagship D3x or the Canon 1DS-Mark III, both about 1/4 the price of the Leica. In any case, good luck with this awesome kit.</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p>Or indeed, a Sony A850 at 1/10th the price, or a Nikon D7000 at 1/20th. But that's kind of a separate issue (the separate issue being: usually you shouldn't buy equipment, especially very expensive equipment, without having a reasonably clear idea how you're going to use it).</p>

<p>What do you mean by gun photography? Are you talking pictures of firearms, for the cover of <em>Guns & Ammo</em> or something? Or do you mean shooting hand-held with a pistol grip? Or with flash "guns"? Or what?</p>

<p>Also, as long as you are accepting the limit of shooting from a tripod, you'd probably be able to get much better results with off-camera dedicated monolights, instead of a flash that is intended to be mainly used on-camera.</p>

 

[sarah_fox]

<p>Guns that go bang, fling hot debris, and make lots of smoke?</p>

<p>Two words: Protective filters. ;-) (Oh god, that's ironic!) Seriously. Anywhere safety glasses are required, protective filters should also be required. Honestly, I wouldn't expose that camera to those sorts of conditions. I wouldn't even use my Canon 5D. I'd use my 40D with a prime and protective filter instead.</p>

<p>Then find some good photography books to brighten all those dim memories. Also google the strobist blog for an excellent online "lighting 101" workshop.</p>

<p>Finally, unless you really know enough to make the best of the extraordinarily exotic gear that you've just bought, re-sell the outfit and use the money to buy everything your heart desires from other manufacturers. Most pros shoot Canon and Nikon, but other makes are also respected.</p>

[michael_zeleny1]

<p>Yes, I mean to photograph guns that go bang, with image quality adequate for documenting the authenticity of 100-year old surface finishes. I understand the basics of lighting, and if my expertise comes well short of making full use of the extraordinarily exotic gear that I've just bought, there are at least two reasons for buying the best in my case. One is because I can. The other is that the values of the objects of my study far exceed the cost of this gear. </p><p><b>Image removed. Not permitted per photo.net Terms of Use.</b></P>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Hmmmm.... OK...</p>

<p>Just a suggestion: You'll probably walk away with much better photographs, having spent far less money, by hiring a decent professional photographer. Hey, being rich is cool, but there's a saying about how the rich stay rich.</p>

[michael_zeleny1]

<p>Doubtless I would walk away with much better photographs, having spent far less money, by hiring a decent professional photographer. But this is a skill that I need to develop for in-house use, so hired help is not an option at this stage. The rich stay rich by deducting business expenses.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>As I read your question the first thought that came to mind was depth of field and how Helicon Focus programme might help you. One of its promotional photos is a shot of a rifle with everything from foresight to butt in sharp focus, gun pointing close to camera. The programme married the sharp bits of a series of photos with varying focus point to achieve the result.<br>

Oh to be in business and deduct expenses! Actually I prefer not to have anything to do with IRD with my liabilities being deducted at source, makes life much simpler.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>If you are going to duplicate the shot you posted them you are going to need a light box and either a means of double exposing or else learn to use a good editing programme to achieve that result. As mentioned above I doubt if the flash will be of much use to you unless you turn it around and bounce it off a large reflector to get a soft as opposed to a hard direct light. Personally I would try and find a well lit room and shoot by available light, "north" light rather than sunlight. Though usually the results are rather soft and I need to increase contrast in editing. I guess my off repeated message here is to think of camera and edit programme as a combined tool towards the final product, so far you have only purchased half of what you need :-) Though even if you get Photoshop the second half will be a fraction of what you have charged to your business expenses.</p>

[sarah_fox]

<blockquote>

<p>The rich stay rich by deducting business expenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not for long. ;-) (That's a double entendre.)</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>you may want to ask this question in the leica forum. i'm not sure there are many P netters in this forum who have seen, let alone used, leica s2 gear.</p>

[michael_zeleny1]

<blockquote>

<p>The rich stay rich by deducting business expenses.</p>

<p>Not for long. ;-) (That's a double entendre.)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In perpetual motion, as long as it takes place in the black. "The gentry prefer double entry, whilst the proletariat would rather bury it."</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Ha! Cute! I'll have to tell that to my accountant. :-)</p>

<p>OK, since you made me laugh, here's another suggestion. It will cost you a bit of money, but only a fraction of what you've already spent. Hire a good pro commercial photographer to teach you, one-on-one. Then you'll have the tools, you'll learn how to make the most of your equipment, you'll get what valuable guidance you need to make other equipment acquisitions, your pics will be top-notch, and you will have spread some joy to someone of lesser financial means. You will especially need to study lighting, as reflective objects (especially chrome plated ones) are challenging. (A basic knowledge of lighting is seldom adequate. Your lighting will be far more important than that there fancy camera of yourn'!) You'll want a commercial photographer who works with shiny metal objects. Trust me.</p>

<p>Also I'm serious about studying the strobist blog. He's all about doing small, portable lighting on the cheap, but you can still learn quite a lot by studying his exercises. What you learn there will apply equally to the very finest studio monolights.</p>

[bms]

<p>Hm. By no means am I an expert (of that type of lightening OR guns), but it seems a lot of the guns have shiney surfaces so reflection will be you biggest problem and you want diffuse lights such as large soft boxes. One book I started to work my way through is Fil Hunter's <em>Light Science and Magic.</em> BTW, also recommended on the <strong>strobist</strong>, http://strobist.blogspot.com/2007/05/starting-june-4th-lighting-102.html. Alight table of course would also be cool.</p>

<p> </p>

[shadforth_stephen]

<p>Sarah's correct. Get ahead of the learning curve a little. The S2 is in very small numbers, but I'd love to see its output compared to the M9, D3x.<br>

People say its expensive, but not in comparison the a Phase 1 or Leaf. Its pretty rarified territory up there and cost is incidental.</p>

 

[ishik_tuna]

<p>well, if your actually interested in producing the finest images of guns possible..then why don't you start by studying/contacting the photographers that take images for Holland & Holland, James Purdey & Sons or Boss & Co. These guys are photographing the absolute cream of the crop in bespoke firearms. Find out who they are, pay them a consultant fee, and learn how to do it right.<br>

I've got to say, it seems rather bizarre to purchase a kit like that, and then ask for advice in a forum like this. </p>

 

[dave_redmann]

<p>Some years ago, one of the major American gun rags (I want to say <em>Guns & Ammo</em>, or else maybe <em>American Handgunner</em>?) had a feature article on how they photographed guns for the magazine. If you can find it, that would be a good start.</p>

<p>Seeing your example, I have to think that getting the right lighting equipment (studio strobes and something to make their output very diffuse) and using the right lighting techniques will have a far bigger effect on the quality of the picture than the differences among using any current medium format, "full-frame", or "APS-C" DSLR. You may end up wanting to polarize the light sources and cross-polarize the lens. The suggestion to hire a pro who is a good product phorographer to teach you is a good one.</p>

<p>Of course, techniques for a gun in action are different than for one just sitting there. The suggestions for protective glass etc. are overkill for almost any smokeless powder gun photographed from a comfortable distance. I get just enough side-spitting from my Super Redhawk to make me put a terrycloth wrist band over the part of my arm that is exposed to it (I use an unorthodox two-handed hold), but otherwise have never experienced anything that would bother me about putting my camera fairly close (just make sure that any ejected cases don't hit the front of the lens). Blackpowder might be a bigger issue.</p>

 

[Uhooru]

<p>Hiring someone who knows product photography could be helpful to help train you for the long run. You can use your camera and he/she will give you some training on lighting and setting up the project. Another idea would to see if you could find a commercial photo class at a local JC.<br>

The lighting in the example may not be the best to bring out the quality of the surfaces of these weapons, other techniques may be better for that. Anyways, I'm sure people are fairly jealous that you are able to lay out the bucks for the gear, I would love to have one.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>Additionally, if you are planning on mostly photographing the guns on a flat surface in a studio, you would do well to invest in either copy stand or a studio stand and boom arm. It will be a lot easier and more repeatable to have something to hold the camera in the same place every time and be able to tune it. Tripods are great for shooting things in front of the camera, but they are a pain to use for something <em>under</em> the camera. But Sarah's advice is very good. You might also need a macro lens, depending on how close the 70mm lens can get, and what its distortion performance is like close up. Given it is a Leica normal, it is probably great. But if you need something closer, their own (expensive) macro would of course be amazing, or you could go for a Hasselblad 120 Makro Planar which is also fantastic for that job. </p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>We should all remember that this is digital gear, not 4X5 or 8x10 large format. The cost of experimentation with this <strong>fantastic</strong> gear is nonexistent. You seem to be a fan of what you're trying to photograph. And with that, you must have in-hand great examples of the <em>final result</em> images you wish to eventually match.</p>

<p>Use these examples as the model for your experimentation. You can see the results <strong>immediately</strong> and make corrections until you duplicate what is desired.</p>

<p>After-all, <strong>self taught</strong> lessons nurture the creative amino acids that <strong>you</strong> can build on. </p>

[nee_sung]

<p>Lighting is the only real issue here. Quite honestly any high-end medium format digital will do, but you really need to study and then experiment with the lighting.<br>

I would suggest buying 4 soft light boxes and then place them at different positions to see the different results.<br>

Colour temperature may irritate you no end. A possible solution is to bracket colour temperatures as well as exposure.<br>

Try putting it in a tent and shoot from the slit. That way, the colour of your shirt, face, camera and your side of the room generally will not spoil the colour temperature. But the contrast may be too flat for your purpose.<br>

You don't need an exposure meter. Just bracket your shots from +6 to -6 and choose the one you like. Delete the rest.<br>

You said you have an old Gitzo but I don't know if it's heavy enough. Also what head will you be using? A wobbly head will spoil everything. Buy a really good tripod + head. You go over to the accessories forum, under "tripods/camera support", the recurrent theme is that people pay a lot more for their tripods because they kept on buying cheap, inferior tripods, and then kept on upgrading. By the time they bought what they need, the total cost of all the tripods far exceeds the single, final, good tripod.<br>

Having written thus far I realised that you may need tilt and shift. That would mean another camera, or a tilt and shift lens. You really need tilt and shift to do your subject justice, because the human eye is a sphere and so our view of an object is not affected by the angle of view, but a film/sensor is a flat surface. The only way to properly compensate for this is tilt and shift.<br>

Too many things, see if any one else has anything to add. Go over to the Lighting forum.</p>

[james_elwing]

<p>I fired an arrow in the air (aka, a response)........yesterday and it didn't land. It wasn't rude! I am a museum conservator, not a gun loving dude; however, trying to be helpful:<br>

I think you need good macro facility if not microscope, plus polarising light source and lens filter to cut through blooming varnish etc on non metallic surfaces, plus UV light source and filters to check on restoration of finishes etc. <br>

I think I suggested we might be interested in the odd interesting post of object photography</p>

 

[john_boyle3]

<p>Lots of interesting pointers here concerning lighting techniques, but I think that Gus made the best suggestion of the lot. Search out the best examples of the pictures you want to make, then start taking photos. Once you know what can be done you have a standard to try to meet, or exceed. Your initial results may not be very good but you will learn from your trials and eventually get the photos you want. In the process you will develop your own "eye" that may well distinguish your work.</p>

<p>I took this path some 35 years ago with wildflower photography with my M2, Visoflex, Bellows and macro lens. I was burning through Kodachrome 64 at $5 for 36 slides, processing included. Digital would make this process a lot easier.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>I have used the Leica S2. I also shoot commercial product photography with a Medium Format Digital camera (a H2F/39 Multi-Shot). And I grasp what it is you are trying to accomplish with your subjects, my father was a gun collector and specialized in older rifles, shotguns, and pistols. He had a fair collection of Civil War weapons including some pretty rare items. I used to photograph some of them for potential buyers ... including cylinder scenes on the pistols.</p>

<p>It is best to dedicate a "studio area" for this so you can concentrate on lighting and composition rather than setting everything up every time you want to shoot. Part of that studio should include a rolling stand to put your computer on. The reason for this is that you can shoot the S2 on a tripod and tethered to the computer to instantly see what you are doing much better and more accurately than on the camera's LCD.</p>

<p>You will need a lighting kit. Most product photographers use strobes. You do not necessarily need the most expensive lighting for this work, but you DO want modeling lights in the strobes, and a fair amount of power so you can stop down enough to get enough depth-of-field when shooting at higher F stops. One of the advantages of the more established lighting is that of consistency from one shot to the next. So, since you obviously have the means, go with Elinchrom, Profoto or Hensel for the lighting gear ... I use Profoto. </p>

<p>Most strobe systems offer a variety of light modifiers ... but one main-stay for this type of work is a large soft-box mounted on a boom arm stand to allow you to light evenly from above either straight down or a directional angle. Further lighting is used to accent that key light and involves things like honeycomb grids and barn doors or flags to cut light from hitting certain parts of the subject. All this stuff is available at any major photographic store like B&H in NYC. Just tell them what you are doing and they'll help you out. Or hire a Pro to help you design your lighting kit and how to use it. The best thing is if you can locate a studio going out of business and get all the stands and do-dads needed at a fraction of a fraction of the cost. </p>

<p>The other thing you may well need is a Macro lens to photograph details while retaining all that S2 resolution you paid for. Leica now makes a 120 Macro for the S2 for yet another King's ransom and it is hard to get. Alternatively, you can use a Zeiss CF 120/4 Macro and a set of extension tubes via the adapter you already have. The 70mm lens will only get you so close. I do not know if there are extension tubes for the S2 yet.</p>

<p>Color balance is a no brainer to accurately reproduce IF your computer is properly calibrated, and you use a color chart in the first shot you take of any set-up. Once you color balance the first shot to be accurate, you can apply it to all subsequent shots using the same lighting. This is another reason you want good strobes with consistent output shot-to-shot. MacBeth color charts are an industry standard and also available at B&H amongst others. I use an X-Rite Color Checker Card.</p>

<p>Good luck ... it's a great subject to photograph, and can be challenging but fun.</p>

<p>-Marc</p>

<p> </p>

[nee_sung]

<blockquote>

<p>Once you color balance the first shot to be accurate, you can apply it to all subsequent shots using the same lighting. This is another reason you want good strobes with consistent output shot-to-shot.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is where I fell down, I didn't buy a good strobe. Believe me, it's not a luxury, it's a MUST.</p>