Wow... Leica is insane. 37.5mp

[Atiyeh]

Was just curious about Leica so I hopped on their site... came across this.

http://www.s.leica-camera.com/leica-s-system/

I searched here, doesn't look like it's been posted before.

[Jim G]

Saw that a little while back on DPR... pretty impressive looking, ginormous sensor to boot :D

[Atiyeh]

I'm going to be up all night reading about Leica, haha. Interesting AV you got there :)

[Bumgardnern]

It is definitely a very cool camera. Other than Mamiya it is the only medium format system I would consider.

[fWord]

If I had many thousands of dollars at my disposal, I'd buy it, but otherwise it would just make me broke. Imagine how much the lenses would cost.

[CartoonBear]

Very cool. This is a great step and I hope some of the other companies start to move this direction.

[Dchemist]

Interesting, thanks.

[gjl711]

..ginormous sensor to boot :D I suppose you need a ginormous sensor to go along with the ginormous price. :)

[NickSimcheck]

It is definitely a very cool camera. Other than Mamiya it is the only medium format system I would consider.


I think Leica is coining the term "Mid-Format" as the sensor is somewhat in the middle of Full Frame and Medium Format.

But the thought that the camera is smaller then some Full Frame cameras is mind boggling.

[James Salenger]

We now have affordable bodies with 10, 12, 16 and 21 megapixels. The race is over.
Improvements can be made in the areas of white balance, lens distortion and noise
reduction. Camera manufacturers would do well to lean toward these areas rather
than bigger sensors and more megapixels. 21 megapixels will fill up a terabyte hard drive in no time. We need better color separation and accuracy more than sensor and file size. JMO (just my opinion)

[TeeJay]

Gotta agree with you James!

TJ

[BlueTsunami]

This'll allow me to print sharp canvas prints! :lol:

[Gentleman Villain]

I'm getting that system :p

Don't care what it costs...I'm getting it...Been waiting for Leica to put out a high resolution camera for quite some time...just one more year to wait

[René Damkot]

Camera manufacturers would do well to lean toward these areas rather than bigger sensors

Ever used a MF digital?
There is a difference....
Is it worth the price difference? That's a lot tougher to decide...

I agree about the megapixels though.

[geester1]

At 37 MP, it will give awesome images! I'll have to wait until it comes out and starts falling in price, though.

[saiminyaku]

what is the MSRP for the body due to be?

[dino8031]

Gulp... 30,000 Euros, or around $45,000 for the body. :wink:

[saiminyaku]

Gulp... 30,000 Euros, or around $45,000 for the body. :wink:
sweet mother of pearl, that's outrageous even for Leica's standards.

[kyleturbo]

Gulp... 30,000 Euros, or around $45,000 for the body. :wink:


Can't be that good.

[Pitter]

James is quite right. Better noise supression at high ISOs should be a priority too.

[saiminyaku]

Can't be that good.
i really think it's going to be sub-$20,000USD, but still...ouch.

[Moogle Pepper]

Holy crap!! I thought the D3X's price was bad!

[Karl Johnston]

So ..what's it do exactly that's any better than any other SLR?

[LiquidSword]

At 37 MP, it will give awesome images! I'll have to wait until it comes out and starts falling in price, though.
Closes the gap and differences between 35mm style and MF cameras. Bigger Sensor provides better images.

[airfrogusmc]

Closes the gap and differences between 35mm style and MF cameras. Bigger Sensor provides better images.


And then theres the glass!!!!;)

[LiquidSword]

And then theres the glass!!!!;)
Well that's implied (as is the photographer). Though some people tend to forget.

[thatkatmat]

We now have affordable bodies with 10, 12, 16 and 21 megapixels. The race is over.
Improvements can be made in the areas of white balance, lens distortion and noise
reduction. Camera manufacturers would do well to lean toward these areas rather
than bigger sensors and more megapixels. 21 megapixels will fill up a terabyte hard drive in no time. We need better color separation and accuracy more than sensor and file size. JMO (just my opinion)

+1 James, very good points

[blary54]

Very cool but way out of my price range(well thats anything Leica).

[CanonTx88]

That's ridiculous. What do you need that kind of resolution for? I'm really curious to know - that isn't sarcasm.

[blary54]

^ Billboards.

[LiquidSword]

That's ridiculous. What do you need that kind of resolution for? I'm really curious to know - that isn't sarcasm.

Think of large sensor cameras when you go into stores like Target and such and see those BIG pictures all over the place.

[DAMphyne]

That's ridiculous. What do you need that kind of resolution for? I'm really curious to know - that isn't sarcasm.

It's all in the Details when it comes to large format.
These are old, but you'll see what I mean.
http://www.damphyne.com/gallery/8x10-Negs
It isn't all about the resolution, it's the size of the sensor also.

[kyleturbo]

Just thought of this. Using this camera shooting in raw, adjusting in photoshop as a smart object and saving as psd or tif file....how big is that file going to be? Sheesh, going to need a bunch of space.

[bbbig]

Just thought of this. Using this camera shooting in raw, adjusting in photoshop as a smart object and saving as psd or tif file....how big is that file going to be? Sheesh, going to need a bunch of space.

Even at 37.5mp, at 16-bit per channel (2 bytes per R, G, B), it's only 75MB per photo. Even with overhead, it's well within a decent computer would be able to handle. Also you'd be able to store about 12420 of those in a 1TB drive - again, not too shabby ($0.008 per photo). With a decent hard drive, it will load in about one second.

[Damian75]

As for the price it may seem like alot even compared to the D3x but the D3x is a toy compared to MF digital and leica did partner up with Phase One who sells digital backs for more than leica is asking for this camera.

[Karl Johnston]

I honestly can't tell the difference between a shot done with a 40D, decently, and a shot done with phase1

[cdifoto]

^ Billboards.

Yeah cuz everyone knows you look at a billboard with your nose pressed to it.

Think of large sensor cameras when you go into stores like Target and such and see those BIG pictures all over the place.
I went into a department store that had huge pictures of Daisy Fuentes. They were something like 12 feet tall. I checked 'em out of curiosity from a couple feet away. They looked like crap. And no, it wasn't a ghetto store.

[XterraJohn]

Even at 37.5mp, at 16-bit per channel (2 bytes per R, G, B), it's only 75MB per photo. Even with overhead, it's well within a decent computer would be able to handle. Also you'd be able to store about 12420 of those in a 1TB drive - again, not too shabby ($0.008 per photo). With a decent hard drive, it will load in about one second.

While the sensor itself usually only records a pixel as red, green, or blue, after it is interpolated and output into Photoshop/saved as a tiff or jpeg, EACH of those 37.5 million pixels then has a red, green, AND blue value assigned to it. So, if you're saving as a 16-bit tiff, you're looking at 2 bytes per color multiplied by 3 colors (2 x 3) multiplied by 37.5 million (2 x 3 x 37,500,000) = 225 MB per image. I think.

[René Damkot]

Sounds about right: A 16bpc tiff off a Leaf Aptus 75 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/aptus-75.shtml) (33 Mp) is 190Mb. The Raw is about 70 Mb IIRC.

[Jannie]

Print adds where a lot of graphics work in Photoshop is done.

[Jannie]

Wow, what is the equivalent focal length compared to a Canon full frame setup, say with the Leica 35mm and 120mm lenses they list?

[Gentleman Villain]

Wow, what is the equivalent focal length compared to a Canon full frame setup, say with the Leica 35mm and 120mm lenses they list?

Hi Jannie

The 70mm lens is equivalent to a 50mm on a full frame 35mm.

70 divided by 1.4 equals 50....So I've been dividing all of the Leica focal lengths by 1.4 to figure out what they are the equivalent of in 35mm FF. DOn't know if that's correct or not..but that's what I've been doing

I'm planning to check out the S2 at PMA next week...so maybe I'll write a report if anybody is interested

[towersinthesky]

Your questioning that sensor. Not seen the RED cameras?

Just go to red.com and then question megapixels.
250 megapixels when you get there ;-)
Now flame megapixels! :P

[airfrogusmc]

Hi Jannie

The 70mm lens is equivalent to a 50mm on a full frame 35mm.

70 divided by 1.4 equals 50....So I've been dividing all of the Leica focal lengths by 1.4 to figure out what they are the equivalent of in 35mm FF. DOn't know if that's correct or not..but that's what I've been doing

I'm planning to check out the S2 at PMA next week...so maybe I'll write a report if anybody is interested

I'd love to read it...

[BLACK MAMBA]

nice!

Buy this camera and don't forget atleast all of the following...

faster computer
bigger hard drive
more ram
better video card

[Gentleman Villain]

I'd love to read it...

Hi airfrogusmc

I checked out the S2 today...unfortunately it was behind glass so all I could do was look. It's much smaller than I was expecting.... it looks really similar to a 35mm DSLR

D Farkas did a great update on his blog about the S2
http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/

[airfrogusmc]

Hi airfrogusmc

I checked out the S2 today...unfortunately it was behind glass so all I could do was look. It's much smaller than I was expecting.... it looks really similar to a 35mm DSLR

D Farkas did a great update on his blog about the S2
http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/

Thanks...

I think if Leica gets the bugs worked out of the M8/M9 digital I might have to score one and a 35 1.4 lens.

[Gentleman Villain]

Thanks...

I think if Leica gets the bugs worked out of the M8/M9 digital I might have to score one and a 35 1.4 lens.

I'm with you :D...I spent some time playing with the M8 and a bunch of lenses at the show and am thoroughly impressed with that system. There's a big difference between reading about things online and then getting some hands on time. The M8 felt great in my hands.

I also got to check out a linhof view camera and an Alpa tech camera. Incredible! The linhof really impressive.

Overall, the show was very depressing. There were prints displayed everywhere and the best of the bunch (imho) was shot on Fuji Velvia. It made me really miss film....and I'm really starting to feel the loss.

[Bobster]

http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/leica_s2/

[airfrogusmc]

I'm with you :D...I spent some time playing with the M8 and a bunch of lenses at the show and am thoroughly impressed with that system. There's a big difference between reading about things online and then getting some hands on time. The M8 felt great in my hands.

I also got to check out a linhof view camera and an Alpa tech camera. Incredible! The linhof really impressive.

Overall, the show was very depressing. There were prints displayed everywhere and the best of the bunch (imho) was shot on Fuji Velvia. It made me really miss film....and I'm really starting to feel the loss.

I shot with an entire portfolio with a 4X5 Deardorff on tri X 320 professional when I was in college. I used do be a darkroom rat and really miss film too. Had 3 500 C/Ms and now have none:(. Nothing like the square format for portraits. I threw out several rolls of Kodachrome 64 120 a couple years back. Even if I still had the blads theres no place to get it processed. AH well, progress I guess :rolleyes:;)

[MDJAK]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0908/09081601leicassystemspecs.asp

I think I'll buy me a Mercedes instead.

[constrict]

soooo overpriced.

leica = cameras for rich businessmen who don't know any better?

[alt4852]

soooo overpriced.

leica = cameras for rich businessmen who don't know any better?

there's something to be said about the simplicity of m-series cameras and leica glass. some call it bull****, but there are times when you see an image rendered with a leitz lens and you just know that your L will never really be able to draw it the same way. each to their own i suppose, but i wouldn't say that leica users just don't know any better. ;)

[wickerprints]

To date I have heard this claim about being able to see the differences in Leica glass being persistently made and yet no scientific testing of this claim has been carried out to determine whether it is true.

Testing is simple. Just have a photographer take a series of images with a Canon film body with an L prime, and one with a Leica with the same focal length. Do this for a wide variety of scenes and conditions. Do normal processing and prints. Then have people try to figure out which images were shot with which lens. A simple statistical hypothesis test will then tell you whether a given individual is able to reliably see the difference.

As for the Leica S-series, $30k for body + 1 lens is far too expensive, considering you could get a Phase One for that price. And unlike the old days of all-mechanical systems, the electronics will fail relatively quickly. Leica's pricing structure is not well-suited for modern technology. It was fine for cameras meant to last for 40+ years, but $30k for something that probably won't last more than a decade is rather much.

[airfrogusmc]

To date I have heard this claim about being able to see the differences in Leica glass being persistently made and yet no scientific testing of this claim has been carried out to determine whether it is true.

Testing is simple. Just have a photographer take a series of images with a Canon film body with an L prime, and one with a Leica with the same focal length. Do this for a wide variety of scenes and conditions. Do normal processing and prints. Then have people try to figure out which images were shot with which lens. A simple statistical hypothesis test will then tell you whether a given individual is able to reliably see the difference.

As for the Leica S-series, $30k for body + 1 lens is far too expensive, considering you could get a Phase One for that price. And unlike the old days of all-mechanical systems, the electronics will fail relatively quickly. Leica's pricing structure is not well-suited for modern technology. It was fine for cameras meant to last for 40+ years, but $30k for something that probably won't last more than a decade is rather much.

There are plenty of charts which you can compare to Canon and thats the proper testing and they are supplied by Leica and Canon both. I have shot with Leica M glass and it is indeed some of the best I've shot with. The only lens I have that is in that league is my 200 2L. My 85L almost...

A good buds M8
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/Cameras/IMG_4876.jpg
It is truly a tank and will be around long after my 5D is dead and gone.

[jdizzle]

There are plenty of charts which you can compare to Canon and thats the proper testing and they are supplied by Leica and Canon both. I have shot with Leica M glass and it is indeed some of the best I've shot with. The only lens I have that is in that league is my 200 2L. My 85L almost...

A good buds M8
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y118/airfrogusmc/Cameras/IMG_4876.jpg
It is truly a tank and will be around long after my 5D is dead and gone.
Nice tank Allen. I'm so drooling over the Leica S2. :)

[jacobsen1]

To date I have heard this claim about being able to see the differences in Leica glass being persistently made and yet no scientific testing of this claim has been carried out to determine whether it is true.

Testing is simple. Just have a photographer take a series of images with a Canon film body with an L prime, and one with a Leica with the same focal length.

how many of people do you know that can afford leica glass/body AND canon Ls? ;)

I do agree their digital pricing is a bit much. The M8 is a sick camera, but it's not even FF so you lose the wide angle aspect for how much money? I have seen a few M8 to 5D comparisons and the 5D does OK from what I've seen. Especially a 5D with it's AA filter completely removed. ;)

there is something sexy/different about a rangefinder though. I can see the appeal, I just can't write the checks. I've been desperately waiting for epson to either start playing the game again or voightlander to jump in head first... The olympus EP-1 in dangerously close in that it can take M-mount glass, but the 2x crop factor is a bit of a bummer there as well (but makes for some WICKED longer fast glass!)...

[wickerprints]

A camera...any camera... is just a camera. I don't lust after optical equipment. Lust is reserved for other human beings...they truly deserve it, after all. :)

You don't need to own both systems, just be able to rent both...

As for the comment about charts, that's not what we're talking about. If you want to talk test charts, then you've missed the whole point about how some people claim to know the "Leica look." That's not something that has ever been quantified or tested in a real-world situation, yet people talk about it as if it were gospel. That's why I'm saying prints of real subjects, not test charts, because if you can claim you can spot the difference, then surely you should have no objection against such a test. And if you have to resort to charts to back up your claim, then that only proves my point that the "Leica look" is bogus.

But it's not my place to tell others what they can or cannot buy. If you want to spend loads of money, knock yourself out. But to hear people say that their glass is just SO much obviously better in every possible way...it's a sort of fanaticism that seems to me to border on fetishism, as if one has not had enough social interaction to develop healthier outlets for such passions.

Repeat after me: "It's just a camera.... it's just a camera...."

[airfrogusmc]

how many of people do you know that can afford leica glass/body AND canon Ls? ;)

I do agree their digital pricing is a bit much. The M8 is a sick camera, but it's not even FF so you lose the wide angle aspect for how much money? I have seen a few M8 to 5D comparisons and the 5D does OK from what I've seen. Especially a 5D with it's AA filter completely removed. ;)

there is something sexy/different about a rangefinder though. I can see the appeal, I just can't write the checks. I've been desperately waiting for epson to either start playing the game again or voightlander to jump in head first... The olympus EP-1 in dangerously close in that it can take M-mount glass, but the 2x crop factor is a bit of a bummer there as well (but makes for some WICKED longer fast glass!)...

They'll get the sensor issue worked out. In fact I hear the M 9 will be full frame and more sensitive. I think Leica was late getting to the digital table because they thought that the move from film wouldn't effect their market the way it has.

[airfrogusmc]

A camera...any camera... is just a camera. I don't lust after optical equipment. Lust is reserved for other human beings...they truly deserve it, after all. :)

You don't need to own both systems, just be able to rent both...

As for the comment about charts, that's not what we're talking about. If you want to talk test charts, then you've missed the whole point about how some people claim to know the "Leica look." That's not something that has ever been quantified or tested in a real-world situation, yet people talk about it as if it were gospel. That's why I'm saying prints of real subjects, not test charts, because if you can claim you can spot the difference, then surely you should have no objection against such a test. And if you have to resort to charts to back up your claim, then that only proves my point that the "Leica look" is bogus.

But it's not my place to tell others what they can or cannot buy. If you want to spend loads of money, knock yourself out. But to hear people say that their glass is just SO much obviously better in every possible way...it's a sort of fanaticism that seems to me to border on fetishism, as if one has not had enough social interaction to develop healthier outlets for such passions.

Repeat after me: "It's just a camera.... it's just a camera...."

Your right its just a camera but one that will last long after the stuff canon and Nikon are cranking out. And to suggest that there's a better way to compare but with a scientific standard is well unscientific and prone to bias. I've shot with Leica M and I own some of the finest glass Canon makes and with only a few exceptions nothing Canon makes comes close to Leica M glass. And if your working in a fast paced street type environment or candids in general there is not a better tool for that job than Leica M.

Oh yeah, you're right, theres nothing to it. Canon is just as good. :lol::lol: And how much time have you spent with a Leica M series camera? :lol: Its all fantasy and marketing :rolleyes:

[alt4852]

But it's not my place to tell others what they can or cannot buy. If you want to spend loads of money, knock yourself out. But to hear people say that their glass is just SO much obviously better in every possible way...it's a sort of fanaticism that seems to me to border on fetishism, as if one has not had enough social interaction to develop healthier outlets for such passions.

Repeat after me: "It's just a camera.... it's just a camera...."

i think you're starting to project. nobody said that leica glass is "SO much obviously better in every possible way". as i said earlier, it just has a different look to it, and as airfrog mentioned, it does certain things better than any canon glass that i've seen. i think many people who are fascinated by the M series are just amazed at how simple and well crafted the whole system is. it's considered timeless because the design has been largely unchanged for half a century and models much older are still functioning just as they did when they rolled off the production line. when you have an 80 year old camera that is capable of outclassing newer models in reliability and maintaining world class optical and image quality.. you know you have something different. you can't really say the same for anything digital for that matter.

give rangefinders a shot sometime for street work. there's something about watching subjects walk into your framelines and pressing the shutter release without and mirror blackout that gives you this little rush of knowing you got the photo that you've been orchestrating in your head. it's a different way to look at photography and if you get the chance, try using a leica M series and you might start to understand why people pay so much for such a high-ticket light-sealed box for your $7 film. ;)

[jdizzle]

A camera...any camera... is just a camera. I don't lust after optical equipment. Lust is reserved for other human beings...they truly deserve it, after all. :)

You don't need to own both systems, just be able to rent both...

As for the comment about charts, that's not what we're talking about. If you want to talk test charts, then you've missed the whole point about how some people claim to know the "Leica look." That's not something that has ever been quantified or tested in a real-world situation, yet people talk about it as if it were gospel. That's why I'm saying prints of real subjects, not test charts, because if you can claim you can spot the difference, then surely you should have no objection against such a test. And if you have to resort to charts to back up your claim, then that only proves my point that the "Leica look" is bogus.

But it's not my place to tell others what they can or cannot buy. If you want to spend loads of money, knock yourself out. But to hear people say that their glass is just SO much obviously better in every possible way...it's a sort of fanaticism that seems to me to border on fetishism, as if one has not had enough social interaction to develop healthier outlets for such passions.

Repeat after me: "It's just a camera.... it's just a camera...."

As long as I've been on this forum, I can't tell you enough how many times I've heard the same words again and again. There's nothing wrong with lusting over equipment. It's our nature to want. From your stand point, you def. have never shot Leica so don't go there. :) I've been wanting to switch to a different system for a long time and even Nikon didn't do it for me.