1. I had the privilege to actually hold and test shoot an S2 today at the West Palm Beach store today.

    What a camera. The AF is pretty swift and accurate, not in the territory of a Mark IV or D3s though. Still surprisingly advanced, considering that it’s Leica and it’s their first true digital SLR they’ve ever made.

    The viewfinder is enormous, it’s crisp, bright and the shutter left me intimidated. Yet, the camera seemed to automatically give me a boost of confidence to make me take great images with it. I was a few bucks (and a good amount of lunacy) short of purchasing one, otherwise it’s a really really impressive tool.

  2. well on a website i saw pics of amodel, the pics are blah…plain girl over a white backgroud but at 100%you can clearly see her contact lenses. Very good definition. Is it better than a real Phase one MF back? Pros will tell but those backs are not cheap (50K for the p65). Anyways, I saw nice pics from the R digital module, not cheap but Rlenses are being given away these days. Any one tried the Dmodule?

  3. @ Eric: wedding photographers who want to upgrade from Canon/Nikon generica would be better served with the upcoming Pentax 645D, costing ~$6-8k, true MF-form factor, 39.5MP, range of new and existing legacy Pentax645-Mount lenses (for various romanticising lens-depending in-camera aesthetics that Photoshop can’t convincingly do; similar to what all these Japanese kids do with their µ4/3 gear and various legacy lenses).

  4. Wow, Steve, what a coup: a S2 review! Can’t wait, as this is a make or break product for Leica.

    @ Edgar: the industry sector Leica is attempting to enter with the S2 is not about the retail price, wedding photography or product longevity but about systemic investment binding, rental house integration, and industry infrastructure. You can’t look at the S2 from the vantage point of the brand enthusiast, collector and freelance prosumer markets that Leica is catering for since the 1980s.

    I handled a dummy at the Mayfair store and have to say that Leica is betting alot on its success. It’s massive for an SLR-styled form factor, and sure is a bold attempt to challenge the exquisite ergonomics of Hasselblad from all positions, both on the move and stationary, in studio and on location.

    What the choice boils down to for the targeted photographers? As I said on the Leica FB page:
    Hmm… Hasselblad H4D-40 (beat S2 to market) with its existing system standard and higher-res sensor for less money spent, OR migrate to Leica S2, a new system at high expense with very limited range of lenses and doubts into the continued existence of Leica AG…. For professional photographers, Leica has some more convincing to do than the Photoscala.de pixel-peeper test!

  5. Im guessing a lot of pros would bring a long there excisting DSLR system or other MF system to use as a back up instead of buying two of these beasts. And I can see lots of top tier wedding photographers lining up for these.

  6. Sweet! i’m really looking foward to see what you have to say about this camera and what kind of pictures you’ve taken. I’m positive it will an interesting review to read. As usual really looking foward to reading your review.

  7. Hi Edgar,

    The body is expensive, but that’s only part of it. Each lens is $7-8000, plus as a pro you’d need a second body as a back-up. All of a sudden its $75000, that’s a lot of cheese.

    Sure the Hassy is not cheap, but if you need a back-up camera, there are plenty of H2’s and used Phase One backs available for a fraction of what they were when new, and rental lenses are easy to come by in most major ‘photo’ cities.

  8. You know, People may look at the price and say. Its Expensive. Yet the Hasselblad H3DII-50MS Medium Format Digital SLR Camera on B&H Photo costs $ 34,995.00 Yet it does not look like you can slap in on your neck and go take pictures just like that. I like the way the S2 looks in what I have seen. It is huge and looks very professional. Waterproof and weather proof. Meaning that it will “last” and your investment will be worth it when it survives and pays for itself. Well that is my opinion.

    My question is though, who would need the use of such camera ? I mean that as a hobby or job, hobby you would have to be wealthy. For a job you have to at least make $80,000 or more a year to even consider it. It costs the same amount of a cheap car and that is without a Lens. Imagine though. A Car or a Camera. Hmmm, choices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.