Given that none of us have actually used a production model of the camera I find it foolish to be complaining about its user interface. Use it, then tell me what you think of its UI. Until then the UI complaints are nothing but hot air.
Well said. I can't believe people feel compelled to criticize without even using the equipment. If there is one valid criticism which is warranted even without seeing the camera, it's the price point and the INSULTING salt on the wound 5k extra for sapphire glass and extra year warranty. That alone should make makes me want to walk away fro this camera even if I could afford it.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
If there is one valid criticism which is warranted even without seeing the camera, it's the price point and the INSULTING salt on the wound 5k extra for sapphire glass and extra year warranty. That alone should make makes me want to walk away fro this camera even if I could afford it.
Once again, Leica's pricing policies confound.
On a $23K camera, why wouldn't Leica put the sapphire glass on it in the first place? At most, their additional cost would be $100. Why withhold this on such an expensive camera. Charging so much to get the more scratch resistant glass the costs so little just boggles the mind. It should be on the camera to begin with, after all they cost-no-object aspects of putting this camera together and the enormous $23K price tag, why would they skimp in on this key aspect of durability?
Lotusm50 wrote:
On a $23K camera, why wouldn't Leica put the sapphire glass on it in the first place? At most, their additional cost would be $100. Why withhold this on such an expensive camera. Charging so much to get the more scratch resistant glass the costs so little just boggles the mind. It should be on the camera to begin with, after all they cost-no-object aspects of putting this camera together and the enormous $23K price tag, why would they skimp in on this key aspect of durability?
The S2-P is intended for the rental market, which can be very hard on equipment. Thus the harder LCD cover, extended warranty and free shutter replacement.
Well, you're getting an entire camera for $23K whereas with MF digital backs the camera is separate (this could be argued either way though - what happens in two years when the S2n comes out with a 50MP sensor?). As for the $5K service plan (that also happens to includes the sapphire glass), there is a similar deal available from Phase One dealers, though I think it gives you three years total. At this price point and market, service plans are not uncommon. Way back when the Kodak DCS 560 was big news and cost $25-30,000+ Kodak also offered such plans.
Obviously this camera and service plan, just like Phase One backs, etc., is aimed at high end pro photographers/studios who need the equipment to be 100% available and are willing to pay for the service premium. It is not aimed at the average 1DsIII/DX3 user and 99% of us here.
It will be interesting though to see whether Leica can made a go of it considering the erosion of the MF digital market from ever higher resolution DSLR full frame cameras and competition from a number of established MF digital back manufacturers.
telyt wrote:
The S2-P is intended for the rental market, which can be very hard on equipment. Thus the harder LCD cover, extended warranty and free shutter replacement.
Regardless, it really doesn't cost very much at all (less than $100), to make everyone's $23,000 camera a bit more durable. Further, I would say that all professionals can be tough on equipment, not just those that rent.
This is to my mind an amazingly petty choice by Leica on such an expensive camera. Really very hard to defend this as sensible.
Price sapphire glass blanks. I'm sure Leica gets a cheaper deal, but it's not cheap. I found a 3" diameter blank for several hundred dollars (300ish?).
Any way you look at it, the logic of not including the sapphire glass on all S2's does not make sense. Even at a cost of 100 - 300 bucks, that represents no more than about 1% the cost of the camera at the most but if you want it, you have to fork over almost 25% of the camera price? Sure, they are really charging for the service but do they offer the option for a few hundred more over the normal price? Nope. Great marketing and customer relations Leica. Make your most devout customers feel like they are not getting the best when they spend $23K on your camera when the cost to do otherwise is insignificant.
Now really, I'm not saying it's not a pricey option, but if the cost/benefit analysis doesn't work out for you, then don't get that option. It's an easy game to play when looking at any purchase. "Well for $xxk, why wasn't *this* feature included too?!" Real quickly you've built a product in your mind that's not profitable. I don't know where that line is for the S2; none of us do. Leica has the best idea of where that line is and have priced the product accordingly. In every S2 discussion I've seen, someone comments that the sapphire glass part must only be an extra $5 or so, why is it so expensive of an add on. That's probably very untrue.
The normal glass is tough. Do any other cameras besides the M8 even come with a sapphire glass LCD cover?
I wish I could remember the magazine this awesome observation was made in...Pop Photo or similar 1966-era...
It was vaguely like this:
"Young men, being uncomfortable with expressions of beauty, color and drawing qualities of photographic equipment, reach for technical parameters that can be measured with cold precision."
Put country simple...bench racing. Parameters, milimeters, line count, whatever.
The question is can we make amazing images with it?
If you're a parameter head, you're unlikely to master your rig, and you'll spend your life buying more gear, which, is what they want. I sold a lot of music scene pics with a D2000, a camera particularly bad at high-ISO (legendarily so). BUT, NoiseNinja had its number and every image I ever post-processed cleaned up nicely.
Efficient? No. Optimal? Hardly! But it worked, and...nope, it just worked.
this artificial division between "gear head", "parameter head" etc and on the other hand, the true, blessed artists.... well, I find it a bit childish, infantile, and artificial.
I think the big point on the extra $5k, if I'm reading it correctly, is the loaner camera should repair be needed. I assume probably a 30 day turnaround or more on repair (going to Germany, etc.). For a rental agency or busy studio that's probably a worthwhile insurance policy. And those would be the same places that would most benefit from the sapphire glass and shutter replacement.
But I agree with what's been said: probably would have been better marketing to raise the price and do it for everyone. Nobody want's the 'second class' $23k camera.
kidtexas wrote:
Price sapphire glass blanks. I'm sure Leica gets a cheaper deal, but it's not cheap. I found a 3" diameter blank for several hundred dollars (300ish?).
Yes I did price them, and at wholesale it is less than $100. Maybe $300 at someplace that sells retail. Given that sapphire glass costs 5 times as much a mineral glass, its only $80 more (and that is all an overestimate to be conservative). For a company that built it's reputation on quality and longevity of its products, it is unfathomable why they would consciously limit the quality of such an expensive product -- and then tell their customer that they are not getting the highest quality of the product they can build even a $23K -- and that you won't get the full quality product unless they spend $5K for the warranty (even though it only has a marginal cost of $80). I think it incredibly shortsighted and really sends the wrong message to their customers -- essentially undermining a key perceived characteristic of the company's products and value.
Not to mention the message that if you don't buy the extended warranty you will get a product that will more likely break/wear early. ("No extended warranty, OK you get the cheaper product!") And it begs the question, where else did Leica cut corners on the product? Can Leica no longer be trusted to provide a product of uncompromising quality? I'm not saying that this is true, but that is the message they are unintentionally sending and a reasonable conclusion for customers to draw. For $80 in cost, its just ridiculous.
Lotusm50 wrote:
Yes I did price them, and at wholesale it is less than $100. Maybe $300 at someplace that sells retail. Given that sapphire glass costs 5 times as much a mineral glass, its only $80 more (and that is all an overestimate to be conservative). For a company that built it's reputation on quality and longevity of its products, it is unfathomable why they would consciously limit the quality of such an expensive product -- and then tell their customer that they are not getting the highest quality of the product they can build even a $23K -- and that you won't get the full quality product unless they spend $5K for the warranty (even though it only has a marginal cost of $80). I think it incredibly shortsighted and really sends the wrong message to their customers -- essentially undermining a key perceived characteristic of the company's products and value.
Not to mention the message that if you don't buy the extended warranty you will get a product that will more likely break/wear early. ("No extended warranty, OK you get the cheaper product!") And it begs the question, where else did Leica cut corners on the product? Can Leica no longer be trusted to provide a product of uncompromising quality? I'm not saying that this is true, but that is the message they are unintentionally sending and a reasonable conclusion for customers to draw. For $80 in cost, its just ridiculous.
Unbelievably arrogant towards potential customers. Leica must try to reach out to the new breed of professional photographers that haven't grown up with film based cameras - only digital. In this segment Leica has never been a serious contender and they will have a hard time selling the S2 to the "believers" only.
Asking so much for a camera, a professional one, they should definitely include professional service at no extra charge, sapphire glass, and a Leica cap.
I like my Leicas but they are aiming for the sky but barely leaving the ground with the S2 and the pricing. They announced it a long long long long time ago and the competition has provided multiple solutions in the mean time. I am afraid the S2 will be old hat before it hits the shelves. A classy old hat though.
One thing that has barely been mentioned here is who the real competition is. The MF world currently consists exclusively of outdated systems based on film bodies, with exchangeable backs and boxy, un-ergonomic designs. I own a Contax 645 AF, and a Sinar eMotion 54LV, and while I like it very much, it is nowhere near as fast to work with as a 35mm DSLR, and the Contax is one of the better bodies out here.
The S2's real competition is not MF, because the market is tiny and the economy is down. The real market is for 35mm DSLR users who are tired of their 20+ MP 35mm DSLR bodies with soft pixels and weak lenses. There is just a handful good lenses for Nikon and Canon, and the rest are not suited for such MP monsters, and with every generation this becomes more apparent, especially in the wide end for Canon, and the middle of the range for Nikon. The real customer is a studio- and location-based fashion photographer with a busy schedule, high IQ requirements, and customers who care about the difference between 35mm DSLRs and MF level quality, i.e. the upper reaches of the market.
The camera offers MF quality in a package handling like a 35mm DSLR, the first to do so. We will see if the aim is true and if Leica can make the 1000/year sales they are projecting. Personally, I am optimistic. The waiting lists are filling up with people selling both 35mm DSLRs and Phase One/Mamiya and Hasselblads, according to one shop owner. No one is complaining about the price, but are just waiting to see that the camera delivers what it promises before signing the cheque.
ulrikft wrote:
this artificial division between "gear head", "parameter head" etc and on the other hand, the true, blessed artists.... well, I find it a bit childish, infantile, and artificial.
I hear you, but, there are people that just buy gear, read numbers, repeat. Trust me, I need them to keep doing it so I can buy their pristine-never-got-dusty/wet gear!
carstenw wrote:
One thing that has barely been mentioned here is who the real competition is. The MF world currently consists exclusively of outdated systems based on film bodies, with exchangeable backs and boxy, un-ergonomic designs. I own a Contax 645 AF, and a Sinar eMotion 54LV, and while I like it very much, it is nowhere near as fast to work with as a 35mm DSLR, and the Contax is one of the better bodies out here.
Yep. The real market for this camera/system is the Guy Mancuso's of the world, the guys that are selling R9/DMR combos lately.
They need 80% of the normal "handy" SLR handling for spontaneity and ease of use outside the studio (remember Guy's scissor lift shots of corporate bldgs etc.?) but they need the quality and the MP's enough to make the high-rez (glossy clay paper) prints.
"Its all about the lenses" and I would expect them to be great.
Sapphire: Even mentioning it in the release the way they did is so off-putting... not smart.
carstenw wrote:
The S2's real competition is not MF, because the market is tiny and the economy is down. The real market is for 35mm DSLR users who are tired of their 20+ MP 35mm DSLR bodies with soft pixels and weak lenses.
Indeed, I have a feeling the next generation of high MP 35mm DSLR's will make things even harder on Leica. It will, of course, do nothing to resolve the lens situation (harhar), but other 30+mp DSLRs coming on the market for under $10K is going to put a lot of pressure on them, that's assuming everything goes well with the S2 launch.
Of course it could be another 2 years before we see a 36mp 35mm DSLR type camera.
