relms wrote:
Beautiful shot of a beautiful lady, Adam. I have been trying to choose between the S 100 and the 120 Macro as my next lens purchase for the S(006). You make a strong argument for the 100.
Thanks!!
Here is what I wrote over on getdpi, when someone asked the same question:
Tough call.. And what I'm about to write is very subjective. I look at lenses in a very different way then most.
The 120S is better for beauty and portraits. I say this for two reasons. One the perspective flatters the face a bit more. And two, the sharpness and roll off is a bit better suited for faces. Less character, so less distracting. A cleaner, fresher look if you will. Besides there's something about the contrast that just gives off a sense of realism (though it fades the further away from your subject you get).
The 100S is better suited for half body and beyond. Especially candids and street scenes. And it makes a great lens for shooting details and close up quirks etc. It also makes a better lens if you're shooting multiple heads in one frame. The rendering also tends to be more in line with the older sought after Leica glow look. And it's just beautiful. How lenses should render Reminds me of a mix between the 75APO and the 75Lux. Basically the good points from each lens sexed (my wife laughed at me when I asked if sexed was a word, as it didn't look right.. She said the word I'm looking for is mated) to create the 100S :P
It's not to say both lenses can't do the others job. It's just to say that I wouldn't want to be without either lens.
As for the actual real world use. The 100S will be faster, even when the lens has less distance to travel. As in, even if you're taking the same subject and neither you or the subject are moving much. Obviously from close range to far away the 100S is VERY fast in comparison.
There are two exceptions to the rule.
1) On the S007 the 100S can be a bit problematic. Sometimes it just won't lock focus, and I've tried with multiple 100S lenses and multiple S007 bodies (one of the reason I don't have an S007 anymore). And even though the recent firmware fixed the issue a bit. It's still problematic. In this instance, the 120S is a faster lens.
2) In certain lighting conditions the 100S has to many internal reflections (poor flare control) and it won't hit focus. Whereas the 120S seems to have less of an issue with this, both visually (in images) and in operation.. The 120S will in that instance focus faster as it doesn't struggle like the 100S does.
On a whole though, the 100S could be used for slow-ish moving subjects, whereas the 120S would be reserved for static subjects.
Hope this helps.
P.S. One more thing to add.. The 70S shouldn't be overlooked. It does great in backlit situations and has beautiful rendering. If you consider it, you'll probably want to space it out a bit and the 120S is a good friend for it Also in that vein of thought, you might want to pickup the 35S instead of the zoom
Anyway, I know you have the 70S, I just copied and pasted what I wrote over there.. If you were wondering, he went with the 120S.
ONE MORE THING>>> I forgot to mention this on the other forum, but the 100S has some REALLY terrible flare issues when shooting into the sun. Typical Karbe design Anyway, a hood helps, but not always. Just keep that in mind (the 120S is much better at controlling flare).
Adam,
Thank you for the detailed response. As interesting as were your comments concerning the two lenses was your mention of preferring the S006 over the S007. My Leica dealer sent me the S007 to try after I discovered that my S2-P was starting to show some sensor corrosion, and for a short while I had both the 007 and S2, and so I was able to do some same-scene shooting with each camera. What I found - and this is very subjective - is that I preferred the files coming from the S2 over those coming from the S007.
I don't want to ressurrect the CCD vs. CMOS argument, but I find that given adequate light the CCD sensor of the 006 simply out-preforms the CMOS sensor of the 007. Certainly, the 007 has its advantages, especially its higher ISO capability, but for the ways in which I use the S system, I prefer the S2 or 006.
There is, however, the possibility that I am trying to convince myself that I don't "need" the 007.
Knowing that I would be without my S2-P for several months while having the sensor replaced, I bought a certified pre-owned 006 to use in the meantime, and so far I have been happy with it. Although it has the same sensor as the S2, there are quite a few enhancements, not the least of which are better auto focus, and a faster processor.
Werner,
You have the eye; you keep turning out wonderful images, one after another. Good stuff!
relms wrote:
Adam,
Thank you for the detailed response. As interesting as were your comments concerning the two lenses was your mention of preferring the S006 over the S007. My Leica dealer sent me the S007 to try after I discovered that my S2-P was starting to show some sensor corrosion, and for a short while I had both the 007 and S2, and so I was able to do some same-scene shooting with each camera. What I found - and this is very subjective - is that I preferred the files coming from the S2 over those coming from the S007.
I don't want to ressurrect the CCD vs. CMOS argument, but I find that given adequate light the CCD sensor of the 006 simply out-preforms the CMOS sensor of the 007. Certainly, the 007 has its advantages, especially its higher ISO capability, but for the ways in which I use the S system, I prefer the S2 or 006.
There is, however, the possibility that I am trying to convince myself that I don't "need" the 007.
Knowing that I would be without my S2-P for several months while having the sensor replaced, I bought a certified pre-owned 006 to use in the meantime, and so far I have been happy with it. Although it has the same sensor as the S2, there are quite a few enhancements, not the least of which are better auto focus, and a faster processor.
Werner,
You have the eye; you keep turning out wonderful images, one after another. Good stuff!...Show more →
Just something about those CCD S files that I can't let go of either. I think I'll keep one body for the long haul. Since for the way I shoot with it, I really don't need to "upgrade" anything on it.
I actually have a spare S-006.. Wish I would have known you're in the market for it.
Hi everyone,
I've recently caught the manual focus bug and I'm considering a Leica M body. Could you guys provide any things you don't like about the rangefinder experience? For reference, I'm currently shooting with adapted lenses to Sony alpha bodies.
james3shin wrote:
Hi everyone,
I've recently caught the manual focus bug and I'm considering a Leica M body. Could you guys provide any things you don't like about the rangefinder experience? For reference, I'm currently shooting with adapted lenses to Sony alpha bodies.
There really isn't anything I don't like about the RF experience when the RF is properly calibrated. It's faster then other methods of manual focusing, and a joy to use. You do need to know it's usefulness though.
Ideally 35/50/75 are the best focal lengths to use. For two reasons. 1) easier to focus those lengths 2) frame lines are in a good spot for predicting moments. As in, you can see outside the frame nicely with those lengths.
Accuracy of the RF frames vary based on distance to subject.
Flare in the RF window can sometimes be an issue. Sometimes you just get blinded by then sun, and can't see/do anything.
An uncalibrated RF will give you poor results, and will be frustrating. It's not often the RF or lenses fall out of alignment, but it does happen. Modern RF cameras (M240 w/live view) is an easy tool for assessing accuracy.
You can use lenses wider then 28mm, but you will be framing wildly. Unless you use EVF mode which defeats the purpose of an RF.
The best piece of advice I can give.. Don't give up so quickly. Use it consistently for a 2 month period. If you're not hooked, you're just not an RF kinda guy. Sell it, try to recoup any losses.
A couple of months ago (p1303 #1), I wrote that I wanted to get my processing to match what I wanted to express, that "Basically, I think that, if one wants to express something, one needs not to avoid being held back by what one thinks other people may want, or by a form of "exquisiteness" that a particular camera can achieve — in this case the M-Monochrom"; that I was "not after realism — B&W is not a realist medium in any case — but want an expressionist look." You can look at the following picture in that vein — and it's easier to do that with Tri-X than with the MM and the M9: easier but much more work with the scanning. It's the highlights that I like and that I just can't achieve in terms of clarity and brightness with the digital Ms.
This picture could be for a series called Alone in Bangkok — only it's in Chiang Mai.
Leica M6 | DR Summicron-50 | Tri-X @ISO 1600 developed in D76 Chiang Mai
Mitch, I agree. You have to find the BW look which appeals the most to your eye, and I do hear many good shooters comment the MM needs some editing love to meet their taste. I pretty much post the looks I enjoy, some are liked others not so much, But my own taste has evolved with exposure to so many good shooters here (yourself included of course) and elsewhere
So nice to see more shots from you, Edward. I really like the color street shot with the 85/2, though it does still seem quite saturated in the skin tones and blue shirts---just to my own taste. Is it easier to use on the SL?
Thank you Charlie! The sonnar is definitely easier to focus on the SL. I totally agree about the color being too saturated by default. I also find it more related to the M9 than the M240, with similar problems under certain lighting conditions, and good suitability to monochrome conversions.
"Stand developing" is amazing: it allows you to shoot at various film speed on the same roll if film. I shot at ISO 400 and 1600 — and I'll post a few that were shot at 1600 on the same roll of film as this one. It seems never to blow out even the brightest highlights — no "great blobs of fire" (to paraphrase the song) that I fight all the time with the MM — and sometimes gives a "halo" of "iridescent" effect, as in the huge plastic bag to the right of the women, which still has detail in it if I were to burn it in. The light was extremely bright in this shot.
Leica M6 | Summilux-35 FLE | Tri-X @ISO 400 stand development in Rodinal 1:100 for one hour Chiang Mai
Anyway, a hood helps, but not always. Just keep that in mind (the 120S is much better at controlling flare). 
