What type of camera would you rather use?

[robbins.photo]

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

You do realize that at $15k for MF digital is actually on the cheap side?

Wasn't the 15k I had a problem with - like I said, $89 shipping is just outrageous.

Even at their MSRP of around 22k, its still cheaper than the Hasselblad competitor... and arguably a better field camera (while Hasselblad makes a better studio camera).

Can I get one of those shipped for $82 or less?

 

[goodguy]

How can I answer something I never tried before.
I would say DSLR and in the future if I will get to try a Leica and like it better then a DSLR then I reserve the right to change my answer to Leica.

 

[robbins.photo]

How can I answer something I never tried before.
I would say DSLR and in the future if I will get to try a Leica and like it better then a DSLR then I reserve the right to change my answer to Leica.

I'll stick with Digital. The kid at the photomat has that "one eye looking at you, one eye looking for you" deal going. Just creeps me out.. lol

 

[usayit]

Just to point out another

DSLR is a design... One implemented by various manufacturers such as Canon Nikon Sony Pentax etc...

Leica is a brand...

How can you ask to choose between a design and brand?



and despite what many think... Leica didn't invent the rangefinder nor the camera. Nor were they the only ones making a rangefinder cameras. Heck, they weren't even the first rangefinder camera to enter into digital world. So you don't need to have a Leica to know anything about a rangefinder camera. In fact, many believe the best rangefinders post-WWII weren't made by the Germans but the Japanese. Nikon being one of them. Canon also took the LTM rangefinder and the basic concepts from Leica and had their series of rangefinders. I have two. The Canon is superior to the Leica it copied from in so many ways. I would shoot a IVSB over a Leica LTM of the same time period any day of the week. Nikon rangefinders was a bit more accurate on telephotos due to their longer base rangefinder length.

Assuming the OP meant rangefinder. For macro, times when a zoom is beneficial, and telephoto, I would choose a DSLR. For times, when I need something that is as fluid and natural as an extension of the eye, I would choose a rangefinder. No blanking of the view... you see all subjects at all times.. entering and leaving the frame... you see absolute DOF as to clearly see foreground and background no matter the aperture selected.... you are not isolating the world with a tunnel.. rather than bringing a frame into composition. Think of it as compositional addition rather than compositional subtraction... etc.. hard to explain but I would chose a rangefinder for almost any situation that its properly suited for. btw...the best handling digital rangefinder I have ever held is actually an Epson... not Leica.

 

[usayit]

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

You do realize that at $15k for MF digital is actually on the cheap side?

Wasn't the 15k I had a problem with - like I said, $89 shipping is just outrageous.

Even at their MSRP of around 22k, its still cheaper than the Hasselblad competitor... and arguably a better field camera (while Hasselblad makes a better studio camera).

Can I get one of those shipped for $82 or less?

$89 shipping.... For an occasion to spend 15k, I'd hop on the train and do it in person. Then go shoot the city with the new camera.

Btw... I didn't respond to you... but minicoop1985.

 

[robbins.photo]

You do realize that at $15k for MF digital is actually on the cheap side?

Wasn't the 15k I had a problem with - like I said, $89 shipping is just outrageous.

Even at their MSRP of around 22k, its still cheaper than the Hasselblad competitor... and arguably a better field camera (while Hasselblad makes a better studio camera).

Can I get one of those shipped for $82 or less?

$89 shipping.... For an occasion to spend 15k, I'd hop on the train and do it in person. Then go shoot the city with the new camera.

Btw... I didn't respond to you... but minicoop1985.

Well, my apologies. Didn't realize it was a private conversation - I mean I just figured since it was posted in a public forum then it was fair game. Didn't realize you had such a strict don't speak unless spoken to policy. Might want to warn folks about it in advance, you know, before you run the risk of coming off as a totally pompous. Oh wait.. nevermind.. lol

 

[Derrel]

I like rangefinder 35mm cameras, have owned a few over the years. Pretty nice to carry, enjoyable to shoot for most things using lenses like 24,28,35,50,75 or 85mm...not the best for longer lenses really...viewfinders not very good with longer, narrow-angle lenses like 135 or longer, and rangefinders not really accurate enough either at wide apertures or close ranges, no zoom lenses, no really easy macro options,etc.

I would LOVE a digital Leica M-series body if the price were more in line with Japanese stuff. i REALLY wish a "digital Bessa" would be made by Cosina! But, I think that is pretty unlikely. So, for me, it's d-slr by sort of default and by virtue of "it's what I have the most of". For me the cost of film,developing, and the time in scanning or proofing and enlarging makes film-based shooting more for very specialized stuff. I like the turnaround time and economical per-frame cost of digital.

 

[minicoop1985]

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

You do realize that at $15k for MF digital is actually on the cheap side?

Even at their MSRP of around 22k, its still cheaper than the Hasselblad competitor... and arguably a better field camera (while Hasselblad makes a better studio camera). Perhaps some thought before posting is in order. Did you just search BH for "DSLR" and sort by highest price forgetting to actually notice that the S2 is MF digital?


The root problem with these threads is people don't know what they are talking about... not enough to even have a serious discussion. Many don't even have enough time behind a rangefinder to even know what they are talking about. Also the fact that the OP with 1 post and only enough effort to write a few words is most likely just trolling...

I didn't just search B&H looking for DSLRs, no. I searched Google for Leica DSLRs. Normally, I have no need to know anything about Leica digital products, so I don't research them much, if at all. It really doesn't affect me, actually. However, you are correct in that I didn't notice it was MF due to said fact of me not really researching it. I thought it was just 35mm FF-price seemed a bit on the cheap side to be MF, and just about right for what I thought Leica would charge for a 35mm FF DSLR. Considering a Hasselblad DSLR can run what, $50k (THAT I found accidentally a long time ago), $15k is pretty cheap, actually. Medium format seems to mean not so medium prices... yikes.

 

[minicoop1985]

and despite what many think... Leica didn't invent the rangefinder nor the camera. Nor were they the only ones making a rangefinder cameras. Heck, they weren't even the first rangefinder camera to enter into digital world. So you don't need to have a Leica to know anything about a rangefinder camera. In fact, many believe the best rangefinders post-WWII weren't made by the Germans but the Japanese. Nikon being one of them. Canon also took the LTM rangefinder and the basic concepts from Leica and had their series of rangefinders. I have two. The Canon is superior to the Leica it copied from in so many ways. I would shoot a IVSB over a Leica LTM of the same time period any day of the week. Nikon rangefinders was a bit more accurate on telephotos due to their longer base rangefinder length.

Assuming the OP meant rangefinder. For macro, times when a zoom is beneficial, and telephoto, I would choose a DSLR. For times, when I need something that is as fluid and natural as an extension of the eye, I would choose a rangefinder. No blanking of the view... you see all subjects at all times.. entering and leaving the frame... you see absolute DOF as to clearly see foreground and background no matter the aperture selected.... you are not isolating the world with a tunnel.. rather than bringing a frame into composition. Think of it as compositional addition rather than compositional subtraction... etc.. hard to explain but I would chose a rangefinder for almost any situation that its properly suited for. btw...the best handling digital rangefinder I have ever held is actually an Epson... not Leica.

My only experience with a rangefinder is with an Aires 35-V-looked pretty similar to a Leica M, basically-and a rangefinder that attaches to a Franka Rolfix I. What are your impressions with a digital rangefinder, and how different is it from using an old school one? Is it the same thing? Just wondering. As I've already made fairly obvious in this thread, I don't know everything

 

[oldhippy]

guess this is odd, but I'd rather shoot with my current camera D600. Love will not leave it. Die with the *****. just kiddin about the die with thing. later Ed

 

[gsgary]

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

Most people wouldn't put it in the same class as a full frame dslr

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[Solarflare]

Well ... I suspect my camera in 10 years will look like a Leica. It will just have whatever latest AF technology has spawned at that point in time, and is competitive with DSLRs. Probably something like the Dualpixel technology Canon recently introduced with the 70D.

Right now however DSLRs still have the upper hand when it comes to AF. So I rather use that.

Why ? Because it doesnt matter if your picture has the final bit of uber sharpness in the corners - if the focus is in the wrong place, the picture wont be sharp. And missed focus is something you can NOT fix in the digital darkroom later.

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

Uh ... of course not ?

The "S" in Leica S stands for "Studio".

The S is the camera for studio and landscape photographers who want to use the most stunning Leica optics. Which are by the way dirt cheap compared to the camera body, just 3k or something per piece.

Also, the S is a medium format camera. Like all medium format cameras, this means its CCD, i.e. it will have more noise than Canikon cameras with CMOS sensors, but it also will probably have better color depth. Or at least thats the strength of medium format cameras.

So what you get out of the S is extreme quality at ISO 100. But dont expect it to be a rugged workhorse like the Nikon D4 or Canon 1D X that still produce something useable in the worst of circumstances.

 

[pixmedic]

They also make this:

Used Leica S2 SLR Digital Camera (Body Only) 10801 B&H Photo

ONLY $15k. ONLY. Better be the best damn camera I've ever used for that much.

Most people wouldn't put it in the same class as a full frame dslr

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

no, that Leica MF DSLR makes 35mm full frame DSLR's look like disposable instant cameras.

 

[Solarflare]

no, that Leica MF DSLR makes 35mm full frame DSLR's look like disposable instant cameras.

Not quite.

The differences are there, but they arent THAT huge: An unfair fight? 35mm vs Medium Format: Nikon D800E and the Leica S2-P ? Ming Thein | Photographer

 

[pixmedic]

no, that Leica MF DSLR makes 35mm full frame DSLR's look like disposable instant cameras.

Not quite.

The differences are there, but they arent THAT huge: An unfair fight? 35mm vs Medium Format: Nikon D800E and the Leica S2-P ? Ming Thein | Photographer

did you notice they did not use a nikon lens for part of that test?
plus, the leica still won on all counts.
price? yea big price difference.
but comparing a D800 to a leica s2 and saying how well the D800 does for the price, is like comparing a D5200 to the D800 and saying how well the D5200 does "for the price"... better is better. its just a matter of whether you can afford "better" or not.