Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] S2 vs. 645D
From: hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 11:07:37 +1000
References: <2ED3B651-E991-4923-8FC6-94604F3FDEAA@me.com> <765078634.4397831330993972405.JavaMail.root@dsmdc-mail-mbs12> <20120305194535.6ccf7584@linux-pfy5.site>

An attractive entry into 'medium format' digital at a much better price
point, no doubt.

An interesting facet of the use of legacy lenses in all of these sytems is
that the sensor can un-mercifully record any limitations in the older
designs. On the other side of the balance unless everything is perfectly
aligned the best lenses can reveal any limitations of the system too. A
local Hasselblad rep told me that they prefer their current closed system
(and raw format) as it gives them better control.
Back in Solms, the chief optical department guy Peter Karbe, has said that
their S lenses are the best they have ever designed and they can outresolve
their next generation  (30x45) sensor as well.

Cheers,
Geoff
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman



On 6 March 2012 10:45, Phil Forrest <photo.forrest at earthlink.net> wrote:

> I always appreciate any system where the manufacturer allows the use of
> legacy glass. Leica, Nikon (for the most part), Pentax, Sony (Minolta
> lenses to some extent.)
>
> I think the pentax 645d is a great step forward.
>
> Phil Forrest
>
>
>


Replies: Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
In reply to: Message from s_gregory1 at me.com (Scott Gregory) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
Message from grduprey at mchsi.com (grduprey at mchsi.com) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
Message from photo.forrest at earthlink.net (Phil Forrest) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)