Aptus 5 Announced

[Doug Dolde]

http://www.leaf-photography.com/updates1009-en.html

[Thom Bennett]

The price points on these are getting affordable. When we bought a Valeo 17 five years ago it was $17K. Still working fine, too.

[Ed Richards]

The purported 12 stop range in pretty interesting.

[Matus Kalisky]

... wondering how does this compare to Leica S2 ...

[Doug Dolde]

... wondering how does this compare to Leica S2 ...

Instead of wondering why not do a little research and find out.

[r.e.]

I think that Matus was just raising an intriguing question.

They are both new products. As far as I know, nobody has at this point seriously tested either one of them, certainly not comparitively.

In the case of the S2, there is a reasonable argument that the future of Leica depends on this camera. It is very unclear whether the two other cameras that Leica announced at the same time will find significant market acceptance. As someone who was on the verge of buying an M9, I am now on hold due to issues that are arising about the camera's capabilities in relation to the price - not the same issues as with the M8, but significant issues nonetheless. I think that it is fair to say that the M9, for reasons having to do with its ISO capabilities, will be rejected by almost all professional photographers, which means that the buyers will be amateurs who are prepared to spend US$7,000 on a camera that won't perform optimally over ISO 400, and maybe not perform acceptably, in comparison with Nikon and Canon cameras costing a good deal less, beyond ISO 800.

The S2 can succeed only if professionals buy in, but it is expensive; and for its part, Leaf appears to be bringing down the cost of entry into medium format digital.

Matus's is a fair - indeed interesting - question, but not one that will be answered until reports emerge from real world testing, and from thorough analysis of the S2 "system" - for that is what it is, not just a one-off camera, but a system.

There is going to be a lot of discussion about both products over the next few months, and I think that Matus is dead on when he says that part of that discussion is going to be about the S2 in relation to the new Aptus.

[mikeber]

1) The Aptus 5 is only 22M and is based on older technology. (The Hasselblad line doesn't include 22M anymore, that's why the Aptus price is low). When Sony offers their alfa 850 with 24M, questions will be asked if the difference in price is justified.
2) Leica is gambling on the S2, but they are also fighting an uphill battle, since they are a newcomer to Medium Format and to the digital worlds. Their sensor has more then this Aptus, but the price is also much higher. The S2 lenses are also all new and other manufacturers don't have anything for this camera. So for the pro who chooses it, it means everything from ground up.
3) Maybe not for this forum, but I don't understand what the previous poster wants from M9. Personally, I wouldn't buy such product in its first year, but when did Leica promise high ISO performance? I follow discussions on several forums and can't recall anyone predicting high ISO performance with M9, so why the disappointment?
Currently AFAIK no manufacturer offers any 20MPix camera with high ISO performance. None. I bet the Leica S2 will also come short in this respect.

[r.e.]

Mikeber,

The point of my post was to suggest that Matus was raising an interesting question and that the response - "Instead of wondering why not do a little research and find out." - was perhaps a little simplistic.

My comments on the announcement of the S2 and the related announcement of the M9 were intended to expand on why I think that Matus's question is a good one. My basic point - that Leica is gambling plenty on this camera - is apparently a view that you share. As part of expressing that view, I suggested that in the professional market the M9 is DOA. Beyond that, I agree, this is not the right place to get into a discussion about the M9. If you want me to respond to the question that you raise in your third paragraph, feel free to send me a personal message.

[Daniel_Buck]

22mp is plenty of resolution to make decent quality 11x14 prints! I bet it would be fun to use! Still a little to expensive for me though.

[mikeber]

22mp is plenty of resolution to make decent quality 11x14 prints! I bet it would be fun to use! Still a little to expensive for me though.

I agree about the 22mp being sufficient for prints even beyond 11x14. I saw 20x24 enlargements from an older Hasselblad digital back that were just great. However, the question is why use a MF camera with its limitations and hefty price tag, when you can get 24mp in a smaller, convenient, user friendly package with a great assortment of lenses, for only a fraction of the price.
Some people insist that there are no differences between images from 35mm DSLRs and MF, but I disagree. My subjective feeling is that I there are. Question is if it's worth the price.