Leica SL (Typ 601) - Mirrorless System Camera Without Compromise

[wildlightphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Doug,

 

Do you want IBIS or would rather not use it? 

 

Rick

 

I'd prefer IBIS though in practice with the a7II subject motion becomes a limiting factor before camera motion.

 

 

 

Doug is the forum resident on this sort of thing.  I hope he reads this and chimes in.

 

 

I can only speak for my preferences and technique.  My technique has evolved as I've added decades; I'm now using a tripod much more than in the past because I am not as steady as I used to be and I'm also much more frequently using a blind with carefully arranged perches, backgrounds and bribes lures.  A tripod makes sense in a blind, hand-held or a monopod does not.  There are many other perfectly good techniques.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[k-hawinkler]

AFAIK an OIS or VR or OSS typically performs pitch and yaw stabilization.

 

For native lenses IBIS also performs roll, X, and Y stabilization.

X and Y stabilization corrections go to zero for infinity shots but can be very important for closeups.

 

There is a difference in IBIS as implemented by Olympus and Sony.

With the Olympus cameras you get to choose either IBIS or the lens stabilization, but not both, or none.

On Sony cameras a native lens with OSS is integrated into IBIS, so only the none-OSS functions are provided by the camera.

For native none-OSS lenses IBIS does all 5-axis stabilization.  Of course, one can also switch IBIS off.

 

Roll stabilization does not require any additional information.

Pitch and yaw require the lens focal length.

X and Y stabilization also require the distance to object, so the focus distance.

 

So, for none-native adapted lenses, like my Leica M and R lenses, IBIS can perform pitch, yaw, and roll, but not X and Y stabilization. 

[Rick]

I'd prefer IBIS though in practice with the a7II subject motion becomes a limiting factor before camera motion.

 

 

Right.  I knew there was a reason why IBIS isn't as big a deal for wildlife photography.  Big heavy tripod and lens is stable.  Bird moving - not so stable.  Thanks for the answering my question.  

 

Next question.  If, money was no object, would you shoot your R 280/4 on this SL or would you pick something else right now?

 

Rick

[wildlightphoto]

 If, money was no object, would you shoot your R 280/4 on this SL or would you pick something else right now?

 

SL/280?  Absolutely yes.  And I'd keep the a7II and Canon FD 300mm f/4 L for backpacking or kayaking or in risky urban areas.

[ramarren]

AFAIK an OIS or VR or OSS typically performs pitch and yaw stabilization.

 

For native lenses IBIS also performs roll, X, and Y stabilization.

X and Y stabilization corrections go to zero for infinity shots but can be very important for closeups.

 

There is a difference in IBIS as implemented by Olympus and Sony.

With the Olympus cameras you get to choose either IBIS or the lens stabilization, but not both, or none.

On Sony cameras a native lens with OSS is integrated into IBIS, so only the none-OSS functions are provided by the camera.

For native none-OSS lenses IBIS does all 5-axis stabilization.  Of course, one can also switch IBIS off.

 

Roll stabilization does not require any additional information.

Pitch and yaw require the lens focal length.

X and Y stabilization also require the distance to object, so the focus distance.

 

So, for none-native adapted lenses, like my Leica M and R lenses, IBIS can perform pitch, yaw, and roll, but not X and Y stabilization. 

 

The Olympus OM-D models E-M5, E-M1, etc, have 100% IBIS and include roll, pitch, and yaw correction for both native and adapted lenses. 

 

As I said, having both OIS and IBIS is a plus only for IS systems designed to take advantage of both, and Sony is the only such implementation there is ... Sony was 100% OIS before they started providing IBIS. Panasonic was too, they have only recently started providing IBIS on selected models. Olympus and Pentax were all IBIS from the start of the IS offerings. 

 

G

 

Oh yes: I'll be shooting the SL with Telyt 250/4 and Soligor 600/8 reflex (nikon mount) as well. I'll be using tripods for these lenses, which I've always done regardless of whether I had IBIS available or not. It's how I get the best results with them. :-)

[k-hawinkler]

The Olympus OM-D models E-M5, E-M1, etc, have 100% IBIS and include roll, pitch, and yaw correction for both native and adapted lenses. 

 

They certainly do.  I have and keep using E-M5, E-M1, and E-M5II.  So, what else is included in their 5-axis version?

 

As I said, having both OIS and IBIS is a plus only for IS systems designed to take advantage of both, and Sony is the only such implementation there is ... Sony was 100% OIS before they started providing IBIS. Panasonic was too, they have only recently started providing IBIS on selected models. Olympus and Pentax were all IBIS from the start of the IS offerings. 

 

G

 

I never had such a camera, but didn't Sony have IBIS in their DSLRs before they came up with the E or FE mount cameras and lenses?

 

 

Oh yes: I'll be shooting the SL with Telyt 250/4 and Soligor 600/8 reflex (nikon mount) as well. I'll be using tripods for these lenses, which I've always done regardless of whether I had IBIS available or not. It's how I get the best results with them. :-)

 

[ramarren]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not sure what you mean, "what else is included?"

 

 

 

Sony bought the Minolta camera division, which already been merged with Konica, and the first Sony DSLRs were rapidly rebranded Minolta models that included IBIS.. But they didn't transfer that technology to NEX, seeking to build the most compact possible bodies, and switched to OIS in that line with their E mount. This also shows their own video bias, to an extent. The A7 system is derivative of the NEX, not the Alpha line, and thus the incorporation of IBIS into A7 grew the cameras and had to accommodate the existing OIS lenses. At least they did something useful with the duplicated IS systems. 

 

But that's enough of Sony technological history for the Leica SL thread on the L-camera forum.. For me, anyway. There'll be a lot more to talk about regarding the Leica SL in about two weeks or so. :-)

[k-hawinkler]

Well, here you go.   

 

A Comparison of How Olympus and Sony’s 5 Axis Stabilization Work

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/12/17/comparison-olympus-sonys-5-axis-stabilization-work/#UlGDRFIVdsedBXZi.99

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/12/17/comparison-olympus-sonys-5-axis-stabilization-work/#.Vjhd4F-oWhQ

 

There ought to be a reason why they call it 5-axis and not 3-axis, don't you agree?

 

 

 

 

[ramarren]

Well, here you go.   

 

A Comparison of How Olympus and Sony’s 5 Axis Stabilization Work

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/12/17/comparison-olympus-sonys-5-axis-stabilization-work/#UlGDRFIVdsedBXZi.99

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/12/17/comparison-olympus-sonys-5-axis-stabilization-work/#.Vjhd4F-oWhQ

 

There ought to be a reason why they call it 5-axis and not 3-axis, don't you agree?

 

Sure. That's a good article and video. 

[wlaidlaw]

That is very interesting and might explain why the IBIS did not seem to work very well with the Leica 80-200 Vario-Elmar R, mounted on my Olympus EP-5 but its own 75-300 lens, stabilises beautifully. You can use the camera hand held at 300mm (600mm EFOV), albeit only in reasonably bright light. 

 

Wilson

[k-hawinkler]

wlaidlaw, on 03 Nov 2015 - 09:09, said:

 

That is very interesting and might explain why the IBIS did not seem to work very well with the Leica 80-200 Vario-Elmar R, mounted on my Olympus EP-5 but its own 75-300 lens, stabilises beautifully. You can use the camera hand held at 300mm (600mm EFOV), albeit only in reasonably bright light.

 

Wilson

 

 

Many thanks Wilson. I am a bit surprised by that.

Doesn't the E-P5 feature the same 5-Axis Image Stabilization as one of the OM-D cameras?  

I forgot which one, but I have all three and could perform the test with either one.  I also have the Vario-Elmar-R 80-200/4.

I never had an image stabilization problem with that lens on any of my OM-Ds or, for that matter, on my Sony A7r2.

 

So, to be sure, today I mounted again the 80-200/4 on my E-M5m2.

I chose 200mm focal length on the lens and also selected 200mm for the stabilization focal length.

Then I switched magnification on at 14x, half-pressed the shutter button to engage 3-Axis Image Stabilization, focused while stabilized, and finally shot a sharp image.  Of course, using a different focal length of the 80-200/4 also necessitates selecting the appropriate stabilization focal length.  As you correctly have pointed out EFOV has been reduced compared to FF, nevertheless the focal lens is still the same as engraved on the lens, so that is what one has to enter for the stabilization focal length.

 

If I may ask, do you do anything differently?  TIA.

 

One more point. X and Y stabilization is only important for close focus shots. Their stabilization contribution goes to 0 for infinity shots.  As the Leica lenses cannot communicate their actual focus distance to the camera, but that would be needed for for X and Y stabilization, the camera has to fall back to 3-Axis Image Stabilization.

 

[wlaidlaw]

Karl-Heinz, 

 

I was using it on a trip to South India in 2013, which is before the firmware was upgraded to avoid the shutter resonance problem, so I am not sure if this was the issue or just the IBIS not working very well with the 80-200 Vario Elmar. The 80-200 also had a problem then with a very loose focus ring, since corrected by Will van Manen. What I was not doing compared with you was focusing with the IS engaged, which would make life much easier. I don't think this is possible with my setup as on the EP-5, a half shutter press cancels the zoom, so you cannot focus with IS and zoom engaged. At this remove, I cannot remember if I had declared the focal length but I suspect as I was changing lenses backwards and forwards, I may well not have done this. All these factors taken together, resulted in some very disappointing shots with the 80-200. On my return, I bought the Olympus 75-300 series II AF lens, which works perfectly every time, without having to dive into the menus and settings to change various things, so I have not gone back to using the Vario Elmar on the Olympus. I may end up using the 80-200 V-E a whole lot more on the SL, dependant on how the zoom/focus peaking "buttongate" gets sorted. 

 

Wilson

[k-hawinkler]

Karl-Heinz, 

 

I was using it on a trip to South India in 2013, which is before the firmware was upgraded to avoid the shutter resonance problem, so I am not sure if this was the issue or just the IBIS not working very well with the 80-200 Vario Elmar. The 80-200 also had a problem then with a very loose focus ring, since corrected by Will van Manen. What I was not doing compared with you was focusing with the IS engaged, which would make life much easier. I don't think this is possible with my setup as on the EP-5, a half shutter press cancels the zoom, so you cannot focus with IS and zoom engaged. At this remove, I cannot remember if I had declared the focal length but I suspect as I was changing lenses backwards and forwards, I may well not have done this. All these factors taken together, resulted in some very disappointing shots with the 80-200. On my return, I bought the Olympus 75-300 series II AF lens, which works perfectly every time, without having to dive into the menus and settings to change various things, so I have not gone back to using the Vario Elmar on the Olympus. I may end up using it a whole lot more on the SL, dependant on how the zoom/focus peaking "buttongate" gets sorted. 

 

Wilson

 

Many thanks Wilson.  Indeed, the Olympus 75-300 series II AF lens, that I also have, works really well.

 

The Sony A7r2 handles third party lenses very well.

As soon as magnification is switched on IBIS is active if it is not completely switched off.

When then half-pressing the shutter button it goes back to normal view, still stabilized. Very nice touch!

After exposure then non-stabilized.

 

In DMF mode with native lenses as soon as one turns the focus ring image stabilization becomes active! √

[wlaidlaw]

 

 

The Sony A7r2 handles third party lenses very well.

As soon as magnification is switched on IBIS is active if it is not completely switched off.

When then half-pressing the shutter button it goes back to normal view, still stabilized. Very nice touch!

After exposure then non-stabilized.

 

In DMF mode with native lenses as soon as one turns the focus ring image stabilization becomes active! √

I think four different camera systems - Leica M/LTM, Leica T/SL, Contax RF and Olympus MFT might be enough for me. 

 

Wilson

[k-hawinkler]

 

 

I think four different camera systems - Leica M/LTM, Leica T/SL, Contax RF and Olympus MFT might be enough for me. 

 

Wilson

 

I have four different ones as well, two we have in common! 

[ramarren]

I think we all have too many ... 

Leica M/LTM, Leica SL/R, Olympus mFT/FT, Nikon F, Hasselblad 500 here. Never mind my Polaroid stuff. '-)

 

Ultimately, I want to drop two of those (H and Nikon) and maybe Olympus too (but I'm pretty attached to that gear). 

[rosuna]

Does the SL have sensor cleaning?

[ramarren]

Yes. Page 278 in the English section of the instruction manual:

 

 

CLEANING THE SENSOR

The camera is equipped with an automatic sensor cleaning function.
Every time the camera is switched on, the sensor unit is subjected to ultrasonic vibrations which removes most of the dust or dirt particles adhering to the sensor cover glass.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[rosuna]

That is great. 

 

The ultrasonic system comes from Olympus, and then Panasonic, very effective... maybe it explains the size of the body.

[ramarren]

I doubt that the sensor cleaning mechanism influences the size of the body. After all, both Olympus and Panasonic have used it in all their FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds cameras, from the littlest pocketable to the biggest pro DSLR. 

 

The size of the SL body was certainly a conscious design choice, seeking for both the structural stability and ergonomic balance required to support use of a broad range of pro-grade lenses, both designed from scratch for the SL and adapted from the S and R camera lines.