Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 147
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have owned and used many cameras with IBIS and similarly with OIS. Image stabilization is lovely stuff ... for what it is actually designed to be useful for. Which is not everything ... Image stabilization is designed to extend and improve on the hand-holdability of long lenses in good light, not to extend hand-holdability of all lenses in bad light.    The SL90-280 lens's OIS is absolutely excellent for this purpose throughout its range since it is a tele to long-tele lens. The SL24-90 lens

And we could be still shooting film or painting glass plates......   People argue like crazy over sensor resolution and stuff when keeping a camera steady would probably yield a bigger IQ improvement over a resolution bump 90% of the time. IS tech is established and available. I've heard of the arguments about IQ loss from moving sensors and lens elements but camera movement probably robs more people of more resolution than any other short coming. I can live without it too but if it were avail

Look back a few pages at Jaap's picture of the IBIS unit from an Olympus E-M1 or E-M1.2.  It's pretty big, and only has to provide room for a M43 sensor to move around.  My E-M1 is 39 or 40 mm thick, and the CL is 30 mm thick (measuring across the base, including the thickness of the LCD in back).  So, yes, IBIS costs as much as a cm in extra thickness.  Remembering how hard Leica worked to take 7 mm in thickness away from the M240 in the M10 redesign, it will be hard for them to add thickness b

Posted Images

If I need IBIS I take another camera that has it; instead of attempting to adapt the tool to the job, I take the tool that is suitable...

Having said that, I do think it would be a useful addition, provided it does not bloat the camera.

 

It would be more useful to request lenses with OIS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any reason why you don't want IBIS other than the fact that tech is not available to Leica. All long R lenses will benefit. I have been able to shoot 28mm at 1/4 sec, 135 at 1/15 and 180x2 at 1/80 with Sony APS-C (see CL vs A6500 thread).

 

Since backward compatibility is Leica's theme, it makes more sense to have IBIS in body than OIS in lens. Combo is even more welcome. Why not.

 

I will assume that Leica is not anti IBIS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However s

 

 

Yeah the lack of stabilization (among other things like the slow zooms and poor video) is what ultimately held me back from converting from Fuji. Instead I sold the CL. Hopefully we'll get IBIS with the next gen CL.

Well, IBIS is certainly an argument. 

However, "slow zooms" is not, IMO.

A fast zoom is a bit of a beast, which I will gladly sacrifice on the altar of weight and size (and price). You cannot have it all: compact, light, fast, high image quality, zoom and affordable. I am perfectly happy to have to revert to a prime for a really fast lens. -But Leica needs to offer one.

Poor video, well, it depends. A camera like this, I regard it as a notebook. Leica does so as well, as evidenced by the lack of an external microphone port and HDMI port.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only, and strictly only, if it can be done with no increase in size and weight. 

Certainly, and I guess that that is the rub for the CL. IBIS does take space and adds components. However, the SL has no excuse...

Link to post
Share on other sites

However s

 

 

Well, IBIS is certainly an argument.

However, "slow zooms" is not, IMO.

A fast zoom is a bit of a beast, which I will gladly sacrifice on the altar of weight and size (and price). You cannot have it all: compact, light, fast, high image quality, zoom and affordable. I am perfectly happy to have to revert to a prime for a really fast lens. -But Leica needs to offer one.

Poor video, well, it depends. A camera like this, I regard it as a notebook. Leica does so as well, as evidenced by the lack of an external microphone port and HDMI port.

The combination of slow zooms and lack of IBIS is the real issue. Leica gives us neither which greatly handicaps the system's versatily. Alot of us would love to ditch our Fuji/Sony/Canikon gear and consolidate to Leica completely but they keep skimping on key features which is quite frustrating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The combination of slow zooms and lack of IBIS is the real issue. Leica gives us neither which greatly handicaps the system's versatily. Alot of us would love to ditch our Fuji/Sony/Canikon gear and consolidate to Leica completely but they keep skimping on key features which is quite frustrating.

That is certainly true, especially over, say, 55 mm. However, I do think it is not skimping but a size/space issue.  I can, at least, understand that -which is not the same thing as liking it

-, as I can understand the constraint on lens speed with the zooms.

That the 55-135 has no O.I.S. is something I cannot understand, though

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought relatively slow, high quality compact lenses with a marginally bigger body with OIS would be the best compromise for a compact system .... as Olympus has shown. 

 

Leica does appear to be an incremental one step at a time company ..... everything appears eventually ..... it's just slooooowwwwww........ 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is certainly true, especially over, say, 55 mm. However, I do think it is not skimping but a size/space issue. I can, at least, understand that -which is not the same thing as liking it

-, as I can understand the constraint on lens speed with the zooms.

That the 55-135 has no O.I.S. is something I cannot understand, though

You're right, some of Leica's decisions are hard to understand. There's not much of a size/weight penalty for integrating IBIS into a APSC sized body as we've seen with the A6000 series. I would have gladly payed another 500 USD for that feature alone. It's 2018 and we have still no option of stabilizing M lenses on a Leica body.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, given that we have had no way of stabilizing M lenses since 1954, I cannot see that as a serious problem. The issue is with the longer zoom lenses.

 

 

It would be great if people would learn to speak for themselves and not presume they have the right to speak for others.

Edited by wildlightphoto
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...