Jump to content
Starwolfy

LEICA, we need IBIS !

Recommended Posts

Guest VVJ

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The simple fact is that the competition is 3 times cheaper and with image stabilization... So yes, I want...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does IBIS require a thicker sensor stack?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not necessarily thicker, but the movement of the sensor and the mechanism to induce it, take up some space.

 

Here is an Olympus IBIS sensor:

 

 

To be fair, it has dust removal as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple fact is that the competition is 3 times cheaper and with image stabilization... So yes, I want...

Which makes it easy to buy the competition additionally for the times you need it...

So I have the CL up to 200 equ. and all routine use, and the GX8 for 200-800 equ. stabilized,  with a DG Summilux 25/1.4 for those handheld cat-in-a-coal-cellar shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many years ago the photographer was the only OIS system available in cameras.

 

Have we all become so lazy and inept that we can no longer take conventional handheld photographs ....... even with the advantage of fast lenses and increasingly high ISO ceilings ?

 

All these threads are full of 'I want', 'I want', 'I want' ......

 

Almost all the situations that you want OIS for are static ...... in which case a bit of thought and improvisation usually will get you down to well below conventional handheld speeds. 

 

OIS is nice, but I'm not going to throw my dolly out of the pram if I can't have it ...... 

 

ps ...... and there will be the same grumbles about the new SL 75/2 and 90/2 lenses ........ moans about no OIS .... but if the lenses had it they would be bigger and heavier .... and then there would be moans about that instead .....

Highlight mine - not for me. I use long lenses for wildlife, only stuffed animals are static; a tripod is often unpractical to useless. Stabilization opens up new possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highlight mine - not for me. I use long lenses for wildlife, only stuffed animals are static; a tripod is often unpractical to useless. Stabilization opens up new possibilities.

 

Highlight mine.  Agreed.  Like using the truck for shelter from rain while the wind is shaking the truck.  Shutter speed 1/125sec IIRC (note the streaks of rain).  Higher ISO & shutter speed would not have shown the rain as well.

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/accipitridae/circus/noharr14.jpg&key=d8b5f351983a766555028b7d4d8e04d18d4b70e1f8ce1f493d2182f253b17936">

 

I was using US$1,200 legacy 500mm lens on a full-frame stabilized camera body.  The equivalent modern lens with optical stabilization from C, N or S is up to US$10,000.  This image, and many others made with this lens, will make a very nice big print.

 

Leica does not make a lens with equivalent field of view for the CL at any price.  IBIS in the CL or SL would allow many to avoid carrying a second (non-Leica) camera (along with its cords, chargers and backups) for long-lens usage.

Edited by wildlightphoto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many years ago the photographer was the only OIS system available in cameras.

 

Have we all become so lazy and inept that we can no longer take conventional handheld photographs ....... even with the advantage of fast lenses and increasingly high ISO ceilings ?

 

All these threads are full of 'I want', 'I want', 'I want' ......

 

Almost all the situations that you want OIS for are static ...... in which case a bit of thought and improvisation usually will get you down to well below conventional handheld speeds. 

 

OIS is nice, but I'm not going to throw my dolly out of the pram if I can't have it ...... 

 

ps ...... and there will be the same grumbles about the new SL 75/2 and 90/2 lenses ........ moans about no OIS .... but if the lenses had it they would be bigger and heavier .... and then there would be moans about that instead .....

 

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 available I'd use the CL more than my Olympus gear. IBIS gives me a confidence to keep my ISO's lower than I would ever do with an M or CL, resulting in cleaner images and more shooting confidence.

 

I totally agree that we should learn great technique before we rely on the crutch of technology. Lord help me if I get another whinge about some so called "pro" complaining about low light AF and blaming the camera when manual focus would be easier and faster, just because he's too lazy to learn. However, once you have the technique technology lets us push the envelope just a bit more.

 

No way I would have shot this at less than 1600 on the CL. But I was confident at 500 on the PenF.

 

PA181282.jpg by Gordon Cahill, on Flickr

 

And out of 70 frames not one had shake.

 

Gordon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

....and because Fujis offer IBIS................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IBIS and weather sealing yes, provided however, that camera and lens sizes and weight remain the same. 

Conclusion: No thanks to IBIS and other bells and whistles, as the CL provides unique IQ/cm/gram when compared to mfts' bloated Swiss army knifes of cameras. Size, weight, UI and superior compatibility with M lenses sold the CL to me. 

Edited by Ecaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....and because Fujis offer IBIS................

Fuji provides stabilization in the form of OIS in their longer lenses. And soon to be announced X-H1 will have IBIS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you wrote (snipped) very many technical challenges to photography have been solved, at least in part, through technology so that new adapters take it for granted. So be it. They are self-identified, secured in their niche, isolated in an aurora of ignorance. For many of us who pursue aged techniques, the shortcomings of photo-phenomena point to the very most important point of the art.

 

 

I find it interesting to avoid the opaque technology; to do the so very radial - look beyond what tech ignores.

 

 

Not many years ago the photographer was the only OIS system available in cameras.

.....

I was still a young man in 1994 when Nikon first introduced VR (Vibration reduction lenses) followed by Canon in 1995. I wish it was "not so many years ago" so I am still a young man. 1994 is 23 years ago.

Why is it that anyone wanting a new technology is considered incompetent in the basic techniques of photography?

There are bells and whistles and there is true beneficial technology - IBIS and OIS are two real benefits

 

For the Archaic photographers who keep complaining about those wanting new technology why do you embrace

TTL metering? 

TTL flash?

Higher resolution sensors than Film resolution?

LCD screens?

Post processing software (shoot slides and you are stuck with your image)?

Histograms? (use your superb talent to judge the exposure)

In camera Sharpening, Contrast, Colour corrections etc etc - did film cameras have any of these? 

Auto Focus?

etc etc

All the above are not new technology????

 

This is a CL forum and it is obvious that CL owners are more technology oriented. And if you are not in the market for a CL then why come here to pour cold water on what CL owners wish for and want? 

 

If you are not technology oriented and have TOTALLY MASTERED the BASIC TECHNIQUES of photography why buy a CL? Buy a FUJi with the ISO, Shutter Speed and Aperture Control all in view - forget what is in the menu and you have your digital Film camera

Does the M262 have these three functions in dials and knobs? If so then there is your answer too.

 

Personally I don't like bells and whistles

Things like Auto focus, IBIS and OIS can assist older photographers with less than perfect eyesight and not so steady hands or users of long lenses or those who don't want to carry a tripod for the weight. 

 

Give an amatuer the best golf clubs and hes still won't beat a pro. Give a pro a choice of golf clubs made in the 1950s and one made in 2018 see which he chooses. I am sure the pro would have Mastered the Basic Techniques of golf and I 'll bet he chooses the latest technology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than arguing with each other, might it not be more constructive to actually ask Leica what their rationale is behind not using in-body IS (which they clearly could have done if they wanted to) and why the range of lenses with OIS is so limited (ie. the SL zooms) ?

 

Considering the price of Leica cameras it clearly cannot be cost, and with the size of the SL it is unlikely to be space. The mount aperture is large on the L series so IBIS should work fine. The technology is not esoteric or difficult.

 

That leaves you with the Leica philosophy of reducing things to what is necessary for photography for 'most people', 'most of the time' ........ not 'everyone', 'all of the time' as attempted by other manufacturers. 

 

Leica has never sold on 'bells and whistles' ..... just basic photography essentials and high image quality. 

 

You may want IBIS ...... but that doesn't mean Leica is going to provide it ....... and if they do it is going to be a minimum of 3 years before the CL is upgraded/replaced, or some other camera currently in development. They appear to have chosen lens based OIS ....... like Nikon and Canon, and as most of the money is in lenses they are likely to continue with this path. I would have thought the chances of IBIS on the SL2 are not great.

 

I am not a luddite and will happily use OIS on the SL zooms ..... where it works exceptionally well. But as far as Leica are concerned I am a realist when it comes to future product expectations and I fear you may be disappointed .... sorry.

Edited by thighslapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was still a young man in 1994 when Nikon first introduced VR (Vibration reduction lenses) followed by Canon in 1995. I wish it was "not so many years ago" so I am still a young man. 1994 is 23 years ago.

Why is it that anyone wanting a new technology is considered incompetent in the basic techniques of photography?

There are bells and whistles and there is true beneficial technology - IBIS and OIS are two real benefits

 

For the Archaic photographers who keep complaining about those wanting new technology why do you embrace

...

 

 

I'm an archaic old fart who was around before TTL metering, TTL flash, etc, existed at all. "Post processing software" wasn't even an idea in anyone's mind until I was in my thirties—it's actually one of the things that I participated in inventing. That said, I don't think anyone who knows me has ever suggested that I'm not "technology oriented" ... I've been labeled a techno-geek most of my life up to the present day, even when it wasn't truly appropriate. I put this up to a total lack of understanding what being a technology-oriented person actually means. 

 

I like what I like because I've found it useful for making my photos, not because it is new or hip, or everyone else has it, or it's just neat. I paid good extra money to get less with the Leica M-D because it focuses the camera on just what works best for me, and I don't use several of its features at that. That said, I love all the features my SL is equipped with and exploit them, when apropos, to get the results I want. 

 

As I've said before, image stabilization, either in-lens or in-body, is great for what it's useful for ... which is not everything but is a certain amount of what I want/need/use it for. I don't mind if they fit it as long as it doesn't ruin the camera in other ways, as so many feature-filled devices are ruined. So many of today's lovely features just get in the way, ultimately, and make it harder to make photographs that matter!

 

So before you yutes go about casting ridiculous hyper-generalizations about us olde folks, perhaps it would be wise to read what we write and actually understand it... If you don't, ask questions.

 

I think I'll go snap a shot or two with my Light L16 camera now... Turns out to be an excellent table top capture camera for a complex setup that needs its ability to shape the focus zone post-exposure.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than arguing with each other, might it not be more constructive to actually ask Leica what their rationale is behind not using in-body OIS (which they clearly could have done if they wanted to) and why the range of lenses with OIS is so limited (ie. the SL zooms) ?

 

You may want IBIS ...... but that doesn't mean Leica is going to provide it ....... and if they do it is going to be a minimum of 3 years before the CL is upgraded/replaced, or some other camera currently in development. They appear to have chosen lens based OIS ....... like Nikon and Canon, and as most of the money is in lenses they are likely to continue with this path. I would have thought the chances of IBIS on the SL2 are not great.

 

I am not a luddite and will happily use OIS on the SL zooms ..... where it works exceptionally well. But as far as Leica are concerned I am a realist when it comes to future product expectations and I fear you may be disappointed .... sorry.

 

 

In-body stabilization isn't OIS.  OIS is Optical Image Stabilization. In the lens.

 

The question to Leica is "how much market share does Leica want?"  Sensor stabilization is rapidly becoming a given in the mirrorless segment of the market.  Leica was slow to the SLR market, slow to adopt TTL metering, slow to adopt AF, slow to the digital transformation, and the market share shows it.

 

Does Leica seriously intend to increase their market share?  If so they'll need to scrap their 3-year (minimum) product cycle and get to work incorporating IBIS in their cameras.  Without this feature Leica doesn't stand a chance of getting my share of the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Doug, Your (and mine

) penchant for long lenses is by no means universal. Let's not fall into the trap of thinking that our needs are universal. After all, Leica has not even released a real long tele solution for the SL, despite the 90-280 which I would rate as a medium zoom; -or the S for that matter. Still, they seem to be happy with the sales.

 To keep up they would need to offer both O.I.S. and IBIS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In-body stabilization isn't OIS. OIS is Optical Image Stabilization. In the lens.

 

The question to Leica is "how much market share does Leica want?" Sensor stabilization is rapidly becoming a given in the mirrorless segment of the market. Leica was slow to the SLR market, slow to adopt TTL metering, slow to adopt AF, slow to the digital transformation, and the market share shows it.

 

Does Leica seriously intend to increase their market share? If so they'll need to scrap their 3-year (minimum) product cycle and get to work incorporating IBIS in their cameras. Without this feature Leica doesn't stand a chance of getting my share of the market.

That sounds perilously close to adopting the "new camera du jour" 9 month cycle of Sony et al ... something which I am violently opposed to, and Leica's CEO has spoken of negatively on several occasions already. It's why those other companies are having such a desperate, difficult time finding profitability, and substantive part of why so many of their products are always half baked.

 

No, the question isn't and shouldn't be "how much market share does Leica want?" The question is, "What kind of a company does Leica intend to be ... a company producing top notch lenses and cameras or a company more concerned with the bottom line than the products they make?" I would much rather the former, the world is full of the latter and they produce an awful lot of often useless crap.

 

The fundamental, technological question is the one which asks, "Why did you choose to go with Optical Image Stabilization rather then In Body Image Stabilization when the choice was available to you?" Just because IBIS is becoming de rigueur for other makers is not a particularly good answer. Both systems work, and both systems have their failings and advantages. Understanding that why, from Leica's perspective, would tell us much more about the company than the trivial answer to "do you want to increase market share?"

Edited by ramarren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds perilously close to adopting the "new camera du jour" 9 month cycle of Sony et al ... something which I am violently opposed to, and Leica's CEO has spoken of negatively on several occasions already. It's why those other companies are having such a desperate, difficult time finding profitability, and substantive part of why so many of their products are always half baked.

 

No, the question isn't and shouldn't be "how much market share does Leica want?" The question is, "What kind of a company does Leica intend to be ... a company producing top notch lenses and cameras or a company more concerned with the bottom line than the products they make?" I would much rather the former, the world is full of the latter and they produce an awful lot of often useless crap.

 

The fundamental, technological question is the one which asks, "Why did you choose to go with Optical Image Stabilization rather then In Body Image Stabilization when the choice was available to you?" Just because IBIS is becoming de rigueur for other makers is not a particularly good answer. Both systems work, and both systems have their failings and advantages. Understanding that why, from Leica's perspective, would tell us much more about the company than the trivial answer to "do you want to increase market share?"

Indeed. If Leica wants to define a core focus for their business then I am fine with it. I don't fault Porsche for not producing a pick up truck (or a racing bike

).

 

However, Leica produces SL and throws a wrench in their M based core focus. What is the core focus? If it includes long lens then I do expect long R lenses to be taken care (and not only new OIS based SL lens).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 back.

Edited by scott kirkpatrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. If Leica wants to define a core focus for their business then I am fine with it. I don't fault Porsche for not producing a pick up truck (or a racing bike

).

 

However, Leica produces SL and throws a wrench in their M based core focus. What is the core focus? If it includes long lens then I do expect long R lenses to be taken care (and not only new OIS based SL lens).

 

 

Well, Porsche now produces four door sedans and SUVs ... so their purity is sullied by producing trucks.

 

Leica concentrated their new technology on the R system for thirty years while the M languished. Just because they put a lot of effort into bringing the M into the digital age doesn't mean it is their "core business" ... There's the S system as well as all the other digital Leicas. The M system is just part of the portfolio.

 

And no one else faults the fact that Nikon and Canon make OIS lenses and non-OIS lenses. I don't actually "expect" Leica to twist the design of every new SL or S to accommodate the legacy R lenses, no matter how wonderful they once were. I do expect Leica to produce, over time, replacements for all those R lenses for the new SL, and to provide as much backward compatibility as they can without degrading the design of the new system.

 

I think they've done an outstanding job of the latter, and I think they will succeed in doing the former over time. It took forty-plus years to build the portfolio of Leica R lenses that exists now ... I hope the SL portfolio moves a little quicker, but it will take time yet—two and a quarter years is not enough.

Edited by ramarren

Share this post


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...