IBIS

[Stripey Badger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M240 which I bought when it came out. I skipped the M10 and have been waiting to see what what its successor looks like. I am 80 and reasonably fit but naturally weight becomes an ever increasing issue or I would be tempted by the new SL2 , but I have four M lenses which is probably one too many anyway.

I think it’s a fairly safe bet that the M11 (?) will have a 47 mp sensor but do you think IBIS might be a possibility? If it doesn’t I shall stay with the 240 for what time's left, but if it does I’ll go for it and chuck the tripod.

[Advertisement]

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

[Luke_Miller]

I certainly don't know the answer, but I believe incorporating IBIS will require a future M11 to be thicker than the M10.  The mechanism necessary to move the sensor to compensate for camera movement requires more space in the body than that of a fixed sensor.  After all the effort to reduce the depth of the M10 body, I would be surprised to see Leica going the other way.

[UliWer]

With the alleged 41 or 47 MP a new M would certainly need a larger battery than the M10, which is already the camera‘s weak spot. I am rather sure that a larger battery would need a body with the dimensions of the M (Typ 240).

So as they squeezed the IBIS in a body a little bit smaller than the original SL I wouldn‘t completely rule out that it would also be possible in an M-body - leaving out some features as video etc. 

Though on the other hand: an M is no camera for long lenses which call for an IBIS. 

[frame-it]

2 minutes ago, UliWer said:

With the alleged 41 or 47 MP a new M would certainly need a larger battery than the M10, which is already the camera‘s weak spot. I am rather sure that a larger battery would need a body with the dimensions of the M (Typ 240).

So as they squeezed the IBIS in a body a little bit smaller than the original SL I wouldn‘t completely rule out that it would also be possible in an M-body - leaving out some features as video etc. 

Though on the other hand: an M is no camera for long lenses which call for an IBIS. 

or they could take the full sensor "cage" from the SL2..and so the m11 would be the same thickness as the SL2 minus the grip

which it already is >

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[darylgo]

Stripey, I have to agree with the consensus here that IBIS won't be incorporated.  The M240 was a big reach for Leica and every  iteration since 2012 has been a move to greater quality and less features.  Like you I was an early adopter of the M240 and use features removed in later models, the body feels a bit dated (but loved) after picking up an M10(P) and experiencing the new shutter mechanism.  The traditionalists are in charge, I couldn't imagine they would ever put up with IBIS, perhaps a civil war in Leicaland 🙂

[UliWer]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb frame-it:

....same thickness as the SL2 minus the grip

Yes:  minus the grip, which carries the battery. That is the part which needs space and the small battery for the M10 is not sufficient.

 

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not sufficient for what?

[scott kirkpatrick]

This comparison is misleading. The register distance (how far the chip sits from the mount) in the M is greater than the register distance in the SL by quite a bit.  By the thickness of the M to L adapter, to be precise.  So there is much less room at the back of an M to put stuff like magnets and elastic suspension for IBIS than is available in the SL, where the chip face is about halfway from the camera back to the mount rim.

Edited November 7, 2019 by scott kirkpatrick

[jaapv]

And if we consider how fully packed the interior of the M cameras is (in the M10 Leica even needed to use a split mother board) it is hard to see where the extra room for IBIS would have to come from. Even digital IBIS would be highly problematic. There is quite some processing involved. The present processor certainly could not handle the additional load and even if replaced by Maestro3, the generated heat would add considerably to the heat dissipation problems.

[UliWer]

vor einer Stunde schrieb jdlaing:

Not sufficient for what?

For the energy needed by a more than 40MP sensor with its processor and/or the IBIS. 

[Einst_Stein]

The advantages of IBIS should be easy to out run the the mentioned disadvantages.

First, the body depth, the SL2 indicates 3mm over SL. This is exactly the same difference between M240 and M10. Currently Leica keeps both body styles indicates thinner body Is not enough to justify loosing of those extra features. I believe the value of IBIS should be much more than the video etc. on M240.

Second, the battery power consumption, using the more advanced semiconductor technology on the sensor-exclusive electronics could reduce the power, something like 15% for every generation, but if a larger battery is still be required, can it be moved to the bottom?  Such as a battery bar like the current battery grip that also helps vertical shooting? 

Fundamentally I don’t think resisting IBIS can last long. 

 

[jdlaing]

56 minutes ago, UliWer said:

For the energy needed by a more than 40MP sensor with its processor and/or the IBIS. 

It’s more than enough.

[UliWer]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

...the generated heat would add considerably to the heat dissipation problems.

You could use the overflow of energy jdlaing found in the M 10 battery for cooling. 

 

[mujk]

I think better high ISO performance would be much more useful than IBIS, and probably also easier to implement in an M body. Being able to use higher shutter speeds in low light would reduce blurriness caused both by camera shake and subject movement. With my other cameras I find IS most useful with long and heavy telephotos, where camera shake is often a bigger problem than subject movement. Of course, if you would want to reduce blur from camera shake but preserve motion blur...

[jdlaing]

On 11/7/2019 at 2:07 PM, UliWer said:

You could use the overflow of energy jdlaing found in the M 10 battery for cooling. 

 

I didn’t say I found an overflow. I simply said it’s more than enough.

Edited November 13, 2019 by jdlaing

[sblutter]

I love my M240 (bought new) & have had a few shots printed large (4x6ft) and they're super crisp (were up-rez'd in PS).

Am I looking forward to an M11 with greater resolution and more accommodating VF.  Don't need much more ISO, but I won't complain if we get 1 or 2 stops

I'll be 1st in line if those wishes come true

(I skipped the M10 due to lack of IQ improvement after examining many DNG samples)

[250swb]

On 11/7/2019 at 2:02 AM, darylgo said:

The traditionalists are in charge, I couldn't imagine they would ever put up with IBIS, perhaps a civil war in Leicaland 🙂

As the pixels increase so does their ability to record even the smallest and briefest movement by the camera. If the M11 doesn't have IBIS the forum will be flooded with people claiming their photos aren't as sharp as they should be and far from being traditionalist hardcore street shooters and suchlike they'll all be running out to buy a tripod.

[jaapv]

Lack of IBIS wiould not be the only problem that might flood the forums:  any misfocus will be more apparent than with lower resolution sensors. A 47 MP sensor will be merciless in showing up a  flawed focusing technique by the user and demand a narrow tolerance for the focus mechanism and calibration. Tweaking the rangefinder once again might be a higher priority than squeezing in IBIS.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[darylgo]

The M10 monochrome could portend  M11issues, no ibis, a good rangefinder.  Is it 41mp good?  

[jaapv]

Yes, but the higher effective resolution of the MM is not achieved  by a higher pixel density, so these aspects will not crop up.