pippy Posted February 8 Share #141 Posted February 8 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, Jeff S said: But you wrote that “the essence of 911 driving remains,” which is why I listed aspects that make me disagree. The rear engine design, without modern stability controls and reduced size and weight, etc, was an entirely different experience, and sometimes not for the better without driver training. I agree with you. Personally my own view (and which is shared by almost everyone else I know within the PCGB*) think that Porsche got the 911 series absolutely right in the years betweeen 1969 and 1973. But to debate that point - as I said in post #140 - would end up going so far off-topic you would need a telescope to see the origins... Philip. * Just FWIW I've been a member of the Porsche Club Great Britain since 1994 and was an 'Enthusiast' for many years before then so am quite well acquainted with their output over the years...🙂... Edited February 8 by pippy 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 8 Posted February 8 Hi pippy, Take a look here Why the M needs IBIS. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hdmesa Posted February 8 Share #142 Posted February 8 47 minutes ago, SrMi said: Stefan Daniel addressed the space issue with IBIS. Discussion is here: I’d be all for removing the physical shutter for a A1/Z9 fast stacked sensor that makes it unnecessary. But losing the mechanical shutter on the M might be quite polarizing. Personally I’d prefer the s-i-l-e-n-c-e of a fast electronic shutter over the M11 shutter that sounds like I’m trying to open a bag of potato chips. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 8 Share #143 Posted February 8 22 minutes ago, DadDadDaddyo said: Yes. And that's why any decent implementation of modern stability controls includes a capability to switch it off when it's not what you want. There's nothing wrong with driver training and experience. This is how it should be with IBIS and OIS as well. Auto-anything is best when you can switch it on - if and when you want it - or make it go away when you don't. I guess Image Stabilization might be thought of as a "need" by folks who "need" it, who might feel lost, locked out, even excluded, without it. You need a shutter speed lower than you can hold? Fine. Grab a body that offers IBIS. Really what I'm hearing is that for some folks, IBIS is a requirement for *them. But that doesn't make it a requirement for the M. C'mon. Just practice, ok? You'll get better at hand holding slow shutter speeds with practice. Really. And you'll like it. The 911 got huge and heavy relative to its early predecessors. I’d rather no added M tech, unless size/weight remains constant, or even reduced, and simplicity maintained. And I say this despite my increasing (benign) hand tremors. Simplicity can also mean reducing options, even if they are defeatable. Getting rid of video in the M was an example to my liking. Video mode sometimes pops up inexplicably with my SL2… infuriating. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 8 Share #144 Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, Jeff S said: ...I’d rather no added M tech, unless size/weight remains constant, or even reduced, and simplicity maintained... Might I introduce you to the M-D Typ-262?......😸...... Philip. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DadDadDaddyo Posted February 8 Share #145 Posted February 8 (edited) ...I retract this post. Sorry. It was grouchy. Must have run into a bad oyster. Or a bit of Camembert gone very wrong... ...musta given me the pip. Edited February 8 by DadDadDaddyo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted February 8 Share #146 Posted February 8 1 hour ago, pippy said: Might I introduce you to the M-D Typ-262?......😸...... Philip. Ha! I do, however, like a screen. Not a Luddite, but a fan of elegant design, simplicity, and great ergonomics and viewing. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted February 8 Share #147 Posted February 8 Advertisement (gone after registration) “Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change” - Stephen Hawking 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelu2010 Posted February 8 Share #148 Posted February 8 We don’t know what new technologies will enable the ibis in cameras the size of the M. And maybe Leica can make a special edition pure MD . And then we can see how many of which are sold. leica is living quite good with having different variations of the same body. And if the ibis is integrated in the sensor then all the discussions end. you can always go and get an M10. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 8 Share #149 Posted February 8 (edited) Indeed, the question should not be if but how and when image stabilization will be implemented in a digital M. It is yet incredible that a high res sensor camera like the M11 needs a tripod or rock solid hands to work the same way as a mere film point and shoot from the last century. Edited February 8 by lct Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbyshire Man Posted February 8 Share #150 Posted February 8 (edited) 48 minutes ago, lct said: Indeed, the question should not be if but how and when image stabilization will be implemented in a digital M. It is yet incredible that a high res sensor camera like the M11 needs a tripod or rock solid hands to work the same way as a mere film point and shoot from the last century. It doesn’t. If you shoot at film resolution ie 18mb it’s not different to film. The higher the resolution (this was true for large format film too) the higher the ability to resolve handling and other motion and hence need for stability one way or another. Edited February 8 by Derbyshire Man 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleElmar135mm Posted February 8 Share #151 Posted February 8 vor 10 Stunden schrieb charlesphoto99: Great word. My wife is from Dusseldorf so I'll ask her about it. ... greetings . And have both an "Alt" and no "Kölsch" 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 8 Share #152 Posted February 8 (edited) 12 hours ago, charlesphoto99 said: Here's an idea: how about Leica (and other mfg) stop trying to make 35mm cameras into mini 4X5's? My least used camera is the highest MPixel one. ~25MPixels has often been suggested to be a 'sweet spot' for a FF camera and with very good reason. I am always baffled by the constant chatter about doing things to the M which take away its greatest asset - simplicity. Someone who used an M3 in the 1950s would be able to use most modern Ms without too much problem. Adding stuff like video and IBIS and more is all very well for the spec. hunters, but IMO merely serves to complicate a camera renowned for its simplicity, as of course does packing too many irrelevant MPixels into it. Leica need to understand that the charm and attraction of the M are largely based on its simplicity and absolute ease of operation. It doesn't need more specification but could well benefit from less. Moving it towards ever higher specifications will only serve to show its inability to compete in terms of specification with cheaper and highly capable cameras. The M cannot compete on specification and has to hold its own as a unique, simple and, within its operating parameters, as an exceptionally well designed camera. Edited February 8 by pgk typo believe it or not 5 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 8 Share #153 Posted February 8 3 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said: It doesn’t. If you shoot at film resolution ie 18mb it’s not different to film. The higher the resolution (this was true for large format film too) the higher the ability to resolve handling and other motion and hence need for stability one way or another. Sorry but this technical point of view sounds like an excuse to explain that a superb and expensive camera as the M11 is unable to do simple things like taking high res shots at slow shutter speeds the same secure way as less expensive mirrorless competitors. I did not complain when i purchased the M11 as i knew this flaw but i expected Leica to find a way of fixing it with the M12. Reminds me of the M10 that could not fix the slugginess of the M240 in LV mode. Waiting for the M11 was not a problem for me then but i'm growing old and waiting for the M13 is a perspective i'm not sure i can afford now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbyshire Man Posted February 8 Share #154 Posted February 8 (edited) They only fix it when they have IBIS however it's a matter of physics. Edited February 8 by Derbyshire Man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 8 Share #155 Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Derbyshire Man said: They only fix it when they have IBIS however it's a matter of physics. I wish it would be that simple. All cameras sans IBIS have not this same issue and as Leica said thelselves and has been recalled above, « it isn't ruled out that the image stabilizer could be integrated into the M at some point, for example, if we would do without the mechanical shutter and so the necessary space would be available again ». What i'm reading in this thread makes me fear that Leica did not find the solution for the M12. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen.s1 Posted February 8 Share #156 Posted February 8 An interesting thread. My two cents on the RF and IBIS: An electronic RF and a good IBIS. All the rest can remain like my M10s. I'd even give up the IBIS... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3D-Kraft.com Posted February 8 Share #157 Posted February 8 Sony demonstrates with the A7CR, how small a camera with the (already aged) 61MP sensor, IBIS, EVF, video, contemporary AF etc. can be: https://camerasize.com/compare/#911,885 So if you are looking for these specs, you can save a lot of money. If you want this in the body of an M, this should be no problem. Those who want to stick with the manual RF should think about, if they really need a new camera. Even the M10 already brings the RF concept to it's limit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DadDadDaddyo Posted February 8 Share #158 Posted February 8 (edited) 45 minutes ago, lct said: What i'm reading in this thread makes me fear that Leica did not find the solution for the M12. Well, that's really OK, isn't it? It's not as if image Stabilization is unavailable to us. It's just not currently available in the M. If I'm shooting in a situation in which the choice is between employing Image Stabilization and not getting the shot, of course I'll reach for a body that offers it. It's just that I just do not run into that situation very often. Why? Because I've been shooting in available light for over fifty years. I don't even own a flash. (BTW, does the M need a built-in flash? My phone has a flash. Why doesn't my M?) It's not the M that needs Image Stabilization, it's *today's photographers* that seem to need it. See, I can't quite escape the thought that the net result of *all* cameras *needing* image Stabilization will be that the fine art of holding and using a camera in low light will be lost. It's already lost to a whole generation of photographers who can't imagine working in low light without it. And that's sad. They don't know what they don't know. They don't realize they've lost something, because they never knew it was something they could have in the first place. Apparently it's the camera's job to make sure the shot is steady. Believe me, that's a fundamental rewriting of what a camera must do, as well as a complete recasting of the job that falls to the photographer. This is more than just a cranky old guy yelling, "Get of my lawn!" It's actually a real shame, a genuine loss. But fine, if Leica adds it to the M, great. Huzzah, and all that. Just let me shut it off in the menu, and then let's make a friendly competition out of seeing who will manage the best without it. Edited February 8 by DadDadDaddyo 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted February 8 Share #159 Posted February 8 32 minutes ago, Stephen.s1 said: An interesting thread. My two cents on the RF and IBIS: An electronic RF and a good IBIS. All the rest can remain like my M10s. I'd even give up the IBIS... An electronic rangefinder could be interesting. And it would still be a rangefinder. 😉 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 8 Share #160 Posted February 8 13 minutes ago, DadDadDaddyo said: [...] Just let me shut it off in the menu, and then let's make a friendly competition out of seeing who will manage the best without it. Been there done that already. Sony with IBIS vs Sony w/o IBIS so the winner was... Sony. Give me the same choice Mr Leica please. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.