SL3-S IBIS performance

[deonvnzl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good morning. 

I was curious whether anyone has been able to test the IBIS on the SL3-S side by side with the Lumix S5II or S5IIx? 
Specifically for video (with walking)

The IBIS in the SL2-S is great but I believe, a bit less performant than the lumix cameras. 

 

[CptSlevin]

41 minutes ago, deonvnzl said:

Good morning. 

I was curious whether anyone has been able to test the IBIS on the SL3-S side by side with the Lumix S5II or S5IIx? 
Specifically for video (with walking)

The IBIS in the SL2-S is great but I believe, a bit less performant than the lumix cameras. 

 

5.5 stops for SL2S vs 5 stops of SL3S

It's basically worse

[deonvnzl]

28 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

5.5 stops for SL2S vs 5 stops of SL3S

It's basically worse

I am hoping for a real world example or somebody's personal account. 

[jaapv]

35 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

5.5 stops for SL2S vs 5 stops of SL3S

It's basically worse

Well, I don’t think that half a stop is very relevant. A cup of coffee is far worse. 

[simon_hsn]

After upgrading from the SL2-S to the SL3-S, I’ve definitely noticed some differences—unfortunately, not all of them are positive: The IBIS performance is noticeably worse, which is a real disappointment.

In general, I find the new body design of the SL3(-S) to be a step backward compared to the SL2(-S) for several reasons:

• Grip – It might just be my hand, but many others seem to agree that the grip feels less secure and comfortable.
• Shutter sound – The SL2(-S) had a more refined, high-quality shutter sound, whereas the SL3(-S) feels less premium in this regard.
• Build quality – The SL2(-S) had a more substantial, premium feel, much like how an M-series camera feels more refined than a Q-series. The SL3(-S) lacks that same heft and solidity.
• Tilting screen – While I appreciate the added functionality, the design disrupts the camera’s overall aesthetic, similar to how the Q3’s tilting screen affects its look compared to the Q2.

Overall, my first impression is that newer isn’t always better.

[simon_hsn]

On the positive side, there are several changes I particularly like:

• Buttons on the right-hand side – This improves ergonomics, making operation faster and easier.
• On/Off button functionality – It looks and feels great. I appreciate that a short press puts the camera to sleep and that it provides clear feedback on charging status.
• Top and ISO dial feel – The improved clickiness makes them much more satisfying to operate compared to the SL2(-S).

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally I could not find  sufficient reason to replace my SL2S

[SrMi]

15 hours ago, CptSlevin said:

5.5 stops for SL2S vs 5 stops of SL3S

It's basically worse

It is unclear whether Leica had to use the new CIPA stabilization standard, which was introduced at the end of 2024. The new stabilization numbers are not comparable with the old ones.

[jaapv]

And it is very hard to do a meaningful test as the stability of your hands will be highly variable. 

[simon_hsn]

Don’t overcomplicate it — the body is smaller, and the IBIS is slightly less effective, as confirmed by the official specs.
I’ve been using the SL2-S for the past four years and noticed the difference immediately. No dealbreaker!

[jaapv]

I rarely notice IBiS. But I have rather steady hands. I don’t miss it on my M cameras either. .  I find OIS far more important to my photography   One glass of wine is my IBIS. 🤣

[simon_hsn]

While IBIS is useful in photography, videographers benefit more because handheld shooting is common in video work, and stabilization directly impacts the quality of footage.

For photography, IBIS is great but not a must-have for 90% of use cases in my opinion. 

[BernardC]

IBIS isn't very useful for more advanced video. You get some distracting distortions every time the system re-centers, which is something that "you can't un-see" (as the kids used to say). OIS is a little better, but only if you are reasonably steady to begin with.

[SrMi]

5 hours ago, simon_hsn said:

 

Don’t overcomplicate it — the body is smaller, and the IBIS is slightly less effective, as confirmed by the official specs.
I’ve been using the SL2-S for the past four years and noticed the difference immediately. No dealbreaker!

I doubt you can feel the difference of half a stop if the spec numbers are comparable at all. Of course, the CIPA spec does not always match the reality.

I have not noticed any difference in IBIS effectiveness between SL2-S and SL3-S.

[phojomatic]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

I rarely notice IBiS. But I have rather steady hands. I don’t miss it on my M cameras either. .  I find OIS far more important to my photography   One glass of wine is my IBIS. 🤣

Old joke: A man walks into a pub and says this floor is crooked. The bartender replies, it will look straight when you leave. 
 

Actual question: does anyone know if Ibis stays on anytime the camera is on, or is it just activated when pressing the shutter button? Thx

[simon_hsn]

9 minutes ago, SrMi said:

I doubt you can feel the difference of half a stop if the spec numbers are comparable at all. Of course, the CIPA spec does not always match the reality.

I have not noticed any difference in IBIS effectiveness between SL2-S and SL3-S.

Are you suggesting I should doubt what I feel? Interesting take.

I suppose some people believe what they want to believe. But at the end of the day, it’s Leica that puts the specs on paper—they’re the ones saying it’s worse. And when it comes to video, that difference is undeniable. For photography, the gap might be subtle enough that some won’t notice, but it’s still there.

[simon_hsn]

17 minutes ago, BernardC said:

IBIS isn't very useful for more advanced video. You get some distracting distortions every time the system re-centers, which is something that "you can't un-see" (as the kids used to say). OIS is a little better, but only if you are reasonably steady to begin with.

I generally agree with you, especially when it comes to using wide-angle lenses.

However, I’d add that it depends on the use case. For handheld shots with consistent movement, IBIS can effectively eliminate micro-jitters. The same goes for handheld interview shots—anyone who has used Panasonic’s Boost IS knows what I mean. It’s basically like having a tripod.

[SrMi]

3 minutes ago, simon_hsn said:

Are you suggesting I should doubt what I feel? Interesting take.

Not at all. Your feedback is valued and is one of the data points for people looking at SL3-S. So is mine.

4 minutes ago, simon_hsn said:

I suppose some people believe what they want to believe.

Why is what you feel more valuable than what others feel?

5 minutes ago, simon_hsn said:

Leica that puts the specs on paper—they’re the ones saying it’s worse.

As I wrote, the testing methodology standard for stabilization has changed in the last year. Most cameras launched in 2025 use the new standard, which typically shows fewer stops of stabilizations.

[BernardC]

The CIPA specs are a best-case scenario. It specifically says "up-to" a certain number of stops because that number is only reached at a certain focal length, with vibration at a certain frequency. Those optimal conditions will vary for every camera system and lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[BernardC]

9 minutes ago, simon_hsn said:

However, I’d add that it depends on the use case. For handheld shots with consistent movement, IBIS can effectively eliminate micro-jitters. The same goes for handheld interview shots—anyone who has used Panasonic’s Boost IS knows what I mean. It’s basically like having a tripod.

It's good with micro-jitters because the sensor shouldn't move to its compensation limit. On the other hand, it can ruin a shot with a moving camera when the whole image seems to warp for a few frames at a time, which I find a lot more distracting than a little bit of jitter.