IBIS, lack of, Feedback

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I tried lower resolution a couple years ago but did not see obvious differences. My fix on the M11 so far is to set shutter speeds to 1/(2f)s but better photogs than me here go up to 1/(3f)s or 1/(4f)s.

[Advertisement]

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

[pgh]

My experience is that downsizing a slightly shitty (sorry, shaky) image from 60 mp to 36 or 18 and hoping a bit of blur resolves is not as effective or reliable as just shooting it right in camera at 24 mp. 

YMMV but I keep seeing this touted on the M11 forums and while I can understand the hypothesis it just doesn’t work like that in practice, at least for me.

I’d agree that IBIS isn’t necessarily the best fit if there is an “M” philosophy, but then if there is, I don’t think 60 mp is either. I think you’ve got to pick one.

Or, you don’t have to, but as I said before, having to shoot faster handheld shutter speeds just to keep things kosher also goes against the M ethos, at least to me. This is a very subjective thing, 

[jaapv]

The visibility of motion blur ( and other high-MP errors like for instance purple fringing from sensor blooming are related to pixel size (can the error be recorded within the pixel diameter, thus invisible or larger thus visible) and not to resolution per se, although higher pixel count will automatically create smaller pixels. So it is logical that lowering resolution cannot make errors go away completely as the original pixel size remains unchanged. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Yes. It does. As will the lack of other technologies. leaf shutters, EFCS, IBIS all add to the shooting envelope of a camera.

So does handling. Grips and Thumbies can help. So can a mono or tripod. Filters and flashes.

With any system you select your set of compromises and work within that. Usually though the photographer is a bigger compromise than the camera.

Gordon

[SrMi]

36 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The visibility of motion blur ( and other high-MP errors like for instance purple fringing from sensor blooming are related to pixel size (can the error be recorded within the pixel diameter, thus invisible or larger thus visible) and not to resolution per se, although higher pixel count will automatically create smaller pixels. So it is logical that lowering resolution cannot make errors go away completely as the original pixel size remains unchanged. 

Sensor blooming should not be an issue any longer. Iliah Borg reported that last time he saw it in a sensor was in 2014.

As you downsize, you increase the pixel size a blur that goes across two pixels gets merged.

The common knowledge is that at the same output size, the motion blur is the same regardless of the initial resolution.

Edited May 27 by SrMi

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Sensor blooming should not be an issue any longer. Iliah Borg reported that last time he saw it in a sensor was in 2014.

As you downsize, you increase the pixel size a blur that goes across two pixels gets merged.

The common knowledge is that at the same output size, the motion blur is the same regardless of the initial resolution.

It is. According to Imatest  high-resolution sensors suffer more than lower resolution sensors.increasing the pixel size is physically impossible. You may bin or interpolate but that is not the same. 
 The motion blur is the same but the high resolution sensor can record smaller amounts that would not be recorded on a lower resolution sensor. 

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It is. According to Imatest  high-resolution sensors suffer more than lower resolution sensors.increasing the pixel size is physically impossible. You may bin or interpolate but that is not the same. 
 The motion blur is the same but the high resolution sensor can record smaller amounts that would not be recorded on a lower resolution sensor. 

Can you point me to a test that shows the latest Sony 60MP sensor having blooming? Thanks.

[jaapv]

Read the Imatest site on purple fringing. It is not brand-specific. 

[hdmesa]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

…leaf shutters, EFCS, IBIS…

…Grips and Thumbies… mono or tripod… Filters and flashes…

I just got the M11-P Safari, which is the heavier brass top/bottom plate. Previously with the black M11, I had to keep a minimum shutter speed of 1/250 sec. to ensure a sharp image (any longer shutter time, and I’d have to take multiple shots to ensure one good one). Now I can consistently get sharp shots at 1/60 sec. Might not make such a dramatic difference for everyone, but for me it has.

[adan]

On 5/26/2025 at 2:45 PM, o2mpx said:

Has the absence of ibis been an obstacle?

Not for me.

"Subject movement" is a far more signficant problem in my work than "camera movement," so I need high shutter speeds/ISOs in any case.

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!

[charlesphoto99]

Well, when you try and turn a 35mm camera into a medium format one, this is what you have to deal with. I'm still blown away by how good some of the photos I took with my 13mp Nikon D3 were (esp with Zeiss glass) or the M8. The only reason for more pixels is cropping, which of course is anathema to the Leica ethos as well. 36mp really does seem the sweet spot for 35mm. 

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

Read the Imatest site on purple fringing. It is not brand-specific. 

Well, it is apparently sensor-specific. It is an issue with CCD sensors, but not anymore with the latest CMOS sensors. Nobody has been noticing any relevant blooming in latest FF and MF sensors, AFAIK (sources: Jim Kasson, Iliag Borg, etc).

 

[jaapv]

Yes on CCD it was a lot worse, mainly highlights blooming blue. Purple on the edges of for instance bright chrome and branches against sky is still present -otherwise Imatest would not mention that it is worse on high resolution sensors -there are no high resolution CCD sensors AFAIK. The irony is -the better the lens the more risk there is because of the better edge contrast. At any rate it is easy to distinguish from longitudinal CA. Sensor purple fringing ing has no yellow counterfringe, Longitudinal CA has.

ir is certainly not true that CMOS sensors do not suffer from blooming; they suffer to a far less extent than CCD and there is anti-blooming technology, but modem lenses with extremely high micro contrast and steep transitions can still provoke it, especially on small pixels  An APO lens on an M11 is pushing it 

https://sensor.wiki/cmos-sensor-blooming/

But we are going far OT. There are other threads on the subject. 

[Derbyshire Man]

On 5/27/2025 at 2:35 AM, jakontil said:

Nope and never miss one on M.. i had the X2D with a great ibis..the only thing i miss over it was the ability to shoot handheld at 2s..

Why has it gone?

[jakontil]

8 minutes ago, Derbyshire Man said:

Why has it gone?

I found myself lean more towards 907x 100c which i could pair with my 503cw body seamlessly.. for my studio shoots

[colonel]

On 5/26/2025 at 9:45 PM, o2mpx said:

Has the absence of ibis been an obstacle?

whats ibis ?

[Jeff S]

45 minutes ago, colonel said:

whats ibis ?

In-body-image-stabilization.  Versus OIS, optical image stabilization, in lens. 

[colonel]

6 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

In-body-image-stabilization.  Versus OIS, optical image stabilization, in lens. 

apologies, I was being ironic

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Jeff S]

19 minutes ago, colonel said:

apologies, I was being ironic

Got me…slow morning

[steve edmunds]

get IBIS add some live view take that old silly rangefinder out maybe get some AF in there and bingo you have a camera just like all the others.

a dream come true for many on here. you could still call it an RF camera like the mickey mouse Fuji camera because people these days think that it must be a rangefinder because it looks like one!!