o2mpx Posted June 18 Author Share #201 Posted June 18 Advertisement (gone after registration) On 6/12/2025 at 12:07 PM, JNK100 said: And yet....... Fuji launch the 100RF without ibis..... I read this and other 2 threads (The M11 is actually a great camera!)(How many of you are happy with their M11-D ) with a takeaway that ibis didn't seem to have hindered our liking of the M, and yet the GFX100RF has been criticized for not having it. Instead of adding a Q3 43 to complement the Q2, decided to add the Fuji instead. As mid aperture landscapes are majority of what I shoot, missing ibis hopefully wouldn't be a big issue. Still waiting on news about the next M as likely will add a 60mp M11-D (or M11-V?) to the M10-R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 18 Posted June 18 Hi o2mpx, Take a look here IBIS, lack of, Feedback. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jjroroek Posted June 19 Share #202 Posted June 19 of course is is a dealbreaker. i switched from de m10-r were the lack of IBIS was already was an issue. i have now a q3 28 and i can easily shoot handheld at 1/15 or sometimes even at 1/8 . Compared to the m11 you need to shoot at 1/125 to get the same sharpness. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted June 19 Share #203 Posted June 19 (edited) 15 hours ago, o2mpx said: I read this and other 2 threads (The M11 is actually a great camera!)(How many of you are happy with their M11-D ) with a takeaway that ibis didn't seem to have hindered our liking of the M, and yet the GFX100RF has been criticized for not having it. when some people don't want to change their workflow because of higher MP, and want to use a 60mp m11 like an m3 at 1/15th, then they need IBIS Edited June 19 by frame-it 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 19 Share #204 Posted June 19 People needing image stabilization want to use their M11 like an M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M4-2, M4-P, M6, M7, M8, M9, M10 & M240, i suspect. The relevant question is not if but how and when this necessary step will happen IMHO 😎 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tseg Posted June 19 Share #205 Posted June 19 Option B: M12T - M12 with built in tripod. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleElmar135mm Posted June 19 Share #206 Posted June 19 vor 12 Minuten schrieb Tseg: Option B: M12T - M12 with built in tripod. ... she is coming 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! 2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/421568-ibis-lack-of-feedback/?do=findComment&comment=5820417'>More sharing options...
ravinj Posted June 19 Share #207 Posted June 19 Advertisement (gone after registration) Lack of IBIS is not a problem until you try a camera with IBIS. With that out of the way, my experience with M11 was that I able to shoot at 1/f shutter speed upto 50mm with no issues. At 90 or 135, lack of IBIS was a deal breaker for me as I don't like raising the ISO to compensate for lack of IBIS. IBIS greatly expands the shooting envelope - having experienced the benefits of IBIS on SL2, A7II, X2D and Q3 28 / 43, I can't go back. I recall shooting with the R 180 APO Elmarit adapted on the Sony A7II years ago in the Grand Canyon - shooting handheld with this lens was an eye opener and impossible without IBIS. I never carried tripods after that. 6 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 20 Share #208 Posted June 20 22 hours ago, ravinj said: IBIS greatly expands the shooting envelope - having experienced the benefits of IBIS on SL2, A7II, X2D and Q3 28 / 43, I can't go back. The Q platform uses OIS, not IBIS 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
o2mpx Posted June 20 Author Share #209 Posted June 20 The other variable to look at is what trade offs in dynamic range etc etc would higher iso be bringing with current gen of sensors. It might not be a case of low light shooting, it could be daylight photos either with a 135apo telyt or a 90elmarit with the 60mp or if the m-12 has an even higher resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
monem Posted June 25 Share #210 Posted June 25 They say it is nice to have but not necessary and that they don't miss it ! , well I say it is the difference between shooting at ISO 1600 instead of 100 in most situations not just landscape, people, or street photography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted June 26 Share #211 Posted June 26 14 hours ago, monem said: They say it is nice to have but not necessary and that they don't miss it ! , well I say it is the difference between shooting at ISO 1600 instead of 100 in most situations not just landscape, people, or street photography. As several have said, the subject's motion blur may require a faster shutter speed anyway (ISO 1600 instead of ISO 100). However, there are plenty of subjects that have little or no motion, so IBIS would allow much larger exposures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwidad Posted June 30 Share #212 Posted June 30 On 6/19/2025 at 5:40 AM, frame-it said: when some people don't want to change their workflow because of higher MP, and want to use a 60mp m11 like an m3 at 1/15th, then they need IBIS Complete codswallop… don’t pixel peep at 400% I love folks claiming 1/15th on an m3 as being sharper than an m11. If you enlarge that 35mm film to a reasonable size, say 11x17 and then compare to an m11 there will be little difference. is the limits of resolution of a summicron stopped down going to make the 35mm better? Not really, the m11, sure. But at normal viewing sizes ie not pixel peeping when probably not. So pixel peeping is your life get a Sony. If taking pictures viewed for everything else I would stick with Leica! My problem with IBIS in my workflow is it doesn’t freeze my grand kids 🙂 (ask my sl2 about that) I enlarge shots to larger than 16x20 all the time and can’t say that unless I put a loupe on the print they lack sharpness but they are not at pixel peeping critical focus. ‘Fraid I don’t get that out of Ektar on my m6 but at 8x10 there not a lot in it I need to find the Leica book about proper viewing distance of prints based on enlargement size and focal length used , interesting read! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted June 30 Share #213 Posted June 30 9 minutes ago, kiwidad said: Complete codswallop… don’t pixel peep at 400% I love folks claiming 1/15th on an m3 as being sharper than an m11. If you enlarge that 35mm film to a reasonable size, say 11x17 and then compare to an m11 there will be little difference. is the limits of resolution of a summicron stopped down going to make the 35mm better? Not really, the m11, sure. But at normal viewing sizes ie not pixel peeping when probably not. So pixel peeping is your life get a Sony. If taking pictures viewed for everything else I would stick with Leica! My problem with IBIS in my workflow is it doesn’t freeze my grand kids 🙂 (ask my sl2 about that) I enlarge shots to larger than 16x20 all the time and can’t say that unless I put a loupe on the print they lack sharpness but they are not at pixel peeping critical focus. ‘Fraid I don’t get that out of Ektar on my m6 but at 8x10 there not a lot in it I need to find the Leica book about proper viewing distance of prints based on enlargement size and focal length used , interesting read! i think you have replied to the wrong person.. read the whole thread and see the context of my reply. whatever Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwidad Posted June 30 Share #214 Posted June 30 (edited) 10 hours ago, frame-it said: i think you have replied to the wrong person.. read the whole thread and see the context of my reply. whatever Unless you relied with something that doesn’t mean what it says it was! Cannot compare film and digital output this way! Edited June 30 by kiwidad 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted June 30 Share #215 Posted June 30 34 minutes ago, kiwidad said: Cannot compare film and digital output this way! that's exactly what my original post meant Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now