IBIS, lack of, Feedback

[raizans]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The suggestion that a camera is “lacking” or “imperfect” or “could be improved” really hurts some people who spent a lot of money on a camera that is supposedly “the best that money can buy.”

[lct]

9 minutes ago, raizans said:

The suggestion that a camera is “lacking” or “imperfect” or “could be improved” really hurts some people who spent a lot of money on a camera that is supposedly “the best that money can buy.”

Can only hurt people who believe that money can buy perfection 😉

[S Maclean]

11 minutes ago, raizans said:

The suggestion that a camera is “lacking” or “imperfect” or “could be improved” really hurts some people who spent a lot of money on a camera that is supposedly “the best that money can buy.”

True, but the M is far from the best money can buy, technicaly you can get better cameras for less money, and much, much better for more.  The same way a Rolex or even a Patek is not the best watch money can buy if time keeping is the goal.  A 100 dollar Casio G shock is more durable and keeps better time. 

Besides, in the context of this thread, an M with EVF or IBIS won't be any less expensive, nor worse for your money.  Some would argue it would be better, others that it would just be different.  THat's more the argument here, I think.

Edited June 3 by S Maclean

[steve edmunds]

10 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I always find the "I don't need it, therefore no one should have it" arguments a bit baffling. If they can do it without adding size or otherwise compromising, is it just about getting some ego boost that you are part of an elite group that walked uphill to school both ways in the rain every day? The was the same debate as the Q camera with the longer lens. Some people who liked the Q with a 28mm were reacting like you were going to punch their mother in the face by suggesting that it would be nice to have an additional version with a longer lens. The only "loss" they experienced was that some other people might become happy. It honestly speaks a lot about the lack of generosity of spirit that pervades the world these days.

if they can do it great but surely Fuji and Leica optical engineers realised that with IBIS you cannot have such small dimensions in the respective cameras?

[Stuart Richardson]

I would assume it can be done. Look at the A7C or Ricoh GRIII. But it might not be able to be done without completely redesigning the interior of the camera (power supplies, screen assembly, rangefinder, shutter etc), which might mean it would be too expensive to be practical. 

[roma]

I wish they would continue the regular (pure) M line and another line with an EVF and IBIS and put that line in the fat M240 body with even a larger battery. Maybe this would satisfy everyone. I’d have one of each once they became available used 🙂

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 minutes ago, roma said:

I wish they would continue the regular (pure) M line and another line with an EVF and IBIS and put that line in the fat M240 body with even a larger battery. Maybe this would satisfy everyone. I’d have one of each once they became available used 🙂

I had the same idea for the EVF-M. The fatness of my M240 never bothered me. But we are not plenty like this here... I could well be alone 😄

 

[o2mpx]

It felt like Leica broke the tradition and ended the lineage of removable bottom plate with the M10 line. If the M11 is charting new grounds, then Leica should have more latitude in shaping future models. No surprise to Leica what are most discussed features, ibis, EVF etc, and until the millennials and Gen z’s catch on, customer demographics likely lean more to boomers with less than perfect vision, shakier hands, achy shoulders.

Personally for my use case only, will take a 100mp sensor, ibis, EVF any day so that with a couple of lenses, I can crop to the next couple of focal lengths, and carry a light weight kit anywhere. A X2D downsized to a M sized full frame will be perfect with a couple of APO M lenses.

Edited June 4 by o2mpx

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, roma said:

I wish they would continue the regular (pure) M line and another line with an EVF and IBIS and put that line in the fat M240 body with even a larger battery. Maybe this would satisfy everyone. I’d have one of each once they became available used 🙂

Stefan Daniel has repeated in various communications that the RF based M is here to stay.  And that Leica is also open to an EVF-based M, given sufficient demand. Of course there are no guarantees, and conditions and decisions can always change. But it seems clear that we could well have 2 lines, RF and EVF, without yet specifying the details on any potential EVF version.

[Tseg]

10 hours ago, S Maclean said:

True, but the M is far from the best money can buy, technicaly you can get better cameras for less money, and much, much better for more.  The same way a Rolex or even a Patek is not the best watch money can buy if time keeping is the goal.  A 100 dollar Casio G shock is more durable and keeps better time. 

Besides, in the context of this thread, an M with EVF or IBIS won't be any less expensive, nor worse for your money.  Some would argue it would be better, others that it would just be different.  THat's more the argument here, I think.

You are making a lot of assumptions about what you think people want out of things... as well as assumptions about what "better" means.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

10 hours ago, raizans said:

The suggestion that a camera is “lacking” or “imperfect” or “could be improved” really hurts some people who spent a lot of money on a camera that is supposedly “the best that money can buy.”

There’s no such thing as the *best money can buy* in the camera world. 

Gordon

[S Maclean]

43 minutes ago, Tseg said:

You are making a lot of assumptions about what you think people want out of things... as well as assumptions about what "better" means.

Thank You . If that’s the case I stand corrected. Sorry if I have crossed a line or offended anyone. Not my intention.

[roma]

7 hours ago, lct said:

I had the same idea for the EVF-M. The fatness of my M240 never bothered me. But we are not plenty like this here... I could well be alone 😄

 

Well, you’re not alone 😬. I was never bothered by it either and regretted selling mine. 

[ivohula]

On 6/3/2025 at 9:37 AM, raizans said:

The suggestion that a camera is “lacking” or “imperfect” or “could be improved” really hurts some people who spent a lot of money on a camera that is supposedly “the best that money can buy.”

This made me laugh so much that I nearly peed my pants.  The notion that a perfect camera exists and someone would be gullible enough to believe it and spend the money to get it is as far fetched as believing that your music life and career would improve if only P Diddy became your best friend. 

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, ivohula said:

This made me laugh so much that I nearly peed my pants.  The notion that a perfect camera exists and someone would be gullible enough to believe it and spend the money to get it is as far fetched as believing that your music life and career would improve if only P Diddy became your best friend. 

I read this yesterday:

"

If the best camera took the best photo , the best typewriter would write the best novel. 
Ara Güler , 
Turkish photographer .

"

[pgh]

7 hours ago, Corius said:

I read this yesterday:

"

If the best camera took the best photo , the best typewriter would write the best novel. 
Ara Güler , 
Turkish photographer .

"

That quote sounds nice and Ara is a legend but the substance of this quip falls apart on scrutiny. 

The photograph itself very much does bear the signature of the equipment it was made on. It is a technical artifact. In some respects the best print, at least in terms of resolution, is possible only with the best equipment. “Best” is subjective with photography but the point is that the tool actually does leave its mark. 

A novel written by hand or on google docs or on the best or worst typewriter easily accommodates the form the book designer imposes on it and the words that make the story remain true regardless. 

[DadDadDaddyo]

A typewriter with auto focus would have been extremely helpful to me in college ...

[Planetwide]

Let's face it, the M system as it is, is a low growth proposition for Leica. The Sony A7CII and Fuji offerings are eating Leica's lunch. Yes, I know, "it's not a Leica" and "the M is so much better in the hand", but new buyers just don't usually get it... Instead, they are opting for the Sony's, Ricoh's and Fuji's. The A7C series has been a huge hit for Sony, and for that matter, the Q series has been a huge hit for Leica - so the writing is on the wall. Naturally, Leica, just like Harley, will not abandon their core consumer, but and its a big but, failure to innovate in a way that new consumers want, will leave Leica where Harley is today - in trouble.

A digital M makes total sense. It needs to be all the things that people want; light weight, capable (60mp), and preferably with IBIS. 

Edited June 5 by Planetwide

[FarbSpieler]

On 5/31/2025 at 6:53 PM, pgk said:

This comment about cropping is suspiciously like it might have sounded if a bunch of f/64 photographers had beers together and mused about why anyone would ever possibly need to crop. If they could just use their equipment properly and frame correctly in the first place there’s no need!  These newfangled lazy folks and their desires to make everything easier, ugh, they’re not real photographers. [😁]

The analogy misses the point entirely.

This isn’t a debate about whether IBIS is useful in general. Of course it is. It’s standard in almost every modern camera, and for good reason.

But the Leica M is not every modern camera. It’s about simplicity distilled to its purest, direct control, and staying out of the photographer’s way.

So no, it’s not about resisting progress for the sake of it. It’s about preserving a tool that exists precisely because it doesn’t follow the crowd.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

31 minutes ago, FarbSpieler said:

The analogy misses the point entirely.

This isn’t a debate about whether IBIS is useful in general. Of course it is. It’s standard in almost every modern camera, and for good reason.

Ummm. It was tongue in cheek but there again, I do have cameras with IBIS but don't actually find it either particularly useful or effective. Photography is not about tech working for every situation, its about using tech when its needed. Sometimes it isn't. And no, I won't be buying an M body with IBIS because I don't need it nor do I want it.