tlitody
Well-known
RF cameras are predominantly hand held and I don't care how still you think you can hold a camera, YOU CAN'T. But you can hold it still enough for your own sharpness criteria and that is the difference. For some it's good enough and for some it isn't. So enter IS. I think its definitely a bonus for low light photography, totally unecessary for tripod photography except in a storm and probably not necessary for general daylight photography, especially moving subjects such as in street photography.
So basically I see the only benefit for low light photography and for me that would be a great help.
It may well be cheaper to implement the now tried and tested IS technology rather than develop much more expensive sensors with increased ISO speeds.
But I don't think it will happen because the body has already been designed and will likely stay that way. But maybe not. Time will tell.
So basically I see the only benefit for low light photography and for me that would be a great help.
It may well be cheaper to implement the now tried and tested IS technology rather than develop much more expensive sensors with increased ISO speeds.
But I don't think it will happen because the body has already been designed and will likely stay that way. But maybe not. Time will tell.
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Check for yourself: Put your camera on 1/8 of a second or so, take a picture with moderate camera shake, measure the camera shake in the final picture. We're talking about a few pixels, well in the sub-millimeter range. So the thing with the shifted microlenses would be a non-issue as well. We're talking about IS in x-y direction only, so register distance is irrelevant to the subject at hand, too.
What is becoming obvious once more, however, is that Leica people seem to be particularly averse to change, usually before considering it. Wasn't there the same kind of reaction when they introduced things such as the moderately higher M6TTL, or exposure automation on the M7? And these aren't even the most prominent examples.
j j
Well-known
Useful technology. It is very handy to have a camera that enables sharper pictures in duller conditions. I wish I had IS in my rangefinder so I could have used it inside a wonderfully dim Welsh church last week instead of switching to a DSLR for the indoor shots.
But if Leica decides to introduce IS it will not be from demand by Leica users. This is film loading and exposure meters revisited and we are talking about the same company that deliberately made battery and memory card changes awkward to please its customer base. Not a dig, by the way, just an observation. Whatever makes you happy.
JJ
PS Had to laugh at why have a bigger camera when I can carry a tripod. Lovely!
But if Leica decides to introduce IS it will not be from demand by Leica users. This is film loading and exposure meters revisited and we are talking about the same company that deliberately made battery and memory card changes awkward to please its customer base. Not a dig, by the way, just an observation. Whatever makes you happy.
JJ
PS Had to laugh at why have a bigger camera when I can carry a tripod. Lovely!
jarski
Mentor
Last edited:
The amount of fine detail that the M8 and M9 can capture is amazing, but the consequence is that camera shake is therefore more likely to limit sharpness. And the small sensor size means that the effects of shake are magnified in viewing and printing. It's not only low light, but any time other parameters result in a slower shutter speed... and as mentioned it's a real problem for those with a bit of hand tremor.
I have a couple of Pentax dSLRs of compact dimensions which feature body IS and dust removal. When the camera is turned on, I can feel a little vibration as the sensor does its dusty dance for a clean start. I don't see any reason this technology wouldn't be equally beneficial on the DRF.
Better dust/moisture sealing is a current trend in the right direction too, IMO. But sealed lenses are usually internal focus designs, are they not?
I have a couple of Pentax dSLRs of compact dimensions which feature body IS and dust removal. When the camera is turned on, I can feel a little vibration as the sensor does its dusty dance for a clean start. I don't see any reason this technology wouldn't be equally beneficial on the DRF.
Better dust/moisture sealing is a current trend in the right direction too, IMO. But sealed lenses are usually internal focus designs, are they not?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
cidereye
Film Freak
No, surely the user of such a high end camera should be capable of holding it steady and knowing how low a shutter speed he/she can hold it at - photography is becoming dumbed down enough as it is without such "gimmicks" being added to a Leica M. What next? Sinar using IS ?? Come on! 
cidereye
Film Freak
tlitody
Well-known
And now ask yourself why Leica is still around as an independent company...
Read their marketing literature and think about who that type of speak appeals to. There you will find your answer. It helps if you have some experience of German culture first hand as that has a lot to do with it.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Yes? And? I have read Leica marketing since 1970 and have lived in Germany for years. Does that exclude all international Leica buyers? Does the fact that I read Goethe when I was 15 make me buy Leicas?
tlitody
Well-known
German culture has a strong element of wanting to be the best and to own the best and to show off the best. That's not exclusive to Germans but I'd say it is more prevalent in Germany than other European cultures except maybe Italy. Nothing but the best will do. That is the ethos of the company and it's highly sucessful in marketing that philosphy to Germans which keeps it in business as an independant company. It's not mainstream enough to appeal to the mass marketers which makes it's an unlikely target for takeover by bigger companies.
gavinlg
Mentor
I personally really like in-body IS but wouldn't particularly want it in an m9.
The reason M digitals are so nice is because they're a camera with what you need and nothing else. There's no bull**** about them. I look at the new canon and nikon pro dslrs and you've got intelligent highlight modes, a million different AF modes and settings, quiet and loud modes, about 100 different ways to configure the buttons, reverse settings, software banks etc.
Don't get me wrong they're formidable tools, but the m9 is so desirable in that it's like a lotus elise or m3 csl in comparison to something like a lexus shoebox suv filled electronic crap you've never dreamed of (automatic reverse parking, electronic lifting steering wheel when you take the key out, about 10 different ways to configure the park lights). One tries to do everything for everyone, the other is a focussed, hardcore, stripped down joy machine.
The reason M digitals are so nice is because they're a camera with what you need and nothing else. There's no bull**** about them. I look at the new canon and nikon pro dslrs and you've got intelligent highlight modes, a million different AF modes and settings, quiet and loud modes, about 100 different ways to configure the buttons, reverse settings, software banks etc.
Don't get me wrong they're formidable tools, but the m9 is so desirable in that it's like a lotus elise or m3 csl in comparison to something like a lexus shoebox suv filled electronic crap you've never dreamed of (automatic reverse parking, electronic lifting steering wheel when you take the key out, about 10 different ways to configure the park lights). One tries to do everything for everyone, the other is a focussed, hardcore, stripped down joy machine.
barnwulf
Well-known
It depends on how Leica wants to go. If they are trying to boost pro sales or even for those that use longer focal length lenses or slow shutter speeds then maybe it would make good business sense to do it. I don't really want it on my camera since I shoot mainly wide angle anyway. I really don't need it and probably wouldn't even use it if I had it.
ampguy
Mentor
Hi Keith
Hi Keith
There are quite a few techniques out, both mechanical and digital and for lenses and bodies. Some methods for p&s simply bump up the ISO and call that image stabilization (Fuji).
The in-body mechanical type known as SteadyShot or Sensor Shift uses gyroscopes to keep an image on-the-plane, when quick movements jar the sensor - like a finger press, allowing a couple stops slower shutter when shooting a static subject handheld.
Just google "how does still image stabilization work?" and you will come across some great reading.
Hi Keith
There are quite a few techniques out, both mechanical and digital and for lenses and bodies. Some methods for p&s simply bump up the ISO and call that image stabilization (Fuji).
The in-body mechanical type known as SteadyShot or Sensor Shift uses gyroscopes to keep an image on-the-plane, when quick movements jar the sensor - like a finger press, allowing a couple stops slower shutter when shooting a static subject handheld.
Just google "how does still image stabilization work?" and you will come across some great reading.
aizan
Mentor
popeye
Established
Way fokken ay!
gavinlg
Mentor
I've owned an Olympus e-3 with in body stabilization and several canon L zooms with IS, and I know how good it is, and how well it works.
I still wouldn't really want it in a m9 body. With an m9 you can handhold at lower speeds than an SLR anyway for the reason that it's better to hold and that it doesn't have a mirror. 1/8th with a 35mm lens should be fine with an m9 if you have good technique.
Your argument would be (as I see it) like a car manufacturer trying to tell me that it's better to have traction control in my sports car - "it isn't there when you don't need it, but when you do it'll help you out." When I drive my sports car I want to be driving something that is a razor sharp instrument that will do nothing to dull my experience of driving. IS doesn't exactly dull the experience of taking pictures, but where do you draw the line with what makes a digital M an M camera?
I still wouldn't really want it in a m9 body. With an m9 you can handhold at lower speeds than an SLR anyway for the reason that it's better to hold and that it doesn't have a mirror. 1/8th with a 35mm lens should be fine with an m9 if you have good technique.
Your argument would be (as I see it) like a car manufacturer trying to tell me that it's better to have traction control in my sports car - "it isn't there when you don't need it, but when you do it'll help you out." When I drive my sports car I want to be driving something that is a razor sharp instrument that will do nothing to dull my experience of driving. IS doesn't exactly dull the experience of taking pictures, but where do you draw the line with what makes a digital M an M camera?
aizan
Mentor
image stabilization doesn't really have anything to do with what makes an m camera an m. it just helps you get sharper photos.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Work on your technique, shutter release and fitness so you can hold the camera steady for the perfect and spontaneous shot.
Go out and take some photos... Use it the way an M should be used. Actually go out and takes a lot of photos.
Take a spare battery with you and most of all have fun.
Do you have the 10 leica commandments engraved in stone at home?
I had more fun if I could hold longer exposure times. IS would be helpful for that. Don't want to do a training as a biathlete before I can go out and do night photography.
user237428934
User deletion pending
No. The IS has to "swing in" for a few seconds to be 100% effective. So normally the IS in the canon lenses starts when you press the shutter-button half way for exposure/af