madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M. That's what I've got my SL2-S for to pair with my Siggy 500/5.6. The M is a "built for purpose" camera. Not a camera that does everything that other cameras do. I think Leica is very keen to understanding what changes impact that "built for purpose" ethos ... never trying to make it be everything, to everyone.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R ... ummm, without IBIS.
Ironically, there was a shooter there with a Canon and 24-70. He couldn't get any isolation shots ... just everything set to 24mm and a wide view of the court. You could see his brain trying to figure out how I was working it with Leica / M glass. Kinda neat to see him "scratchin' his head" as he kept looking at my setup. He never asked, though ...
I did switch out to my SL2-S with M glass on the last day. I wanted to raise the ISO even more to get higher SS speeds. The games picked up speed, as the better tournament progressed. Too fast for AF. I know, sounds kinda bass-ackwards, huh.
madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M. That's what I've got my SL2-S for to pair with my Siggy 500/5.6. The M is a "built for purpose" camera. Not a camera that does everything that other cameras do. I think Leica is very keen to understanding what changes impact that "built for purpose" ethos ... never trying to make it be everything, to everyone.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R ... ummm, without IBIS.
Ironically, there was a shooter there with a Canon and 24-70. He couldn't get any isolation shots ... just everything set to 24mm and a wide view of the court. You could see his brain trying to figure out how I was working it with Leica / M glass. Kinda neat to see him "scratchin' his head" as he kept looking at my setup. He never asked, though ...
madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M. That's what I've got my SL2-S for to pair with my Siggy 500/5.6. The M is a "built for purpose" camera. Not a camera that does everything that other cameras do. I think Leica is very keen to understanding what changes impact that "built for purpose" ethos ... never trying to make it be everything, to everyone.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R ... ummm, without IBIS.
Ironically, there was a shooter there with a Canon and 24-70. He couldn't get any isolation shots ... just everything set to 24mm and a wide view of the court. You could see his brain trying to figure out how I was working it with Leica / M glass. Kinda neat to see him "scratchin' his head". He never asked, though ...
madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M. That's what I've got my SL2-S for to pair with my Siggy 500/5.6. The M is a "built for purpose" camera. Not a camera that does everything that other cameras do. I think Leica is very keen to understanding what changes impact that "built for purpose" ethos ... never trying to make it be everything, to everyone.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R ... ummm, without IBIS.
madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M. That's what I've got my SL2-S for to pair with my Siggy 500/5.6. The M is a "built for purpose" camera. Not a camera that does everything that other cameras do. I think Leica is very keen to understanding what changes impact that "built for purpose" ethos ... never trying to make it be everything, to everyone.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R and M246 ... ummm, without IBIS.
madNbad wrote:
Much of the appeal of a M body is its size. After the M5, Leica went back to the traditional size body. The M240 was a digital version of the M5. A lot of good ideas and trying to expand the M cameras versatility. The M10 loops back around to a traditional size body.
I can understand IBIS in cameras designed for much longer focal lengths that lenses normally used with a Leica M. There are plenty of fast lenses in the 21 to 90mm range. With the latest M's ability to use high ISO it doesn't seem that IBIS would be a priority.
Kent is right that IBIS in a M240 size body is feasible. It would be interesting to see the reaction from Leica buyers.
+1 that the lenses for the M's ... and today's ISO capabilities ... make IBIS in an M, well, let's just say it's not a "must have" for most seasoned M shooters. It's not like you're shooting a 500/5.6 or a 100-400 5-6.3 on an M.
I mean, I was just shooting INDOOR handball with the M10R and M246.
Dec 30, 2024 at 10:07 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #16718786 « Why are Leicas so expensive? »
