Re: Leica M11-V to be announced (Now called Leica M EV1)
KLaban wrote:
I used the C-Sonnar for many years on my M bodies but had to resort to using the Visoflex to overcome focus shift issues.
Unfortunately the lack of stabilisation on the M EV1 means the body is still not a suitable option for my use.
But, it was usable with the Visoflex?
I still don't understand how it is that folks can be fine with using an M body, but now that an M body doesn't have IBIS, it is suddenly unsuitable. While that may not be your specific use case (per se), but I see folks that have used M's, decry the lack of IBIS as a deal breaker.
I mean, it seems that the ability to use a faster shutter speed or higher ISO (or both) minimizes the need for handholding an M (use case) in sub 1/30 range for many things. Not the least of which is the "capture the moment" kind of things. It seems to me that if you're in "moment" work, you're gonna be fine with higher ISO (today's ISO ain't your CCD ISO 800 grainfest) for that SS speed.
I can dig on IBIS as much as the next person ... and have different bodies, some with / some without. But I'm hard pressed to understand how many M shooters suggest that the lack of IBIS is a deal breaker. Bump the ISO and capture the moment. It's not like folks are shooting 500mm glass on an M. Most folks are shooting 50mm or wider. Few use 75 / 90 and almost none use 135. Unless folks are simply deferring their technique to the technology, as a matter of preference.
Not meaning to suggest your case specific ... just struck a chord with some rationale that I don't get from some folks regarding M's and the deal breaker the lack of IBIS presents for them. That combination typically makes me think ... go get an Olympus and shoot m43 if you want small with great IBIS. Or, use the (larger) SL body with M glass, if you still want to use the M glass. Kind of a pick your poison thing. The engineering requirements for IBIS hardware require real estate ... so, either get a smaller sensor that packs into a smaller body, or get a larger body that allows space for larger IBIS movement mechanism's. I've never expected an M body the size of the M10 / M11 to have IBIS. I've long stated that I think the M240 body would support the necessary real estate for IBIS ... and Leica's gonna be "picky" about such an implementation into an M ... but, I digress.
Sometimes, it makes me think that folks would want an Italian racing bicycle to have a motor in it, and still expect it to be as light and small as an Italian racing bicycle.
Re: Leica M11-V to be announced (Now called Leica M EV1)
KLaban wrote:
I used the C-Sonnar for many years on my M bodies but had to resort to using the Visoflex to overcome focus shift issues.
Unfortunately the lack of stabilisation on the M EV1 means the body is still not a suitable option for my use.
But, it was usable with the Visoflex?
I still don't understand how it is that folks can be fine with using an M body, but now that an M body doesn't have IBIS, it is suddenly unsuitable. While that may not be your specific use case (per se), but I see folks that have used M's, decry the lack of IBIS as a deal breaker.
I mean, it seems that the ability to use a faster shutter speed or higher ISO (or both) minimizes the need for handholding an M (use case) in sub 1/30 range for many things. Not the least of which is the "capture the moment" kind of things. It seems to me that if you're in "moment" work, you're gonna be fine with higher ISO (today's ISO ain't your CCD ISO 800 grainfest) for that SS speed.
I can dig on IBIS as much as the next person ... and have different bodies, some with / some without. But I'm hard pressed to understand how many M shooters suggest that the lack of IBIS is a deal breaker. Bump the ISO and capture the moment. It's not like folks are shooting 500mm glass on an M. Most folks are shooting 50mm or wider. Few use 75 / 90 and almost none use 135. Unless folks are simply deferring their technique to the technology, as a matter of preference.
Not meaning to suggest your case specific ... just struck a chord with some rationale that I don't get from some folks regarding M's and the deal breaker the lack of IBIS presents for them. That combination typically makes me think ... go get an Olympus and shoot m43 if you want small with great IBIS. Or, use the (larger) SL body with M glass, if you still want to use the M glass. Kind of a pick your poison thing. The engineering requirements for IBIS hardware require real estate ... so, either get a smaller sensor that packs into a smaller body, or get a larger body that allows space for larger IBIS movement mechanism's. I've never expected an M body the size of the M10 / M11 to have IBIS. I've long stated that I think the M240 body would support the necessary real estate for IBIS ... and Leica's gonna be "picky" about such an implementation into an M ... but, I digress.
Sometimes, it makes me think that folks would want an Italian racing bicycle to have a motor in it, and still expect it to be as light and small as an Italian racing bicycle.
Re: Leica M11-V to be announced (Now called Leica M EV1)
KLaban wrote:
I used the C-Sonnar for many years on my M bodies but had to resort to using the Visoflex to overcome focus shift issues.
Unfortunately the lack of stabilisation on the M EV1 means the body is still not a suitable option for my use.
But, it was usable with the Visoflex?
I still don't understand how it is that folks can be fine with using an M body, but now that an M body doesn't have IBIS, it is suddenly unsuitable. While that may not be your specific use case (per se), but I see folks that have used M's, decry the lack of IBIS as a deal breaker.
I mean, it seems that the ability to use a faster shutter speed or higher ISO (or both) minimizes the need for handholding an M (use case) in sub 1/30 range for many things. Not the least of which is the "capture the moment" kind of things. It seems to me that if you're in "moment" work, you're gonna be fine with higher ISO (today's ISO ain't your CCD ISO 800 grainfest) for that SS speed.
I can dig on IBIS as much as the next person ... and have different bodies, some with / some without. But I'm hard pressed to understand how many M shooters suggest that the lack of IBIS is a deal breaker. Bump the ISO and capture the moment. It's not like folks are shooting 500mm glass on an M. Most folks are shooting 50mm or wider. Few use 75 / 90 and almost none use 135. Unless folks are simply deferring their technique to the technology, as a matter of preference.
Not meaning to suggest your case specific ... just struck a chord with some rationale that I don't get from some folks regarding M's and the deal breaker the lack of IBIS presents for them. That combination typically makes me think ... go get an Olympus and shoot m43 if you want small with great IBIS. Or, use the (larger) SL body with M glass, if you still want to use the M glass. Kind of a pick your poison thing. The engineering requirements for IBIS hardware require real estate ... so, either get a smaller sensor that packs into a smaller body, or get a larger body that allows space for larger IBIS movement mechanism's. I've never expected an M body the size of the M10 / M11 to have IBIS. I've long stated that I think the M240 body would support the necessary real estate for IBIS ... and Leica's gonna be "picky" about such an implementation into an M ... but, I digress.
Sometimes, it makes me think that folks would want an Italian racing bicycle to have a motor in it, and still expect it to be as light and small as an Italian racing bicycle.
IDK ... just me not understanding, I reckon.
Nov 02, 2025 at 08:45 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #16920510 « Leica M EV1 »
rationale that I don't get from some folks regarding M's and the deal breaker the lack of IBIS presents for them. That combination typically makes me think ... go get an Olympus and shoot m43 if you want small with great IBIS. Or, use the (larger) SL body with M glass, if you still want to use the M glass. Kind of a pick your poison thing. The engineering requirements for IBIS hardware require real estate ... so, either get a smaller sensor that packs into a smaller body, or get a larger body that allows space for larger IBIS movement mechanism's. I've never expected an M body the size of the M10 / M11 to have IBIS. I've long stated that I think the M240 body would support the necessary real estate for IBIS ... and Leica's gonna be "picky" about such an implementation into an M ... but, I digress. 
