5
57even
Guest
About as much as increasing the IC to allow for IBIS.
If they make the cameras heavier, larger and more complex they won't appeal to some buyers.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
No IBIS for X series
- Thread starter keesenzo
- Start date
5
57even
Guest
5
57even
Guest
That is your choice. Calling people who make different choices 'snobs' is ridiculous.
Insisting that it should exist because you like it is OK?
For you. Personally, I would give up all the weight and complexity of an A7R2 for the simplicity and lens quality of the Fuji.
So you buy the 50-140 OIS instead.
There are tangible benefits to the alternatives too. You just don't care about any of them.
Then what's wrong with an OIS zoom?
Exactly
why would we want IBIS ? to be able to shoot handheld at VERY low shutter speeds right?
OK
how can we achieve that?
1) use aperture and ISO to have a reasonable shutter speed
2) same with additional help from IS if glass is long
3) same as 1 or 2 with additional help from IBIS.
The more help the better we could think.
STEP back
now it gets interesting
There are two types of scenes (roughly)
A: scenes with motion (that we want to freeze)
B: scenes without motion (that we want to freeze)
So for TYPE A:
in my experience most motion needs shutter speeds faster than ( lets be conservative) 1/30th of a second.
IBIS and IS do not help to reduce shutter speeds. so we need iso and aperture to get the minimal required shutter speed. we only need some extra stabilization if the focal length is larger than lets say 1.5 than the inverse shutter speed we need to stop the motion ( so for a 400 mm lens lets say between 1/30th and 1/600th of a second) to stop motion and be able to shoot handheld. for a motion stopping slow shutter speed faster than 1/30th we need roughly 4 stops of help at the max. from OIS or IS for 400mm lens.
for shorter lenses the help we need quickly reduces ( 200 mm only 3 stops, 100 mm maybe 2)
and for standard lenses and wide-angle lenses we do not really need help when shooting motion.
AND THIS is very very slow moving objects!!! for faster moving objects we do need less help from OIS or IBIS, but more from ISO and aperture!!!!
For the longer lenses at least unto 400mm we have a good solution in the form of OIS so in this case do not need an additional IBIS
For situations that we can not crank up the iso enough or open up the aperture further we have NO solution but to buy a faster lens or buy a camera with better high ISO performance.
now type B: Scenes without motion:
All the static situations we would be able to shoot motion according to scene A are no problem without IBIS.
What remains are STATIC situations that are to dark to be shot with a shutter speed faster than 1/(1.5*focal length) with 1/30th of a second with the given camera (+ maybe IS).
how can we solve this problem:
three solutions:
S1:buy a similar ( or better) camera with IBIS
S2: invest in faster lenses ( if available)
S3:buy a camera with higher ISO performance ( if available)
WHAT would help me best?
S1: will help me with certain static situations
S2: will help me certain static situations AND with movement ( however there is a limit to the speed of lenses ( at least with most budgets, and weight consideration etc.)
S3:will help me in ALL situations
Oh well actually the combination of three, off course will push it the furthest.
Looking at this, I think handheld shooters are helped most effectively if Fuji (or whatever sensor/camera maker) invests in good quality high ISO performance as it will solve more handheld issues then IBIS wil ever do. and looking at what the d810's and a7s II 's of this world can deliver ISO wise i cannot imagine i would ABSOLUTLY NEED IBIS in a body very often.
(Have been shooting a triathlon during the night , fellow photographers were able to stop motion ( cyclists) with long glass with their d810's and a7s' in moonlight no help from IBIS there.)
IMHO the situations that IBIS seriously can help are the situations that I would personally already have grabbed a tripod, monopod, beanbag or something like that. because it is either static content that is not going anywhere and I have all the time or the lens is so long that i find it to heavy to shoot handheld.
Ok what do i want to say with this lengthy post?
Can IBIS be useful? yes certainly
Can it work perfectly? yes sure, that has been proven by several successful camera's
does IBIS degrade image quality? In general, not necessarily. for X mount yes (according to Fuji)
But if Fuji (or any camera maker) needs to invest in ISO and IBIS, what will bring most value to me ( and I think most shooters)? That is clearly ISO , as that solves the problems that IBIS also solves.
the same if i spend my money on gear. I rather pay extra for ISO then for IBIS, because ISO solves the problems IBIS solves and more.
So for me I would rather not have Fuji spend their money on IBIS.
Would i NOT buy a camera because it has IBIS, no of course not (unless i can't switch it off when i think needed)
Kees
Last edited:
K
kodachromeguy
Guest
What? Put the IBIS issue to bed? Never. It will go on and on like the idiocy about:
1. certain brands "cheating" on their ISO rating,
2. the lack of need for black and white sensors because brand XYZ super software can do a better job with a color sensor,
3. the lousy choice of the Fuji X array because favorite brand XYZ software does not process it well,
4. why there is no need for a tripod because I can handhold with IBIS at 1/2 second, and it is tack sharp and I'm pathologically opposed to using a tripod even though my pictures are of static scenes
5. the lack of need for a hood because the super-premium lens coating banishes flare forever.
6. how film is so inferior because I can take 2000 super digital exposures a month instead at no cost.
Sigh....
1. certain brands "cheating" on their ISO rating,
2. the lack of need for black and white sensors because brand XYZ super software can do a better job with a color sensor,
3. the lousy choice of the Fuji X array because favorite brand XYZ software does not process it well,
4. why there is no need for a tripod because I can handhold with IBIS at 1/2 second, and it is tack sharp and I'm pathologically opposed to using a tripod even though my pictures are of static scenes
5. the lack of need for a hood because the super-premium lens coating banishes flare forever.
6. how film is so inferior because I can take 2000 super digital exposures a month instead at no cost.
Sigh....
K
kodachromeguy
Guest
Watch it; I think many of these "photographers" won't get it.
georgehudetz
Veteran Member
Excellent post, nice summary.
C
Chris Dodkin
Guest
Randy
You need to get your head around British humor.
If you're on here spouting BS then you're probably going to be on the receiving end.
It's fabulous that you care for the mods and our frustrations so deeply.
It's posts and threads like this that make it all worthwhile.
You need to get your head around British humor.
If you're on here spouting BS then you're probably going to be on the receiving end.
It's fabulous that you care for the mods and our frustrations so deeply.
It's posts and threads like this that make it all worthwhile.
ShutterNot
Senior Member
I was actually enjoying the MODS very logical unbiased feedback.
MODS are users of this forum too - are they not ?
MODS are users of this forum too - are they not ?
mahidoes
Senior Member
[No message]
Phamtastic
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 446
- Reaction score
- 213
As it is yours and other people's choice to not have it. I don't have any problem with that. But I'm not passing judgment on those who don't feel they need the feature. The issue I have is with people that express their beliefs about how it isn't necessary to everyone else. Fine, you don't need it. Great. Fine, I need it. Great. But that does not equate to getting on the interwebs and talking to others about how THEY don't need it or how it is not a necessary feature in photography. Sure, it may not necessarily be necessary to specific people. But it is a necessity to many others. And that is all I am accounting for. Choice is great. Just don't try to make other people's for them simply because it doesn't fall in line with YOUR choice.
I didn't call people who make different choices "snobs." I called people that nay say something simply because they have determined it to be something THEY don't need to be narrow-minded and/or snobs. The sayings "different strokes for different folks," horses for courses," etc etc come to mind. I was merely pointing out the fact that if YOU or whomever has decided to bash, speak ill of, or nay say something simply because YOU don't need it that THAT, is in fact what is ridiculous.
If we all perceived every new innovation or development in the same fashion, where would we be in photography tech today?
I am not insisting that it should exist simply because I like it. Not sure how you made that leap. I am expressing the view that it is in FACT a useful feature to have whether you believe it to be or not. The fact that IBIS implementation in other systems allows you to have it either on or off means that you can either choose to use it or NOT to. Completely up to you. I don't really care whether everyone NEEDS it or not. But it doesn't change the fact that it is inherently useful in photography. Pointing out that something is objectively useful is not the same as insisting that it exist because I like it.
So would I, at times. Which is precisely why I run both systems and have dumped DSLR completely. I love Fuji for what it is which is why I have a very full Fuji kit. But I also love what the Sony gives me that Fuji doesn't. Both work together to give me absolutely everything that I need for my uses. If I had to choose only one system, I would have to agree with you that Fuji would be the winner (for me).
OR, I could have maximum aperture and stabilization together. You could say the same about any field in the world that people partake in. Here is 80% of the performance, would you like the other 20? To that, I answer heck yeah.
Perfect example, I run a stabilized Sigma 20/1.4 on the Sony with which I am comfortable shooting up to ISO 25k. The files are also very flexible in post which allow me to push an additional few stops cleanly. Having all of those things together basically allows me to suck in light in places and ways I was never able to before. Is that useful and would I like to have it? Heck yeah. And I do.
I absolutely care about them. They just don't work for me. The difference is, I don't try to tell others that carrying monopods, tripods, or lights is unnecessary. I have ONLY expressed that it does not work for ME and potentially some others.
Refer to previous paragraph about maximum light gathering. There is absolutely nothing wrong with an OIS zoom. But for me, I prefer to have a fast aperture prime with stabilization and usable high ISO together. Again though, I haven't passed any judgment about how an OIS zoom wouldn't work better for other people. I have only expressed my personal preference.
To conclude, I love what Fuji does. I have been one of their biggest supporters. But to ignore the fact that there are advantages that are real and tangible that they haven't adopted is narrow in view. And that is all I am saying. Doesn't stop me from having preordered the x-pro2 immediately after announcement and being excited to receive it as soon as possible.
P.S. Conversely, I have also defended its price point (xpro2) along with the usefulness of the hybrid VF which many have spoken ill of around these parts as well. I just like to call people out for poorly supported views or weak opinions.
Phamtastic
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 446
- Reaction score
- 213
georgehudetz
Veteran Member
MrFresno
Senior Member
I didn't say that Chris shouldn't post or provide input. I said he should avoid the bickering that is the worst part of this forum. It doesn't matter if we are discussing how great Fuji's lens lineup is or how poor their foliage rendering is via Adobe. What matters is HOW we discuss those things. Lately, I think Chris has been getting involved in more arguments and he can also come off as very condescending at times. There is a big difference between moderation and censorship. I don't think people should have a problem with discussions about the negative aspects of Fuji cameras. This is a forum, not a fan club.
Elyharbour
Senior Member
Not sure I'd agree with you on the latter point
But, there are a number of posters here who are disillusioned with Fujifilm cameras and decisions. They have every right to express their views and some have decided to move to another brand. But there are a few that find it necessary to come back time and time again to labour the points that have been discussed to death in the past, to simply troll or add fuel to the fire because it makes them feel better or superior...at least that's my take on things (rightly or wrongly). At some point the moderator has to say "enough is enough" - they each have different ways to doing this.
C
Christof21
Guest
I am really surprised you may give this answer and it really looks like you want to avoid to answer to the question again.
If I follow your logic, you would not recommend the use of a tripod. Instead, people should use good technic and wonder why they get camera shake. No need to buy OIS lenses neither...
This is NOT a question of technic. I've never met a human tripod so far !
True.
True,
I did not say that IS plays no part.
I actually use it in the scenarios above!
What I say is that from a usability perspective investing in ISO performance brings me more than investing in in body stabilisation given that we already have OIS:
Because: when we have to freeze motion shutter speed + aperture + iso are the only variables impacting the amount of light collected, and thus SNR SO IBIS will not bring much to the equation ( especially because we have already OIS )
so remaining are the static scenes. low light or not. if SNR is a reason to choose a shutterspeed that I would not be able to handheld, then IQ is apparently is very important for that particular shot. In that case I would definitely use a stable tripod, switch of IS etc. use base ISO etc.
Note that I do not say that there is no place for IBIS at all but if I have to pay for a new camera and can choose from:
CAM A: Max usable ISO X + IBIS (n stops)
CAM B: Max usable ISO X+n
and both cost the same, then I'd rather spend my money on CAM B
of course if CAM C brings me both ISO X+n and IBIS for the same amount I would not hesitate to buy that.
Of course other Photographers can and probably will have other priorities.
And maybe the fact that photographers found shooting landscapes handheld used to be clubbed to death with heavy tripods made that I have become accustomed to using one ;-)
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum