32mm 1.4 on the way...

Started Mar 15, 2018 | Discussions thread
Marco Nero
Marco Nero Veteran Member • Posts: 7,012
Canon won't ever offer IBIS - they say it's inferior.

mpressed wrote:

bluefoam wrote:


It seems that Canon are listening... New fast prime coming... Let's hope they increase the speed of new lens delivery too...

Many of us that love the ef-35 F2 IS, will be curious, it is an amazing lens, great IQ awesome Bokeh, and the size and weight even adapted on the M5 are fine. regardless the release of a native M in the frequently requested 50mm equiv FL was something that really had to happen. Its too important to not have and many wondered why to wouldn't have been released before the 28 macro.

I think Canon pushing this to 1.4 shows a lot about where we may finally be heading, hopefully this lens is what we are hoping for and has a metal mount and is built more in line with the early M lens releases not the recent plastic mount ones.

I do wonder where the balance for canon lies between size and giving us the perfect lenses, had this new 32 been IS (and a piece of me will pray the rumors are wrong and it is) then while it would need to be bigger it would take the challenge out of comparing it and choosing between it and the great 35f2. size vs IS?

It also makes you wonder if canon takes a new route as they head deeper into MILC, would an overall MILC kit be smaller and ultimately less expensive if Canon moved to IBIS and removed the need for IS in lenses?? IBIS would not increase camera body size that much nor price and the cost would quickly be offset when putting lens packages together that would not need to have IS and also could allow for size vs IS to be a moot point...

I find the smaller the camera the harder it is for some people to steady it, im a big fan of IS lenses in general but the idea of smaller less expensive non IS lens being the norm because of IBIS would be awesome... and of course still allow for the option of dual IS options as well....


The IBIS System of in-body image stabilization was developed by Canon's rivals when they were unable to produce their own Lens-based Image Stabilizers. This meant that they could make smaller, lighter lenses which could be sold at a higher profit due to lower production costs. They could also then sell their camera a bodies at higher cost by promoting IBIS as an "included" feature.  Canon's rivals (including Minolta and OlympusSony/Konica) explored the In-Body IS (sensor suspension) tech during the development of a competing system in the early 2000s. But as recently as 2015, both Canon and Nikon jointly stated that there were several reasons why OIS was superior. I've quoted Canon directly below:
Below are the reasons Canon gave for the superiority of OIS Vs IBIS:

1) Each lens is optimally tuned to achieve reliable correction.

2) OIS allows faster and more accurate AF & exposure metering, because the image comes already stabilized to the camera sensor (and advantage you’ll notice especially in low light).

3) OIS is more effective with long telephoto lenses

Unless something has changed, IBIS was always considered inferior to lens based (Optical) Image Stabilization. I can't see Canon going there. They use it for video due to gaps in the patenting system and the ability to crop and stabilize video using in-sensor tech and recent software that does not infringe on the IBIS system.

-- hide signature --

Marco Nero.

 Marco Nero's gear list:Marco Nero's gear list
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS Ra Canon EOS R6 Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4 Canon RF 85mm F1.2L USM +20 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow