A few questions about IBIS

Something I don't understand regarding the way IBIS works in the Z7 and probably the Z6 as well. Perhaps I misunderstood the function but here is how I understand it is:

The camera has a 5-axis IBIS when the native lenses are used. Those lenses have no built in VR, so everything is based on the sensor shifting mechanism.

The camera has 3-axis vibration reduction with VR lenses, two provided by the lens, one by the sensor shifting mechanism.

What about legacy lenses? Old manual focus lenses without electronics must be configured in the camera's lens list to be able to provide vibration reduction. This is OK, but will I get 5-axis, or what? If I am not wrong, IBIS will give me 5-axis vibration reduction in this case.

What about if I switch the VR off in my VR lenses? In that case the camera will still receive lens data, but what sort of vibration reduction will I get? To my brains, this is similar to the legacy lens use above, so I should get the same type of vibration reduction as with the legacy lenses.

Can someone clarify this or point me to a link where this is tested and explained?

Also, aren't people worried about IBIS having negative affect on AF due to sensor shake?

What about tilted images? I used Oly E3 about 10 years ago and that camera definitely had issues with the sensor shifting IBIS, causing tilted images occasionally. Hopefully this is not the case we will discover later on. That experience told me NEVER to buy a camera with IBIS, but now, 10 years later maybe the technology is mature enough.

The only thing I know that is reliable is that VR/VC/OS in the lens is better, especially for longer lenses, than IBIS.

So turning it off might be detrimental to overall performance. Especially with the latest versions from Nikon/Tamron, the VR is excellent. (Of course the Tamrons currently don't work on the Z so it's a moot point).

As far as "tilted images", I think the operator is as much responsible for tilting as the IBIS. I think some of the images will be tilted due to not holding the camera perfectly flat, others due to IBIS operation, some will cancel out, some won't. So on the whole I have never heard of "problems" with tilted images from IBIS. It is not a big problem being addressed/debated/discussed. I think whatever "IBIS tilt" might happen will be corrected with post when you straighten your horizons and verticals. From my understanding the movement of the sensor is so small it would not make the image "worse", it just might not make it much better, in worse case scenarios.

Lastly, there is always the option of turning IBIS off, and relying either on VR or on good technique. Does not sound like there are too many downsides to IBIS with its current implementation on the Z.

Eliot Kramer said:

The only thing I know that is reliable is that VR/VC/OS in the lens is better, especially for longer lenses, than IBIS.

So turning it off might be detrimental to overall performance. Especially with the latest versions from Nikon/Tamron, the VR is excellent. (Of course the Tamrons currently don't work on the Z so it's a moot point).

As far as "tilted images", I think the operator is as much responsible for tilting as the IBIS. I think some of the images will be tilted due to not holding the camera perfectly flat, others due to IBIS operation, some will cancel out, some won't. So on the whole I have never heard of "problems" with tilted images from IBIS. It is not a big problem being addressed/debated/discussed. I think whatever "IBIS tilt" might happen will be corrected with post when you straighten your horizons and verticals. From my understanding the movement of the sensor is so small it would not make the image "worse", it just might not make it much better, in worse case scenarios.

Lastly, there is always the option of turning IBIS off, and relying either on VR or on good technique. Does not sound like there are too many downsides to IBIS with its current implementation on the Z.

Click to expand...

OK, thanks. But... regarding the tilting of Olympus E-3, I can assure you it was NOT caused by the user, but by the floating sensor. This was known to all E-3 users and was frequently discussed back then. Also the fact that the E-3 had some intermittent AF inaccuracy issues were probably caused by the floating sensor. Hopefully all this was due to poor quality.

Regarding the possibility of fixing it at PP... yes, that is possible but it is NOT the solution. The camera should not add errors, it should remove or reduce them. I will definitely not be happy if I have to edit a huge number of images BECAUSE the camera is tilting my horizon.

Yes, the IBIS can be switched off, but again, that's NOT a solution. We pay top dollars for the cameras, so crippling it is out of the question. If the horizon is tilted Nikon must fix it. No question about that.

You are though right that the VR lenses are better used with VR o, I know that, and that was not my question. My question was that with the VR off they should behave similarly as the legacy lenses, so how is the IBIS in that case? Oh, well...

Eliot Kramer said:

The only thing I know that is reliable is that VR/VC/OS in the lens is better, especially for longer lenses, than IBIS.

Click to expand...

For shorter lenses (up to, say, 70 - 100 mm), I don't think that doing the shifting in the lens is in any way better. For longer ones, you can optimize the travel to the focal length when the shifter is in the lens.

Jim

Is your most recent IBIS experience that from 10 years ago?

Mark9473 said:

Is your most recent IBIS experience that from 10 years ago?

Click to expand...

...only 9, as I sold my E3 in 2009.

I sold my Oly, bought a D300s and never turned back. I was very happy with the Nikon lens based VR in all my lenses, as well as in the Nikon 1 system. If the Z system would still use it I'd still buy it. Would not change system just for the IBIS. BTW, I know Oly fanboys can't stop talking about it and praise it like if it was something holy, but I am more sceptical, though I hope and trust Nikon did his homework well. Otherwise I would not be interested in this camera.

JimKasson said:

Eliot Kramer said:

The only thing I know that is reliable is that VR/VC/OS in the lens is better, especially for longer lenses, than IBIS.

Click to expand...

For shorter lenses (up to, say, 70 - 100 mm), I don't think that doing the shifting in the lens is in any way better. For longer ones, you can optimize the travel to the focal length when the shifter is in the lens.

Jim

Click to expand...

Actually, after selling the 24-120 and the 105 micro GVR lenses I will only have one VR lens which is a long one, so I know that should benefit from the lens VR. But I was curious...

olyflyer said:

Mark9473 said:

Is your most recent IBIS experience that from 10 years ago?

Click to expand...

...only 9, as I sold my E3 in 2009.

I know Oly fanboys can't stop talking about it and praise it like if it was something holy, but I am more sceptical

Click to expand...

Well you can believe or not believe whoever you want, but your experience with the E3 is just about as irrelevant as it gets.

Mark9473 said:

olyflyer said:

Mark9473 said:

Is your most recent IBIS experience that from 10 years ago?

Click to expand...

...only 9, as I sold my E3 in 2009.

I know Oly fanboys can't stop talking about it and praise it like if it was something holy, but I am more sceptical

Click to expand...

Well you can believe or not believe whoever you want, but your experience with the E3 is just about as irrelevant as it gets.

Click to expand...

Ok, now what about staying on the subject and answering my questions? BTW... what's your experience of the Z system? Let me guess... zero. Less than mine with IBIS. You see, it doesn't matter to me how well it is working on other systems. That was NOT the subject. Also I think I was quite clear about my background so what's yours? Why are you in this thread if you have nothing else to contribute with?

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

Using in lens VR the actual VR gain partly depends on shutter speed.

it seems rarely more 2 stops at 1/250 and rarely faster than 4 stops at 1/15 shutter speed.

As far as I know Nikon has only provided lens specific CIPA results at different shutter speeds for the 200-500 zoom.

Leonard Shepherd said:

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

<snip>

Click to expand...

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

SrMi said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

<snip>

Click to expand...

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

That was my understanding also, but does it use 5 axis, three or less with non-CPU, old legacy lenses? I guess I'll answer my own question soon, but if it uses all five with an old lens then it should also use all five with a GVR lens when the VR is off. I understand that the lens VR can be more efficient in some situations, or with long lenses, but what about more "normal" ones and macro lenses? Can similar images like this be taken with a 100mm lens at 1/8s with it hand held leaning down and forward?





And I don't mean "with a little luck" or "depends on your technique and abilities" and so on, but without any concerns and special considerations or any specific hand holding techniques. Of course, this is very much up to each one of us, but I have tried to repeat this and other similar images using my Nikons over the years and I had to struggle, missing many times... Hopefully the answer to that will be a definite yes and most definitely I will make similar tests once I have the camera.

The Oly E-3 was the first generation IBIS for Olympus, and the IBIS in the Z6 and Z7 is the first generation for Nikon, so it is a bit risky but hopefully no problems will ever be related to it.

I like the fact that the Nikon cameras lock the sensor physically when it is switched off. This means that the sensor is definitely aligned when the IBIS is off, as well as when the camera is under transport. The Oly did some sort of reinitialization and realignment every time the camera got switched on (or off, I don't remember), but always thought it was weird.

SrMi said:

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

One comparison site I have seen says the D7 has 5 stops IBIS and the best Sony has 5.5 stops.

I have not seen anything from Nikon that specifically mentions how many stops IBIS (as distinct from axis) the Z6/7 have; or at what focal length presuming 5 stops is accurate.

Leonard Shepherd said:

SrMi said:

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

One comparison site I have seen says the D7 has 5 stops IBIS and the best Sony has 5.5 stops.

I have not seen anything from Nikon that specifically mentions how many stops IBIS (as distinct from axis) the Z6/7 have; or at what focal length presuming 5 stops is accurate.

Click to expand...

In the testing I've done (which is not according to CIPA), the number of stops improvement (exposure difference for same blur) is dependent on your technique and the maximum amount of blur you accept as tolerable.

Jim

olyflyer said:

(snipped) but what about more "normal" ones and macro lenses? Can similar images like this be taken with a 100mm lens at 1/8s with it hand held leaning down and forward?



And I don't mean "with a little luck" or "depends on your technique and abilities" and so on, but without any concerns and special considerations or any specific hand holding techniques.

Click to expand...

You are perhaps overlooking that the closer you are to 1:1 the faster the shutter speed needs to be because of the increased magnification.

1/60 with a 50mm is a good "average" photographers starting point for a subject between infinity and about 8 foot wide. No more than a guess but this image might be about 2 foot wide.

I do not know what the magnification of this image is - and speculate as it is a 50mm lens around 1/200 might be reasonable for a sharp shot without either VR or special technique.

If 3 stops VR is possible with a none VR F mount lens, 1/30 might be a reasonable expectation.

The VR section of the Z7 manual says almost nothing :-(

Has anybody found a definitive answer from Nikon?

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than the equipment being used.

Leonard Shepherd said:

SrMi said:

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

One comparison site I have seen says the D7 has 5 stops IBIS and the best Sony has 5.5 stops.

I have not seen anything from Nikon that specifically mentions how many stops IBIS (as distinct from axis) the Z6/7 have; or at what focal length presuming 5 stops is accurate.

Click to expand...

It's Z7, not D7 #!@% ;-).

Nikon says that its 5-axis IBIS provides up to 5 stop image stabilization (see 7):

https://www.nikon.com/news/2018/0823_mirrorless_01.htm

olyflyer said:

SrMi said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

<snip>

Click to expand...

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

That was my understanding also, but does it use 5 axis, three or less with non-CPU, old legacy lenses? I guess I'll answer my own question soon, but if it uses all five with an old lens then it should also use all five with a GVR lens when the VR is off. I understand that the lens VR can be more efficient in some situations, or with long lenses, but what about more "normal" ones and macro lenses? Can similar images like this be taken with a 100mm lens at 1/8s with it hand held leaning down and forward?



And I don't mean "with a little luck" or "depends on your technique and abilities" and so on, but without any concerns and special considerations or any specific hand holding techniques. Of course, this is very much up to each one of us, but I have tried to repeat this and other similar images using my Nikons over the years and I had to struggle, missing many times... Hopefully the answer to that will be a definite yes and most definitely I will make similar tests once I have the camera.

The Oly E-3 was the first generation IBIS for Olympus, and the IBIS in the Z6 and Z7 is the first generation for Nikon, so it is a bit risky but hopefully no problems will ever be related to it.

I like the fact that the Nikon cameras lock the sensor physically when it is switched off. This means that the sensor is definitely aligned when the IBIS is off, as well as when the camera is under transport. The Oly did some sort of reinitialization and realignment every time the camera got switched on (or off, I don't remember), but always thought it was weird.

Click to expand...

It is my understanding that Z7 uses 5-axis only with native lenses, otherwise only 3-axis. When you set VR off on the lens then you turn off IBIS as well. IBIS technology has progressed a lot since E3, Z7's IBIS is quite good and working very well.

Z7 locks the sensor when the camera is off, not when IBIS is off. However, I found the following interesting tidbit about sensor locking (Z7 brochure):

"This (locking) mechanism also makes it possible to avoid even the tiniest alteration in composition during time-lapse and interval timer photography."

Leonard Shepherd said:

olyflyer said:

(snipped) but what about more "normal" ones and macro lenses? Can similar images like this be taken with a 100mm lens at 1/8s with it hand held leaning down and forward?



And I don't mean "with a little luck" or "depends on your technique and abilities" and so on, but without any concerns and special considerations or any specific hand holding techniques.

Click to expand...

You are perhaps overlooking that the closer you are to 1:1 the faster the shutter speed needs to be because of the increased magnification.

1/60 with a 50mm is a good "average" photographers starting point for a subject between infinity and about 8 foot wide. No more than a guess but this image might be about 2 foot wide.

I do not know what the magnification of this image is - and speculate as it is a 50mm lens around 1/200 might be reasonable for a sharp shot without either VR or special technique.

If 3 stops VR is possible with a none VR F mount lens, 1/30 might be a reasonable expectation.

The VR section of the Z7 manual says almost nothing :-(

Has anybody found a definitive answer from Nikon?

Click to expand...

The lens used for that image is the Oly 50/2 macro lens with a maximum magnification of 1:2, but exactly how close I was I don't know, but pretty close, around 3 ft or 1 meter. Anyway, that should correspond to 100mm on the Z7, due to the crop factor, so 1/8 sec shutter speed is very good, since according to the 1/FL it should require 1/100s for the same sharpness at normal distance, but this was close.

Yes, Nikon is pretty quiet about the IBIS. I read the manual and not many words are "wasted" on the IBIS. I guess they assume that we will figure out on our own. Perhaps they are right, because if they would state too many values some people would take them as granted and would require to fit everyone's shooting style, which might not work that well for them.

SrMi said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

<snip>

Click to expand...

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying, but it's now worded properly, so maybe it can be clarified.

The number of stops of stabilization benefit is INDEPENDENT of the photographer, so saying 'depends on the situation and photographer" is not correct. It's like saying "this lens is at aperture 2.0 but you might not get a 2.0 DoF, depends on the situation and photographer.

A more correct way of saying it, in my opinion is. "At what point one stops getting useful images with stabilization on versus off will depend on the photographer or the situation".

Stated otherwise, the stabilization is an inherent property of the camera/lens. Photographers with poor technique don't get any less or more stops of stabilization than photographers with good technique.

So let's say I can hold the camera well up to 1/250 of a second. With VR on I will get 1/250 plus 5 stops of stabilization.

You can hold it much steadier, up to 1/15 of a second. With VR on you will get 1/15 plus 5 stops of stabilization.

We both get 5 stops, it's just the point at which our respective pictures are still usable will be different because we started from different starting points.

The VR doesn't know if the camera is being used with good or bad technique, it always delivers the maximum benefit it can. Also, the camera doesn't know what "situation" it is in. The algorithms controlling the VR or IBIS simply adjust for shifts of position, irrespective of all else.

Seems pedantic to explain the obvious, but for some reason I see this error repeated constantly. "how much benefit you will get will depend on you", No, it doesn't. We all get the same benefit.

Eliot Kramer said:

SrMi said:

Leonard Shepherd said:

Not specifically answered - you can get UP TO 3 stops (not 5 as with IBIS) with an F lens without in lens VR.

<snip>

Click to expand...

IBIS uses 5-axis VR (not stops) and a VR lens with FTZ uses 3-axis VR (not stops). A VR lens typically has 2-axis (Pitch & Yaw) and FTZ adds a third (Roll). I assume that non-VR lenses use 3-axis IBIS, which works well for lenses <100mm.

Nikon 70-200/2.8 FL lens (2-axis VR) specification lists 4 stops of image stabilization.

How many stops you really get also depends on the situation and the photographer, I guess.

Click to expand...

I agree with what you are saying, but it's now worded properly, so maybe it can be clarified.

The number of stops of stabilization benefit is INDEPENDENT of the photographer, so saying 'depends on the situation and photographer" is not correct. It's like saying "this lens is at aperture 2.0 but you might not get a 2.0 DoF, depends on the situation and photographer.

Click to expand...

No, it's different because the amount of shake introduced by the photographer influences the shape of the MTF50 vs shutter speed curves, and how far apart they are in shutter speed depends on their shape. I've seen this in my own quantitative experiments.

Selex said:

A more correct way of saying it, in my opinion is. "At what point one stops getting useful images with stabilization on versus off will depend on the photographer or the situation".

Stated otherwise, the stabilization is an inherent property of the camera/lens.

Click to expand...

It is not. It is highly dependent on the forcing function and the MTF50 criterion.

Selex said:

Photographers with poor technique don't get any less or more stops of stabilization than photographers with good technique.

Click to expand...

They actually get fewer, in my testing.

Selex said:

So let's say I can hold the camera well up to 1/250 of a second. With VR on I will get 1/250 plus 5 stops of stabilization.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you deeply believe in the CIPA protocol. It is not representative of all use cases, or, in my experience even of most use cases.

Selex said:

You can hold it much steadier, up to 1/15 of a second. With VR on you will get 1/15 plus 5 stops of stabilization.

Click to expand...

That's not true either. IBIS is tuned for a particular frequency range of forcing functions.

Selex said:

We both get 5 stops, it's just the point at which our respective pictures are still usable will be different because we started from different starting points.

Click to expand...

Not what I have tested.

Selex said:

The VR doesn't know if the camera is being used with good or bad technique, it always delivers the maximum benefit it can. Also, the camera doesn't know what "situation" it is in. The algorithms controlling the VR or IBIS simply adjust for shifts of position, irrespective of all else.

Seems pedantic to explain the obvious, but for some reason I see this error repeated constantly. "how much benefit you will get will depend on you", No, it doesn't. We all get the same benefit.

Click to expand...

Again. Not the results of my testing. Do you have quantitative evidence to the contrary?

Jim

--
Posted as a regular forum member.
https://blog.kasson.com