Why cine cameras don't use IBIS?

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
JamesAg Forum Member • Posts: 83
Why cine cameras don't use IBIS?

In another thread, someone claimed that IBIS could degrade the quality of an image. This is supposedly the reason why cine cameras don't include it. That sounds plausible.

However, to me it also seems like there could be other reasons. To my understanding, filmmakers almost always externally stabilize their cameras (either with a dolly setup or a gimbal). In a situation where a camera is externally stabilized, there is no need for IBIS.

In the rare occasions when cinematographers don't externally stabilize their cameras, there's another reason why they might not need IBIS. Modern cinema cameras, especially after adding all the common rigging, are much heavier than photography cameras. For example, the most popular camera at Sundance was the ARRI Alexa Mini. This thing is 6.5 lb, body only. Add in the rigging and lens, and it's probably a minimum of ten pounds. With more weight comes more inertia, which implies resistance to camera shake.

Probably nobody on this forum can answer this definitively, as I doubt any of us are engineers on cine cameras. However, I'm curious which explanation folks think better explains the decision to forgo IBIS?

I've yet to see anyone provide real evidence that IBIS degrades image quality, so my own vote would be the latter explanation: external stabilization and natural resistance to shake because of higher camera system mass mostly removes the need for IBIS.

 JamesAg's gear list:JamesAg's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony a7 III Apple iPhone XS
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow