for all FF BS, fuji told the real story, 1/3 market by value, by unit much lower Locked

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
MEDISN Contributing Member • Posts: 772
Re: Well my A7 II 5 axis IBIS is nowhere close to my EM1 MKII????

bobn2 wrote:

Jeff wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

richarddd wrote:

cba_melbourne wrote:

Mark Ransom wrote:

VideoPic wrote:

Mark Ransom wrote:

VideoPic wrote:

Because there are NO standard, anyone can slap an IBIS logo on a camera and claim its like an Olympus camera.........

In reality, no gets close to what Olympus and now Panasonic achieves......

Excuse me?


You say "there are NO standard", I give you a link to the standard.

Mark, I did not read that document in every detail, just had a very quick browse through it. So i may be wrong....

But... it looks to me, this is only about optical and electronic image stabilization systems. Not sensor shift systems like IBIS.

The test setup only moves the camera in pitch and jaw. Optical IS systems can not correct rotation, hence they do not test this. But this standard would make optical IS look better than it is, compared to IBIS..

Is there a separate CIPA standard for sensor shift stabilization? Or did I overlook something?

Olympus uses the CIPA numbers in its marketing. If the standard was understating the benefits of Olympus's IBIS, I'd think they'd find a way to say so rather than just touting its own results.

The real problem with this kind of standard is that products end up getting designed to get good scores according to the standard's tests, rather than doing a good job. Ironically for our friend, Olympus is a past master at this, and has worked out how to extract the last EV from CIPA ratings. I have my own issues with the CIPA test, I don't think it looks well related to the effectiveness of IS in real practice.

There are also very few people who have rigorously enough tested their IS to say definitively that X is better than Y. There's a whole load of confirmation bias going on.

I'm ok with everything you've written except when it gets to the highlighted comment. Can you add some specificity to this claim, or is it speculation on your part?

The evidence is simply that Olympus has extracted the last EV. Commercial secrets being what they are, they're never likely to let the information out. It just wouldn't be sensible, would it? It's about as likely as VW telling the world in advance that they were gaming the emissions standards. Just not ever likely to happen.

Are you suggesting that Olympus only achieves 5+ stops during the CIPA test?  Despite most hands-on reviews achieving that and more?  Conversely, should I sue Sony because my 5-stop CIPA rated A9 barely achieves 3 stops in actual use?  Or that the 20fps CAF they advertise for the A9 is really only 16fps with a static subject?

It gets to be the same in all these discussions, if Olympus hasn't publicly told the world that they are engaging in misleading marketing practice, we must assume that they are not. Just to remind you, Olympus is presently paying out millions of dollars for downright lying in its medical business, where the lies can have fatal consequences. Thankfully, in hobby photography it's not so serious.

That wasn't misleading marketing, it was allegedly failing to disclose a defect which made endoscopes "difficult to clean" at some institutions.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow