What will specific circumstances will IBIS give you a benefit ?

David Hull said:

Sittatunga said:

David Hull said:

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Kumsa said:

Thanks for the pros/cons outlook. It's informative and a useful reflection of your experience.

Click to expand...

Your welcome. Overall I like IBIS but for nightscapes I would prefer a camera without it due to the noise penalty.

Click to expand...

I assume this relates to this comment in your list:

It can heat the sensor in a longer exposure more than one without IBIS. So if using it for nightscapes or landscape long exposure you may get more noise after taking a few shots.

I am not sure how this comes about, what would be the mechanism for it?

Click to expand...

The First Law of Thermodynamics.

Any practical motor will produce waste heat, some of which will be conducted into the sensor mount. A sensor screwed into a metal chassis will dissipate heat by conduction more easily than one supported on electromagnets.

David Hull said:

Otherwise an excellent treatise on the pros and cons of the feature.

David Hull said:

There is one other major benefit of a mature IBIS and that is pixel shift. I find that a useful feature. Limited in its application but useful when you want max resolution and best colour on a static subject. I also use it with nightscapes with a tracking mount.

Greg.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yea, that makes sense. Now my question would be: is this significant. For the motor heat, I assume you can turn the thing off when on a tripod or astronomical mount.

Click to expand...

Yes you do as its not needed. Whether the sensor still floats but does not correct for shake I am not sure. It very well might as you can lock the sensor down for cleaning it which implies it does float even when the IBIS is turned off.

Greg.

ZX11 said:

Kumsa said:

Now that Canonistas are being tantalized with the promise of IBIS in an R frame, I'm curious to understand what will be the envisioned real-world benefit ? My IS lenses work really well for my purposes.

• I"m not being snarky, or engaging in a luddite dismissal of new tech.
• Personally, I'm mostly just doing still photography, and a lot of stabilization is for hand-held situations, as in video.
• A lot of my photography is always going to be on a tripod (studio portraiture), or at a shutter speed that obviates the benefit of stabilization.
• I appreciate that there will be some advantages: manual lens adaption would benefit); or maybe the new Rs would get pixelshift capability for higher resolution.

So, I'm asking to be educated. For instance, I never appreciated the amazing, magical, utility of the EVF on my R. I found the heads-up details to be game changing.

What's a possible image that I would fail to capture with an IS lens versus an IBIS enabled camera ?

Click to expand...

The IS lens negates the advantage of IBIS. IBIS is just one of many methods available to stabilize the camera/image. Lens IS or a tripod/monopod are other methods.

BIS is mostly useless to me due to my ownership of IS lens, tendency to use monopods, and the great light were I am. Furthermore, my family and animal subjects don't hold still for the photo, so slow shutters stabilized by IBIS result in blurry subjects.

IBIS only seems helpful if you are in a specific scenario where four or five horrible things (no IS lens, low light, etc) are happening to you at once, and the subject is dead.

Click to expand...

I find IBIS helps get sharper shots of moving subjects. Quite the opposite of what you said.

You don't of course have to select a slower shutter speed so at the same shutter speed an IBIS camera is likely to make sharper shots of moving subjects than non IBIS cameras.

I noticed that between my Sony A7riii and EOS R indoors and moving subjects. The Sony tended to be sharper because it corrected for camera shake. IBIS of course does not select a slower shutter speed nor has any connection to the shutter speed. That is something you select in manual mode or the camera does in automatic mode. That is based on the available light.

Not sure what the negativity about IBIS is. Perhaps unfamiliarity as once you have it you probably not want a camera without it. Just like it would be hard to go back to a camera without AF.

Greg.

GuardianFlash said:

According to rumors lens IS can be work with IBIS for more stops of stabilization.

Click to expand...

That's how the competition does it as well so that is the standard.

Greg.

Astrophotographer 10 said:

GuardianFlash said:

According to rumors lens IS can be work with IBIS for more stops of stabilization.

Click to expand...

That's how the competition does it as well so that is the standard.

Greg.

Click to expand...

The rumor that I saw stated,

"IBIS

• 5 stops with IBIS alone
• 7-8 stops of correction when used with in-lens stabilization"

It must either be amazing engineering to get 7-8 stops correction or just a marketing ploy since it would only be situational. If I shoot at 1/250 (indoors and my kids don't stay still) on a 35mm f2 IS prime a 5-stop correction would make it equivalent to 1/8000.

That seems unlikely or with a lot of compromises. I would be more than happy with IBIS correcting 1 or 2 stops on a 35mm 1.4 prime. I mostly shoot people and rarely go below 1/60 but I can see how shooting slower than that might be able to benefit from 7-8 stops.

Video and shooting indoors with non-stabilized glass. For video specifically I find IBIS to be much more effective than lens IS. That said I'm not sure it's enough to warrant switching bodies again. The RF 35 1.8 is good enough for me indoors, and if I got anything longer to shoot outdoors shutter speeds would be beyond stabilization range anyway.

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Its not instant so you need to remember to pause for half a second or so for it to become active and set.

Click to expand...

IBIS can be "always on" and thus way faster than in-lens stabilisation - which really needs time to settle in.

Astrophotographer 10 said:

ZX11 said:

Kumsa said:

Now that Canonistas are being tantalized with the promise of IBIS in an R frame, I'm curious to understand what will be the envisioned real-world benefit ? My IS lenses work really well for my purposes.

• I"m not being snarky, or engaging in a luddite dismissal of new tech.
• Personally, I'm mostly just doing still photography, and a lot of stabilization is for hand-held situations, as in video.
• A lot of my photography is always going to be on a tripod (studio portraiture), or at a shutter speed that obviates the benefit of stabilization.
• I appreciate that there will be some advantages: manual lens adaption would benefit); or maybe the new Rs would get pixelshift capability for higher resolution.

So, I'm asking to be educated. For instance, I never appreciated the amazing, magical, utility of the EVF on my R. I found the heads-up details to be game changing.

What's a possible image that I would fail to capture with an IS lens versus an IBIS enabled camera ?

Click to expand...

The IS lens negates the advantage of IBIS. IBIS is just one of many methods available to stabilize the camera/image. Lens IS or a tripod/monopod are other methods.

BIS is mostly useless to me due to my ownership of IS lens, tendency to use monopods, and the great light were I am. Furthermore, my family and animal subjects don't hold still for the photo, so slow shutters stabilized by IBIS result in blurry subjects.

IBIS only seems helpful if you are in a specific scenario where four or five horrible things (no IS lens, low light, etc) are happening to you at once, and the subject is dead.

Click to expand...

I find IBIS helps get sharper shots of moving subjects. Quite the opposite of what you said.

You don't of course have to select a slower shutter speed so at the same shutter speed an IBIS camera is likely to make sharper shots of moving subjects than non IBIS cameras.

I noticed that between my Sony A7riii and EOS R indoors and moving subjects. The Sony tended to be sharper because it corrected for camera shake. IBIS of course does not select a slower shutter speed nor has any connection to the shutter speed. That is something you select in manual mode or the camera does in automatic mode. That is based on the available light.

Not sure what the negativity about IBIS is. Perhaps unfamiliarity as once you have it you probably not want a camera without it. Just like it would be hard to go back to a camera without AF.

Greg.

Click to expand...

Not being in those handheld situations is not negativity to IBIS. i.e., I am not sure what the negativity about fluid heads is (or other camera equipment). AF can be used in most situations. IBIS is very limited in when it is needed given Canon's IS lenses. Like fluid heads are needed in limited situations.

If IBIS is durable, reliable, and embraced by GoPro, then fine for me as I don't treat my cameras with kit gloves or replace them yearly. That there are no downsides to IBIS seems a lie.

That I need IBIS while using a monopod is a hard sell. That I need IBIS in good light is a hard sell. That I need IBIS when I have an IS lens is a hard sell. That I need IBIS for action shots of moving subjects is a hard sell. A bunch of difficult items have to line up for me to need IBIS. I need a non IS lens, low light, no way to hold the camera stability, and a dead subject (not moving) to make IBIS a valuable addition. If any single one of those things are absent, then I don't see the advantage of IBIS.

No hostility here, I just don't value IBIS in a camera and don't think Canon is playing catch up with its ability to make cameras. Is Hasselblad playing catch up because they don't have IBIS?

No IBIS while running through snow:







--
"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

These are only a few examples and I'm sure there's other situations where IBIS will give you crystal clear photos. I went to the zoo at night and the light was really poor and low and on top of that the snakes were really low close to the ground so for some shots I had to get down on my knees and bend my back even more to get lower and I was able to get some fantastic super clear shots hand held.















I couldn't find the photo I took of these Ferris Wheel in Seattle at night but this is another example of what you can do. While the wheel is spinning you can use those nice very low shutter speeds to get a really cool look of the wheel, hand held without a tripod of course. I'm sorry that I can't find that photo right now.

Its nothing new as others have it for years. As you said, slow exposure handheld for stationary subject is probably the biggest plus. I think I read that if you have IS lens, the 2 system can work together to give even more stabilization. I almost never use tripod so this is important. The pixel shift thing would be good for landscape with a tripod

What will specific circumstances will IBIS give you a benefit ?

Click to expand...

When you pick up a camera.

Kumsa said:

Now that Canonistas are being tantalized with the promise of IBIS in an R frame, I'm curious to understand what will be the envisioned real-world benefit ? My IS lenses work really well for my purposes.

Click to expand...

Not everyone has all IS lenses. IBIS will help with hand-holding those lenses. Canon has 4 RF lenses that have IS. they also have several primes and a few good zooms (like the Non-IS 70-200/4, which can be picked up for cheap) which lack IS as well.

Kumsa said:

• I"m not being snarky, or engaging in a luddite dismissal of new tech.
• Personally, I'm mostly just doing still photography, and a lot of stabilization is for hand-held situations, as in video.
• A lot of my photography is always going to be on a tripod (studio portraiture), or at a shutter speed that obviates the benefit of stabilization.
• I appreciate that there will be some advantages: manual lens adaption would benefit); or maybe the new Rs would get pixelshift capability for higher resolution.

So, I'm asking to be educated. For instance, I never appreciated the amazing, magical, utility of the EVF on my R. I found the heads-up details to be game changing.

What's a possible image that I would fail to capture with an IS lens versus an IBIS enabled camera ?

Click to expand...

Probably none. But the possibility of Pixel Shift (like my Pen-F has) would be truly great and could be useful in some types of studio or landscape situations. Personally I'm hoping for an IBIS and IS combined benefit like Olympus does. I hear the 12-100/4's combined IBIS + Lens IS is the stuff of legends. ;-)

Kumsa said:

What's a possible image that I would fail to capture with an IS lens versus an IBIS enabled camera ?

Click to expand...

Surely with IBIS you get all lenses stabilized, old and new.

And with IBIS you can have the high resolution modes (either like Pentax with "just" 4 pictures to overcome the Bayer patern or like Sony and Panasonic to get huge resolution) that are not possible with OIS. This is great if one shoots products, art colections or for book archival.

But what is absolutly unique is the Astrotracer mode. The sensor moves slowly to compensate Earth movement in conjunction with the GPS to get sharp long exposures (up to 5 minutes) of stars and nebulas and break the 500/600 rule.

https://nightscapephotographer.com/pentax-k1-astrotracer/

http://www.gippslandimages.com.au/basic-night-sky-photography/

Have fun,

Luis

maiaibing said:

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Its not instant so you need to remember to pause for half a second or so for it to become active and set.

Click to expand...

IBIS can be "always on" and thus way faster than in-lens stabilisation - which really needs time to settle in.

Click to expand...

There have been a lot of complaints on this forum and the Nikon Z forum about lens stabilisation being always on.

Sittatunga said:

David Hull said:

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Your welcome. Overall I like IBIS but for nightscapes I would prefer a camera without it due to the noise penalty.

Click to expand...

I assume this relates to this comment in your list:

It can heat the sensor in a longer exposure more than one without IBIS. So if using it for nightscapes or landscape long exposure you may get more noise after taking a few shots.

I am not sure how this comes about, what would be the mechanism for it?

Click to expand...

The First Law of Thermodynamics.

Any practical motor will produce waste heat, some of which will be conducted into the sensor mount. A sensor screwed into a metal chassis will dissipate heat by conduction more easily than one supported on electromagnets.

Click to expand...

Well, this is obviously a true fact but is it relevant? I've yet to see one complaint about it in Pentax forums and we have been using cameras with IBIS for "decades" (OK, since 2006 so just a bite longer that a decade). And many using the Astrotracer with very long exposures.

Have fun,

Luis

ZX11 said:

(I)BIS is mostly useless to me due to...

Click to expand...

But that is just you, isn't it?

ZX11 said:

Furthermore, my family and animal subjects don't hold still for the photo, so slow shutters stabilized by IBIS result in blurry subjects.

Click to expand...

Correction: IBIS has nothing to do with this. The photo will be blury with OIS or even with a tripod. Only flash or faster shutter speed can help in this case.

ZX11 said:

IBIS only seems helpful if you are in a specific scenario where four or five horrible things (no IS lens, low light, etc) are happening to you at once, and the subject is dead.

Click to expand...

Like that amazing night scene you're looking at after trekking for a few days with a backpack.

Have fun,

Luis

I was asking this myself the other day when I was hiking next to a partially frozen stream, and thought, "wow, I wonder if I could capture a soft, semi-long exposure waterfall hand held with IBIS." I don't know the answer, but it seems like with 5-7 stops I could probably get pretty close.

For wedding photographers, it's an absolute god send.

I spend a lot of the day at my lower limit of 1/125 on the shutter speed, and very rarely do you get consistency perfect conditions to take a shot in.

IBIS means I can take shots single handedly or in less than ideal conditions, and get sharpness I just wouldn't get without IBIS.

1. All non stabilized optics become stabilized. Most canon EF primes for example are not stabilized. So, EF, RF, and legacy lenses will gain stabilization.

2. Supposedly IBIS coupled with the IS on the RF may give us 7 stops stabilization. That isn't trivial.

3. It can mean 1-2 stops better ISO. For example, if I were to shoot with the 50 stm on the EOS R at a completely static subject in dim light which requires 1/50, and ISO 12800, wide open, IBIS would allow me to cut down that ISO to 3200 or lower.

4. A more relaxed shooting experience. I don't think people should use bad technique. But I don't think can appreciate a more relaxed shooting experienced in situations where you would be close to the edge of what is possible hand held, while not stabilized. For example point 3. At 1/50, 1/25, 1/10 and a 50 mm lens one would have to ground one self, and focus on 3 point contact and breathing to get a sharp image. IBIS would allow you to shoot like you were shooting at 1/400, which allows you to focus more on the scene then perfect technique.

5. Useful for older people and/or less stable people. Not everyone can keep still. Some of my colleagues in their 50s and up for example have hands that are a little shaky.

6. Moving situations. Shooting out of a car, standing on a platform that isn't completely stable etc. This of course is a mixed bag. Stabilization won't be able to correct for huge movements. So you can't jump and it will correct for the large travel. But if you were sitting on a... Harley (which vibrates a lot) and you take a shot my guess is it would compensate for it.


These things have been mentioned by others. And downsides to IBIS as well. But the benefits are real. Basically I can get sharper images at lower ISO with the 24-105 f4 @50&f4 than I can with the 50 stm @f1.8. However the 50 f1.8 is better at AF in low light. With IS the 50 stm would allow for even lower ISOs wide open.

noggin2k1 said:

For wedding photographers, it's an absolute god send.

I spend a lot of the day at my lower limit of 1/125 on the shutter speed, and very rarely do you get consistency perfect conditions to take a shot in.

IBIS means I can take shots single handedly or in less than ideal conditions, and get sharpness I just wouldn't get without IBIS.

Click to expand...

Why can't you do this with the lens based IS?

noggin2k1 said:

For wedding photographers, it's an absolute god send.

I spend a lot of the day at my lower limit of 1/125 on the shutter speed, and very rarely do you get consistency perfect conditions to take a shot in.

IBIS means I can take shots single handedly or in less than ideal conditions, and get sharpness I just wouldn't get without IBIS.

Click to expand...

Hi I'm wedding photograper and I normally prefer to use 1/250 or faster to avoid blur from subject movements and I never go slower than 1/100 on people (incl flash use) even in the darkest venues. So lack of IBIS has not been a very big issue for me.

All the same I think my 135 F/2 would benefit from stabilisation, its particularaly sensitive to camera shake, even 1/250 is not safe with this lens.