R8-no ibis vs. R6 MKll - Ibis

thunder storm wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

Ephemeris wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

Looking at your gear list, you have EF-mount IS lenses. Those don't really benefit from IBIS on R-mount cameras. So with your current lenses, IBIS wouldn't add much, if anything.

For non-telephoto non-IS lenses and RF-mount IS lenses, IBIS does add a lot. Your 180mm won't benefit, the EVF will be a bit more stable, that's it.

I wasn't too sure but I think you are saying that EF lenses (any) don't really benefit from IBIS on R lenses. If I have misunderstood I apologise.

We have some EF lenses on R5s, not all owned now but it has covered 24mm to 200mm (and have extenders). Also a 100mm macro.

I'd say it's provided a good improvement over an R generally.

EF lenses with IS in the lens don’t really benefit from IBIS,

It adds correction for pitch and roll?

That's the understanding from Canon that I have.

nor do telephoto lenses without IS. The lenses that benefit from IBIS are EF lenses up to 80-ish mm, without IS in the lens. All RF lenses benefit from IBIS, regardless of having IS in the lens or not.

My EF28mm benefits a lot, my EF85 a bit and my EF180 only benefits from less shake in the EVF.

For me it's 3 stops at 50mm and 1 stop at 105mm.

I've never really analysed it except when we had one R5 and an R for a while to compare. R5 more keepers and able to go at least 1stop lower in shutter speed.

Lenses from 24mm to 200mm and a 1.4x extender available. Was particularly noticed with the EF100 f2.8

The EF100L I had actually performed worse at macro distances, which is why I replaced that one with the RF100.

I don’t have the steadiest hands in the world, so you might get better results

-- hide signature --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb7XV6E0v1Q