AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

Started Jan 24, 2010 | Discussions
EagerBeaver Forum Member • Posts: 94
AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

This weeks Amateur Photographer magazine includes a test of a number of both Lens and Sensor (In-body) shake reduction systems, including a test of the K7 using a Sigma 50-200 both with and without use of Lens-IS and Sensor-IS.

In general the results showed that the Lens (Optical) IS systems performed significantly better than the Sensor-IS based systems

The tests were based on sets of 10 images of a resolution chart taken hand-held at 1/8 & 1/15 sec, assessed both for suitability for printing at A4 size and the measured resolution.

The results for the K7's Sensor-IS were rather poor, and in fact were by far the worst of the 3 Sensor-IS based systems tested, the others being the Olympus E-620 and the Sony Alpha 500.

For example, for the K7 at 1/15 sec only 2 of the Sensor-IS shots were deemed acceptable for printing at A4 compared with 9 for the Lens-IS shots. At 1/8 sec none of the Sensor-IS shots passed the test.

The Panasonic G1 performed particularly well, yielding 10 acceptable shots using its 14-140 Lumix Vario Mega-OIS system

So ..... is it worth using Pentax Sensor-IS for general use? It seems not !

(Don't shoot the messenger !!!)

-- hide signature --

Tony-H

 EagerBeaver's gear list:EagerBeaver's gear list
Canon PowerShot G7 X Pentax K-5 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 +2 more
godfrog Senior Member • Posts: 1,463
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

Seems to be in line with what I find myself and what DPReview.com is finding (even if their testing is flawed).

It would be nice to see stabilized lenses for Pentax. In-body IS for primes and old glass, in-lens for zooms.

-- hide signature --
YunZY Regular Member • Posts: 276
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

EagerBeaver wrote:

This weeks Amateur Photographer magazine includes a test of a number of both Lens and Sensor (In-body) shake reduction systems, including a test of the K7 using a Sigma 50-200 both with and without use of Lens-IS and Sensor-IS.

In general the results showed that the Lens (Optical) IS systems performed significantly better than the Sensor-IS based systems

The tests were based on sets of 10 images of a resolution chart taken hand-held at 1/8 & 1/15 sec, assessed both for suitability for printing at A4 size and the measured resolution.

The results for the K7's Sensor-IS were rather poor, and in fact were by far the worst of the 3 Sensor-IS based systems tested, the others being the Olympus E-620 and the Sony Alpha 500.

For example, for the K7 at 1/15 sec only 2 of the Sensor-IS shots were deemed acceptable for printing at A4 compared with 9 for the Lens-IS shots. At 1/8 sec none of the Sensor-IS shots passed the test.

The Panasonic G1 performed particularly well, yielding 10 acceptable shots using its 14-140 Lumix Vario Mega-OIS system

So ..... is it worth using Pentax Sensor-IS for general use? It seems not !

(Don't shoot the messenger !!!)

Now I will feel content if the SR does not introduce any extra blur.

steelski Senior Member • Posts: 2,555
Please add some more figures. like sensor based IS Oly and Sony

Please add some more figures. like sensor based IS Oly and Sony

opiecat Senior Member • Posts: 2,404
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

godfrog wrote:

Seems to be in line with what I find myself and what DPReview.com is finding (even if their testing is flawed).

It would be nice to see stabilized lenses for Pentax. In-body IS for primes and old glass, in-lens for zooms.

sigma has a few with OS. nice to see stabilization in the OVF.

btw, do you have a link to this article?

-- hide signature --

'when 900 years you reach, look as good you will not'
-- master yoda

http://jordanpaw.zenfolio.com

h734790 Regular Member • Posts: 115
Some disappointing figures

steelski wrote:

Please add some more figures. like sensor based IS Oly and Sony

The meaning of the numbers in order:
number of shots OK
increase in resolution

Olympus E-620 with Zuiko Digital 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5mm
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 0 2
1/15sec Off: 0
1/15sec On: 10 2.6

Pentax K-7 with Sigma 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 1 2.4
1/15sec Off: 1
1/15sec On: 3 -0.6

Sony Alpha 550 with Sigma 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 4 3.6
1/15sec Off: 0
1/15sec On: 10 4.4

According to the conclusion the Sigma OS system in the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS performed much better than Pentax SR, but it was beaten by the Sony's SteadyShot IS. The Pentax horizon correction function, when used, lowered the Pentax SR and Sigma OS scores. Both the SteadyShot and the Olympus IS managed to boost the number of OK images at 1/15sec from 0 to 10, and so did Panasonic’s OIS even at 1/8sec.

OP EagerBeaver Forum Member • Posts: 94
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

opiecat wrote:

btw, do you have a link to this article?

The article is not available on-line, only in print in the issue dated 23 January.
--
Tony-H

 EagerBeaver's gear list:EagerBeaver's gear list
Canon PowerShot G7 X Pentax K-5 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 +2 more
opiecat Senior Member • Posts: 2,404
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

did they mention how they tested the SR?
what was their source of vibration ? did they use janneman's lawnmower ?

-- hide signature --

'when 900 years you reach, look as good you will not'
-- master yoda

http://jordanpaw.zenfolio.com

Russell Evans Forum Pro • Posts: 12,617
Re: Some disappointing figures

h734790 wrote:

steelski wrote:

Please add some more figures. like sensor based IS Oly and Sony

The meaning of the numbers in order:
number of shots OK
increase in resolution

Olympus E-620 with Zuiko Digital 40-150mm f/3.5-4.5mm
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 0 2
1/15sec Off: 0
1/15sec On: 10 2.6

Pentax K-7 with Sigma 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 1 2.4
1/15sec Off: 1
1/15sec On: 3 -0.6

Sony Alpha 550 with Sigma 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS
1/8sec Off: 0
1/8sec On: 4 3.6
1/15sec Off: 0
1/15sec On: 10 4.4

According to the conclusion the Sigma OS system in the 50-200mm f/4-5.6 DC OS performed much better than Pentax SR, but it was beaten by the Sony's SteadyShot IS. The Pentax horizon correction function, when used, lowered the Pentax SR and Sigma OS scores. Both the SteadyShot and the Olympus IS managed to boost the number of OK images at 1/15sec from 0 to 10, and so did Panasonic’s OIS even at 1/8sec.

Are these the results at 200mm?

Thank you
Russell

-- hide signature --
Jimbob Productions Veteran Member • Posts: 3,776
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

None out of 10 at 1/8th! Tester must've had the DT's! Pathetic.

Whilst I haven't done a specific test on the K-7, here's a 1 second shot at 200mm on the K20D, handheld. M42 lens at that.

h734790 Regular Member • Posts: 115
Yes, results are at 200mm (nt)
Tan68
Tan68 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,778
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

EagerBeaver wrote:

So ..... is it worth using Pentax Sensor-IS for general use? It seems not !

i had always figured in-lens was better.

just because it seemed more likely to be effective based on my seat of the jeans understanding of the amount of movement required by in-lens v. in-camera to correct vibration.

but, i don't think it makes the Pentax system useless. there is a difference btwn less effective and (completely) ineffective. i think the Pentax system is fine for general use. not so fine for extreme situations.

oh, yes, my little Panasonic FZ-5 with the in-lens stabilization does much better at the same effective FL than my Pentax.

 Tan68's gear list:Tan68's gear list
Phase One Capture One Pro +1 more
Roland Mabo Forum Pro • Posts: 12,462
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

Regarding your question if it is worth to use the Pentax SR system, my longtime experience with Pentax SR (K10D and K-x) says a definately Yes.
I see a worthwile improvement and when using SR compared to when not using SR.

Of course a tripod is the best, but for handheld photography I have got shots with the SR on that wouldn't be possible with SR off.
So my experience is that the Pentax SR system works and it works well.

There are tests that says it is poor, there are tests that says it is the best on the market.
I say, try it and judge yourself.

-- hide signature --
labnut Senior Member • Posts: 1,016
Good results

I am getting good results at 1/10 sec so fail to understand the fuss. And it works with my old lenses, what a bonus!!

pcarfan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,948
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

EagerBeaver wrote:

For example, for the K7 at 1/15 sec only 2 of the Sensor-IS shots were deemed acceptable for printing at A4 compared with 9 for the Lens-IS shots. At 1/8 sec none of the Sensor-IS shots passed the test.

...........................

So ..... is it worth using Pentax Sensor-IS for general use? It seems not !

(Don't shoot the messenger !!!)

-- hide signature --

Tony-H

I have extensively tested the lowest shutter and yet get sharp shots at 100% pixel view (I am a proud pixel peeper). I did this to study what can be done with low-light night shots, and I ended up getting some F2 lenses after this test.

I was hoping that 1/5th would work for me, but the lowest shutter I can use and still consistently get sharp pictures at 100% view is 1/8th second for my lenses from 15mm to 43mm that I had tested with my K-7.

So, you are saying this test showed no usable shots at 1/8th and you conclusion is that Pentax sensor-IS is worthless in general use. But, unfortunately I found even 1/8th very useful, and I am a stickler for sharpness.

But, now that this test is out and you have made your conclusions based on that test, should I immediately stop using Pentax SR and switch systems ?

It was a rhetorical question, and I hope it is obvious what the answer is.....I am a proud pixel peeper, but IMO coming to conclusions of your sort with one test, whether be SR, camera, lens, etc., is irrational.

We see lots of posts like this with this lens is better than that, this camera is better than that camera etc., and the ONE AND ONLY THING that these threads reveal to me is not the difference between what gear is being discussed but the complete lack of rationality of the person who is posting these irrational conclusions. Frankly I feel sorry for those who are impeded by this disease that keeps them away from enjoying photography.

But, I know there are lots of people who believe anything in print, everything on TV and some anything on the web as well, and there are those who drop all rationality and ignore everything the users had to say as soon as a 'test' is out. It is pathetic, but it is also the reality......

-- hide signature --

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=2323984&subSubSection=0&language=EN

K10D, K-7
Pentax Primes: DA21/3.2, FA*24/2, F28/2.8, FA35/2, FA43/1.9, FA77/1.8, F135/2.8
Sigma Zooms: Sigma 10-20, Sigma 100-300 F4

'Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming... 'Wow! What a ride!'

viking79
viking79 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,156
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

It makes me wonder if there is some bug in the newer Pentax SR code. I don't know if my K-7 is as good as my K10d or K20d were, but I haven't formally tested. I think circumstances play a lot into it.

When I tested my K20d I had a usable 2 stop increase. That is significant enough for me. My K-m/K-2000 never seemed as good with SR either.

Testing this type of thing can be very difficult, as it depends too much on each user.

Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://viking79.blogspot.com/ (Weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
See my PPG Shots: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/erictastad (8/31/09)

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony a7R Samsung NX1 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
viking79
viking79 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,156
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

pcarfan wrote:

I was hoping that 1/5th would work for me, but the lowest shutter I can use and still consistently get sharp pictures at 100% view is 1/8th second for my lenses from 15mm to 43mm that I had tested with my K-7.

Same here, 1/8th seems to be about the limit for SR.

I also agree about that rationality of some of these posts, the test is a bit biased if it only shows at 200mm (I haven't seen the actual test yet), the in lens system will certainly start to have an advantage at that focal length.

How well does in lens work at stabilizing 40 year old takumar lenses or new auto focus primes at focal lengths less than 200mm? And a couple f/stops of shake reduction at longer focal lengths is nothing to laugh at.

Eric

-- hide signature --

I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://viking79.blogspot.com/ (Weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
See my PPG Shots: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/erictastad (8/31/09)

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony a7R Samsung NX1 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
h734790 Regular Member • Posts: 115
FL was different

pcarfan wrote:

I was hoping that 1/5th would work for me, but the lowest shutter I can use and still consistently get sharp pictures at 100% view is 1/8th second for my lenses from 15mm to 43mm that I had tested with my K-7.

So, you are saying this test showed no usable shots at 1/8th and you conclusion is that Pentax sensor-IS is worthless in general use. But, unfortunately I found even 1/8th very useful, and I am a stickler for sharpness.

In the test they used a zoom lens at around 125mm. At 1/8 it is almost 5 stops from the hand-holdable shutter speed. If you used a 15 or 43mm lens at 1/8 it was only 1.5-3 stops from the safe value.

pcarfan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,948
Re: AP's Test of Shake Reduction Systems (incl. K7)

viking79 wrote:

pcarfan wrote:

I was hoping that 1/5th would work for me, but the lowest shutter I can use and still consistently get sharp pictures at 100% view is 1/8th second for my lenses from 15mm to 43mm that I had tested with my K-7.

Same here, 1/8th seems to be about the limit for SR.

I also agree about that rationality of some of these posts, the test is a bit biased if it only shows at 200mm (I haven't seen the actual test yet), the in lens system will certainly start to have an advantage at that focal length.

How well does in lens work at stabilizing 40 year old takumar lenses or new auto focus primes at focal lengths less than 200mm? And a couple f/stops of shake reduction at longer focal lengths is nothing to laugh at.

Eric

My beef is not even with the test, but what kind of thinking comes to this conclusion from ANY test.

"So ..... is it worth using Pentax Sensor-IS for general use? It seems not ! :("

What happened to the hundreds of posts posted over the years showing the effectiveness ?, even if we ignore all those posts, just the one post that Jsherman did with his lawnmower proves beyond doubt that sensor-SR works, how could a person throw all that out as soon as one 'test' is out and say it seems like Pentax sensor-IS in general use is not worthy?...How ?

-- hide signature --

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=2323984&subSubSection=0&language=EN

K10D, K-7
Pentax Primes: DA21/3.2, FA*24/2, F28/2.8, FA35/2, FA43/1.9, FA77/1.8, F135/2.8
Sigma Zooms: Sigma 10-20, Sigma 100-300 F4

'Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming... 'Wow! What a ride!'

h734790 Regular Member • Posts: 115
I was wrong: FL length was 125mm (200mm eq.)
-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads