How many of GX9's "5-axis IBIS" are actually IB?

pardon me for asking this if it is clear to all, but it is unclear to me from the descriptions i've read what portion of the IBIS is actually built in to the sensor, and what is only available when using OIS Panny lenses. it looks like (to my uneducated mind) the sensor only includes the same 2-axis stabilization (simple shift up-down-left-right?) as was part of the GX7, with the rotational & fore-aft stabilization being performed by the lens? or vice versa?

i guess my question is, if i were to buy they GX9 & hook it up to my Oly 12-40, what kind of stabilization would i see?

Adding an OIS lens adds about one extra stop of IBIS. As for using a 12-40 Lens, you will get at least five stops of camera IBIS which is plenty for wider FL. I have only four stops IBIS on my EM1 and never had an issue with shooting with that lens. Longer lenses like the 100-400 this dual stalization can make a tangible difference.

It's 5-axis IBIS. http://i.imgur.com/x0XQL3H.jpg

Panasonic IBIS has been 5-axis since the GX85. This 5-axis is works even without OIS lenses. OIS only adds dual stabilization. Panasonic says explicitly the BIS is 5-axis.

See the video from Panasonic:

"Combining an O.I.S.(Optical Image Stabilizer, 2-axis) and a B.I.S.(Body Image Stabilizer, 5-axis), the 5-axis Dual I.S. compensates for a larger movement which was conventionally uncontrollable, making it possible to use 4-step slower shutter speed*1"

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

The GX7 BIS was 2-axis and GX8 BIS 4-axis.

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Helen wrote:

Juan Muchos Jarros wrote:

pardon me for asking this if it is clear to all, but it is unclear to me from the descriptions i've read what portion of the IBIS is actually built in to the sensor, and what is only available when using OIS Panny lenses. it looks like (to my uneducated mind) the sensor only includes the same 2-axis stabilization (simple shift up-down-left-right?) as was part of the GX7, with the rotational & fore-aft stabilization being performed by the lens? or vice versa?

i guess my question is, if i were to buy they GX9 & hook it up to my Oly 12-40, what kind of stabilization would i see?

5-axis is what you’d get, like on any current OM-D body. From the GX80/85 onwards, Panasonic has been using a magnetic levitation IBIS system rather like the Olympus one. Neither system does fore-aft movement, as that would interfere with focusing.

I think that the OP might have been referring to whether or not the “5-axis” stabilisation included the dual or triple extra stabilisation from any lens OIS available. Somehow perceiving that the 5-axis stabilisation needed the help from lens OIS to achieve that effect.

thanks very much, that was exactly what i was wondering about. i guess what threw me was this phrase from Panny's press release: "A 5-axis Dual I.S. (Image Stabilizer) in the LUMIX GX9 effectively suppresses blur. Combining an O.I.S. (Optical Image Stabilizer, 2-axis) and a B.I.S. (Body Image Stabilizer, 5-axis)," it just seemed an odd way to phrase it, given that those 2 axes are already covered by the BIS.

i know, yes, that it says the BIS is 5-axis, but i was thrown by the "addition" of the lens 2-axis OIS. so i guess that means it's stabilized in all 5 axes (x, y, z, strangeness & charm, let's call them) but adding an OIS lens that supports it adds quantum-level photon entanglement stabilization to the x & y axes.

My not terribly researched response would be that the stabilisation result of an Olympus lens without stabilisation would be very much the same on a current model IBIS stabilised body whether it was either an Olympus or a Panasonic body - but of course reserving the perceived opinion that Olympus IBIS alone is always slightly more equal

my thoughts exactly! i had considered this camera, but i think i might stick with my GX7 for now and wait for shrödinger's camera (the E-M5 Mk iii) and see if it more closely fills the bill.

My understanding is that the G9 adds 6.5 stops even if the lens does not have OIS. No real need for dual IBIS in that case though it must help in some way. Have only just got mine and have not had an opportunity to test it yet

I hope this old thread is appriopriate to my question, because it's still unclear for me.

Can anyone say what is really GX9 stabilization like? I made a lot of web research, including this thread, and still don't know, if:

1. IBIS + OIS are 4-stops only when used both as Dual I.S.

2. or IBIS is 4-stops alone, even with unstabilized lenses, plus stabilized lense as an addition.

There are not many tests or reviews of gx9 (much more about G9), and the ones I found says about 4-stops or 6.5-stops (I think it's mistakely taken from G9).

The official specification says: "Image sensor shift type (5-axis / 4-stop*), Dual I.S. compatible/*" witch in my opinion is the first one, the sensor is 4-sops. But on another official page Panasonic says "The 5-axis Dual I.S. works (...) and makes it possible to use a 4-stop slower shutter speed".

I'm asking, because Olympus e-m10 iii specification says about 4-stops IBIS and I wanted to compare, how GX9 works with non-Dual IS lenses. I know it's just theoretical anyways.

atomic77 wrote:

I hope this old thread is appriopriate to my question, because it's still unclear for me.

Can anyone say what is really GX9 stabilization like? I made a lot of web research, including this thread, and still don't know, if:

1. IBIS + OIS are 4-stops only when used both as Dual I.S.

2. or IBIS is 4-stops alone, even with unstabilized lenses, plus stabilized lense as an addition.

There are not many tests or reviews of gx9 (much more about G9), and the ones I found says about 4-stops or 6.5-stops (I think it's mistakely taken from G9).

The official specification says: "Image sensor shift type (5-axis / 4-stop*), Dual I.S. compatible/*" witch in my opinion is the first one, the sensor is 4-sops. But on another official page Panasonic says "The 5-axis Dual I.S. works (...) and makes it possible to use a 4-stop slower shutter speed".

I'm asking, because Olympus e-m10 iii specification says about 4-stops IBIS and I wanted to compare, how GX9 works with non-Dual IS lenses. I know it's just theoretical anyways.

If you own a GX9, unmount the lens, switch the power on, and try to move the camera around you can see the sensor moves.

Indeed it is a floating sensor held in place by electromagnetic force on power on. GX9 is also an improved version from the GX85. In case of GX85, on power off, I can see the sensor rock inside the casing when move the cam from side to side. According to Helen, the sensor of GX9 sits mire steadily in its position.

Therefore, the GX85/9, same as G85, GH5 and G9, are a true 5 axis IBIS system. GX7 and GX8 uses a fixed position design (non floating).

I did my home testing on my newly purchased GX85 last year, it had given me around 5 stops of effective stabilisation on 12~35 f/2.8 @35, or 4 stops on 12~32 @32 vs the traditional rule of thumb. Both lenses are Dual IS compatible.

On my only non OIS lens 14 f/2.5, I had around 2 stops stabilisation which is around 1 stop more effective than on GX7. Some members claimed the new IBIS of Pany to have very effective IBIS for non OIS lenses, I can't varify it.

A rule of Pany, in case of an OIS lens (non Dual IS compatible), only lens OIS or no stabilisation be allowed.

Thanks for your answer, it makes me more confident to choose GX9. But the question was more theoretical - How does it compare to, for example, Olympus, when using not stabilized lens. Because there are some differences in both reviews and technical specifications.

atomic77 wrote:

Thanks for your answer, it makes me more confident to choose GX9. But the question was more theoretical - How does it compare to, for example, Olympus, when using not stabilized lens. Because there are some differences in both reviews and technical specifications.

It might not be the same as other members.

To my understanding, Dual IS is more or less the same as EM5-II in terms of 5 stops. For OIS only (3 stops for 14~45) or non OIS lens, I might weight EM5-II better.

atomic77 wrote:

Thanks for your answer, it makes me more confident to choose GX9. But the question was more theoretical - How does it compare to, for example, Olympus, when using not stabilized lens. Because there are some differences in both reviews and technical specifications.

Differences in reviews are because the evaluation of stabilization systems is very subjective. And the person holding the camera plays a very important role in this process. As well as the lens used for the test. But back to the person, even the personal preferences, both objective like how camera ergonomics and grip fits to your hands and how much coffee is in your blood system, and subjective as liking or disliking a specific camera model and brand) can heavily influence the test outcome.

IMHO, measuring stabilization in  "stops" is bad, and is just slightly better than measuring it in "axis".

Forever green is the tree of life.

tt321 wrote:

There is usually a CIBA rating in stops. It can be useful for comparison purposes for the average person corresponding to whatever CIBA uses to give that rating. It's just like CIBA battery life rating is useful for cross comparisons (but might not be a good indication of how many shots each person may expect to get per charge).

CIPA ratings for battery life may at least give you some indication, and if camera A does the tests better than camera B then it is a good chance that also in your hands A will be better than B, even if the absolute numbers may be far off. At least as long as all cameras use the same screen technology etc.

Stabilization is far less comparable between persons, and it is easily to imagine a situation with two combinations of camera+lens, say X and Y, and two test persons, say A and B, where A finds X better than Y, and B finds Y better than X, and these may even be repeatable results. This situation just has too many variables in it.