Panasonic OIS compatibility on Olympus bodies?

Motorazr wrote:

I just received a new Panasonic 35-100mm f/4-5.6 and I’m surprised at the lack of OIS compatibility on some Olympus camera bodies. It’s not a shock that OIS doesn’t work on any of the older 12mp Olympus bodies. What surprises me though is that Panasonic’s campatibility chart shows a whole group of lenses which won’t stabilize on the E-M5 mkI and E-M10 mkIII. Oddly, to me at least, that same group of lenses DO stabilize on the E-M10 mkI and mkII.

I searched online without being able to find an explanation for this behavior. Why would some Panasonic lenses work on the E-M10 mkI and mkII but NOT on the newest mkIII? And why not on 12mp bodies like the E-PM1 but fully working on the 16mp E-PM2?

Surely someone on this forum knows why this limitation exists.

I assume you mean the list on this site:

http://av.jpn.support.panasonic.com/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/FourThirds_lens.html

I believe that the Panasonic lenses listed as "NG" for OIS on certain Olympus bodies are the ones with no OIS switch. If there's an OIS switch, you can turn it on and off on any body with no menu diving.

If it has no OIS switch, it has to be supported in the camera menu. So, support for lenses with no physical switch is entirely contingent on the manufacturer being able to and wanting to support it. With Olympus' older bodies, they didn't have it in the menu. With the newer bodies, they added it. Very simple.

Do you own the E-M10 III and are you sure it doesn't have a menu option for OIS lenses? That would be unusual IMO and a step back. If it's not there, perhaps Olympus think that IBIS is always better than the lens option for those lenses that don't have the switch. That would be wrong IMO, especially for the 45-175, but, if it's not there, perhaps that's what they think. With the 45-175 above 100mm, I think OIS would be better . With the rest, it's questionable. But OIS has advantages regardless of how good IBIS is, like the fact that it's always on and always stabilized EVF.

Sorry I can’t answer your question, but as I own the lens, I am curious if both your E-PM models built-in sensor shift IS works even if O.I.S. doesn’t. Must add that the O.I.S. works similarly to the built-in 5-axis IS on my EM5.2 but the EM1.2 is better with the built-in IS vs the lens’s O.I.S.

With all the usual confusion I finally made a page that shows how Panasonic OIS lenses behave on various Olympus bodies...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/30-oly-stabilisation.html

From E-PL5/E-PM2 onwards the rules are good, before that the rules were bad, except for E-M5 Mk1 if updated to V2.2 where it joins the later rules bunch. My timeline also has some additional stabilisation info...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/80-Oly-timeline.html

Regards..... Guy

Guy Parsons wrote:

With all the usual confusion I finally made a page that shows how Panasonic OIS lenses behave on various Olympus bodies...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/30-oly-stabilisation.html

From E-PL5/E-PM2 onwards the rules are good, before that the rules were bad, except for E-M5 Mk1 if updated to V2.2 where it joins the later rules bunch. My timeline also has some additional stabilisation info...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/80-Oly-timeline.html

Regards..... Guy

Not supporting OIS lenses with no physical switch is a step backward and probably more an attempt to bite into Panasonic lens sales than anything else.

Bad move IMO.

Holistic Photog wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

With all the usual confusion I finally made a page that shows how Panasonic OIS lenses behave on various Olympus bodies...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/30-oly-stabilisation.html

From E-PL5/E-PM2 onwards the rules are good, before that the rules were bad, except for E-M5 Mk1 if updated to V2.2 where it joins the later rules bunch. My timeline also has some additional stabilisation info...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/80-Oly-timeline.html

Regards..... Guy

Not supporting OIS lenses with no physical switch is a step backward and probably more an attempt to bite into Panasonic lens sales than anything else.

Bad move IMO.

Yes, that decision rates as totally 100% stupid.

They have gone backwards by 6 years to do that.

In the case of the E-M5 Mk1 they eventually updated its rules to handle unswitched OIS properly, it's just so simple to do the same for the E-M10 Mk3 (right now!) - make it a normal Oly camera, not some crippled "beginner's" camera.

In dumbing down the E-M10 Mk3 they went just a few too many steps too far.

My main beef is that this camera is not an E-M10, it is something else. Their old naming standards from last century would have called it maybe an E-M1000.

Regards..... Guy

Guy Parsons wrote:

With all the usual confusion I finally made a page that shows how Panasonic OIS lenses behave on various Olympus bodies...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/30-oly-stabilisation.html

From E-PL5/E-PM2 onwards the rules are good, before that the rules were bad, except for E-M5 Mk1 if updated to V2.2 where it joins the later rules bunch. My timeline also has some additional stabilisation info...... http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~parsog/olyepl1/80-Oly-timeline.html

Regards..... Guy

Great write-up Guy. My question answered.

Motorazr wrote:

Thank you for your response, Guy.

I’m amused (not really) at the number of Google hits directing me to web pages making the simplistic claim that all Micro Four-Thirds lenses are “100% cross-compatible”.

The reviewers usually get it wrong.

The OIS/IBIS thing still has issues, such as Olympus cannot make dual IBIS+OIS work with Panasonic lenses as they have stated that they use different algorithms.

The Panasonic 12-32mm cannot MF on Olympus bodies. Panasonic lenses that have aperture rings are useless ornaments on Olympus bodies, Olympus only works with body control of apertures (I'm definitely OK with that one).

So, life is easier if sticking to same brand lenses as the body, but there are always some benefits at times in certain cases. Like the Panasonic 45-150mm using OIS on the appropriate Olympus bodies does give a stabilised live view without needing to use half press option. That is really nice on those earlier bodies like the E-PL5/6, but not so good on my E-P5 as the IBIS is so much better than the OIS that I put up with a wobbly live view (I don't use half press IBIS).

Now I also have the 35-100/2.8 on E-P5 but use the IBIS anyway, the switch is always there to change to OIS if I think that may give a clearer live view.

So M4/3 has a common mount but there are many little issues, but that does not stop people from buying cross brand lenses just to get the focal lengths or apertures needed.

It’s just fantastic that older Olympus bodies without credible in-body image stabilization can’t use OIS unless the lens has its own switch to turn on stabilization (while IBIS is turned off).

I started with the E-PL1 and along the way added Panasonic 14-45mm (with switch) and 45-150mm (no switch) and got along OK. but it got way better when I bought the E-PL5 where I could use both lenses properly as needed. Made sense to use OIS with the early Olys as their IBIS is a bit tragic, it adds some blur most times.

Sadly the M4/3 companies don't seem to publish charts of all the problems, or at best make it hard to find possible problems.

As I said long ago and it's still true, we are all beta testers for the digital camera industry.

Regards.... Guy

I shoot with an EM1.2 + 12-100 Pro as my main combo. Of course the dual IS is stunningly good. But really IS of any type is mostly useful in low light when shutter speeds are slower, and to allow lower ISO, especially at longer focal lengths. But, back in my 35mm film days, IS only became available in the last few years. In fact I got my first stabilised lens just before I took my last film photos about 15-16 years ago. Until then, like everyone else we simply user the shutter speed to focal length ratio and it worked fine. Although we didn’t pixel peep prints so critically then either.

TL:DR: Does IS really make that much of a difference for most photography that we should worry about compatibility?

My thoughts, and I offer this purely as comment, I’m not saying I’m right or that others’ don’t have valid points to make:

With few exceptions, lenses and bodies released about the same time seem to be relatively compatible especially of the same brand. And again with few exceptions, the newer bodies seem able to take advantage of lens IS if it’s available. Nowadays, with such effective 5-axis IBIS as on the latest Olympus and more recent Panasonic bodies, lens IS seems less important IMO. Nice if dual IS is available, but hardly critical. Do we really take that many photos at 1” shutter speeds hand held? They’re more likely to be travel snaps than something critical that you’d want to print a 30x20”. For those you’re more likely to use a tripod or similar anyway.

Acknowledging that the thread is about cross-manufacturer lens compatibility, μ4/3 is now more about the mount than total compatibility isn’t it? I mean, why should one company restrict what they see as their advantage take a back seat to cross-brand usage? Panasonic clearly has been the leader in lens OIS while Olympus sees IBIS as it’s solution. And even then, I think Panasonic’s widest prime lens with OIS is the 42.5mm. Under that you get no IS unless using a later model with IBIS or an Olympus. All that said, I am sure that both manufacturers have released bodies at times with features that “encourage” the purchase of their lenses. And that goes for all systems. In 50 years of photography, I’ve almost without exception found I get the best results with a native brand lens. Some love their Sigmas and no doubting they have some incredible glass for the prices, but they rarely have 100% compatibility with the body they’re mounted on either.

In my view, IS is at best 10-20% important. And that is when I’m using a long focal length without a tripod.

Guy Parsons wrote:

Motorazr wrote:

Thank you for your response, Guy.

I’m amused (not really) at the number of Google hits directing me to web pages making the simplistic claim that all Micro Four-Thirds lenses are “100% cross-compatible”.

The reviewers usually get it wrong.

The OIS/IBIS thing still has issues, such as Olympus cannot make dual IBIS+OIS work with Panasonic lenses as they have stated that they use different algorithms.

The Panasonic 12-32mm cannot MF on Olympus bodies. Panasonic lenses that have aperture rings are useless ornaments on Olympus bodies, Olympus only works with body control of apertures (I'm definitely OK with that one).

So, life is easier if sticking to same brand lenses as the body, but there are always some benefits at times in certain cases. Like the Panasonic 45-150mm using OIS on the appropriate Olympus bodies does give a stabilised live view without needing to use half press option. That is really nice on those earlier bodies like the E-PL5/6, but not so good on my E-P5 as the IBIS is so much better than the OIS that I put up with a wobbly live view (I don't use half press IBIS).

The issue is that a lot of times, you don't actually need stabilization for the shot but you want it for looking in the EVF (without half pressing). For me, that's most of the time on long lenses. A lot of times at long FL's, your shutter speed is so fast for freezing motion that stabilization isn't needed, but it's annoying looking at a screen or EVF that's not stabilized. Thus OIS.

Also, at longer focal lengths, power OIS is better than IBIS. The 45-150, with mega OIS, is dubious at 150mm as to if it's better or IBIS is better. But, as I mentioned before, the 45-175 is better than IBIS. So, they've taken something away from that lens IMO. And it's one of my favorite lenses.

For the longer, highly stabilized lenses like the 100-300 II and 100-400, Panasonic uses a switch, so Olympus may be able to get away with it. If Panasonic weren't using a switch for those lenses, Olympus could never get away with this without massive complaints.

And let's not forget that Panasonic COULD add very long, highly stabilized lenses without switches in the future, and that would make the E-M10 III a highly crippled camera in the future if that happened.

Now I also have the 35-100/2.8 on E-P5 but use the IBIS anyway, the switch is always there to change to OIS if I think that may give a clearer live view.

So M4/3 has a common mount but there are many little issues, but that does not stop people from buying cross brand lenses just to get the focal lengths or apertures needed.

It’s just fantastic that older Olympus bodies without credible in-body image stabilization can’t use OIS unless the lens has its own switch to turn on stabilization (while IBIS is turned off).

I started with the E-PL1 and along the way added Panasonic 14-45mm (with switch) and 45-150mm (no switch) and got along OK. but it got way better when I bought the E-PL5 where I could use both lenses properly as needed. Made sense to use OIS with the early Olys as their IBIS is a bit tragic, it adds some blur most times.

Sadly the M4/3 companies don't seem to publish charts of all the problems, or at best make it hard to find possible problems.

As I said long ago and it's still true, we are all beta testers for the digital camera industry.

Regards.... Guy

JakeJY wrote:

I should say, to be fair, in Panasonic bodies there is no choice of using OIS or IBIS (it's either stabilization is on or off; OIS switch doesn't let you do that either), so Olympus provided more options in the first place.

Of course Panasonic has dual IS which mitigates most of this.

Olympus now has a couple of lenses with OIS and in some earlier bodies it does X-Y correction with the lens and Roll correction only with the IBIS. Limited cooperation.

Some latest bodies do work better and combine OIS and IBIS to get better X-Y stabilisation plus of course Roll correction. With those two Oly lenses turn off the OIS switch and it turns off all stabilisation. So it's all or nothing.

They did a late upgrade to the old E-M5 Mk1 to include Panasonic non-switched OIS lenses, but then in the E-M10 Mk3 they dropped that ability and went backwards by 6 years.

The rules get weirder as time goes by.

Regards..... Guy