OM-1 Mark II - Sync IS = No Advantage...

[DNBush]

Looking at the specs for the OM-1 Mark II it says...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Up to 8.5 EV steps* ((Body only))

Up to 8.5 EV steps** (Sync IS)

Based on CIPA measurement conditions

*When using M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II. Focal length: 40mm

(35mm equivalent: 80mm)

**When using the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO.

Focal length: 150mm (35mm equivalent: 300mm), halfway release image

stabilisation Off, Frame rate: High

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So this seems to imply that lenses with Sync IS (12-100 f/4 for instance) no longer add anything to the stabilization.

Am I reading the right?

I know for lower range bodies like the OM-3 which has only 6.5 stops in body, Sync IS still adds some, getting you up to 7.5 stops.

But this makes it sound like the OM-1 Mark II has maxed out via in body alone.

 

[drj3]

The stated values for stabilization are typically reported for specific lenses at specific focal lengths. One can assume that these give the best numbers. They do not necessarily apply to any other lens at those focal lengths or any other focal length.

Also you should note that the reported values are only stabilization for two axes (yaw/pitch). The camera IBIS and Dual stabilization are for 5 axis stabilization.

 

[DNBush]

The stated values for stabilization are typically reported for specific lenses at specific focal lengths. One can assume that these give the best numbers. They do not necessarily apply to any other lens at those focal lengths or any other focal length.

Right... by the issue is, with the OM-1 (mark 1) OM System says IBIS provides 7.0 stops and with Sync IS you get 8.0

They further say that with the Mark II you get 8.5 stops IBIS and, this is the important part, with Sync IS, you get 8.5 as well. So Sync IS doesn't get you any better stabilization. At least not based on what OM System is telling us. Specifically they say...

"The OM-1 Mark II boasts an impressive 8.5 EV stops of stabilisation, taking it 1.5 stops further than the already impressive OM-1. It also features Sync-IS up to 8.5 stops."

Also you should note that the reported values are only stabilization for two axes (yaw/pitch). The camera IBIS and Dual stabilization are for 5 axis stabilization.

Really? I read this in the specs for the Mark II under Image Stabilization...

Type: Sensor shift

Modes Five-dimensional, vertical or horizontal activation,

And they provide the following to illustrate this, showing five axis in-body stabilization...

 

[vcxz]

For what it's worth, when I was choosing between the 12-40 f2.8 and 12-100, I thought I could compensate for the slower f4 with sync IS. On both lenses, I seemed to max out at 1/10 to get the consistent sharpness I desired. That is, I didn't notice better stabilization with the 12-100 myself. So your analysis would be consistent with my real life experiences.

 

[drj3]

The stated values for stabilization are typically reported for specific lenses at specific focal lengths. One can assume that these give the best numbers. They do not necessarily apply to any other lens at those focal lengths or any other focal length.

Right... by the issue is, with the OM-1 (mark 1) OM System says IBIS provides 7.0 stops and with Sync IS you get 8.0

They further say that with the Mark II you get 8.5 stops IBIS and, this is the important part, with Sync IS, you get 8.5 as well. So Sync IS doesn't get you any better stabilization. At least not based on what OM System is telling us. Specifically they say...

"The OM-1 Mark II boasts an impressive 8.5 EV stops of stabilisation, taking it 1.5 stops further than the already impressive OM-1. It also features Sync-IS up to 8.5 stops."

Also you should note that the reported values are only stabilization for two axes (yaw/pitch). The camera IBIS and Dual stabilization are for 5 axis stabilization.

Really? I read this in the specs for the Mark II under Image Stabilization...

Type: Sensor shift

Modes Five-dimensional, vertical or horizontal activation,

And they provide the following to illustrate this, showing five axis in-body stabilization...

I guess I was not clear enough in my post. With the OM1.2 you get the equivalent of 8.5 stops correction for two axes (yaw/pitch) with the lenses on the CPIA approved test apparatus.

It says nothing about the other 3 types of stabilization that OM Systems indicates they control or how many actual stops you get with even the two specified lenses for all 5 stabilization actions.

The stated stops would be the upper limit of stabilization if there was no movement in the other three axis. The number of stops may be different for any other lens at the tested focal lengths.

The camera/lens stabilizes the other three types of movement, but there is no promise of how many stops that allows. The only promise is that you get that 8.5 stops for two types of movement for the specifically stated lenses and focal lengths as tested by CIPA approved equipment.

--
drj3

 

[DNBush]

The stated values for stabilization are typically reported for specific lenses at specific focal lengths. One can assume that these give the best numbers. They do not necessarily apply to any other lens at those focal lengths or any other focal length.

Right... by the issue is, with the OM-1 (mark 1) OM System says IBIS provides 7.0 stops and with Sync IS you get 8.0

They further say that with the Mark II you get 8.5 stops IBIS and, this is the important part, with Sync IS, you get 8.5 as well. So Sync IS doesn't get you any better stabilization. At least not based on what OM System is telling us. Specifically they say...

"The OM-1 Mark II boasts an impressive 8.5 EV stops of stabilisation, taking it 1.5 stops further than the already impressive OM-1. It also features Sync-IS up to 8.5 stops."

Also you should note that the reported values are only stabilization for two axes (yaw/pitch). The camera IBIS and Dual stabilization are for 5 axis stabilization.

Really? I read this in the specs for the Mark II under Image Stabilization...

Type: Sensor shift

Modes Five-dimensional, vertical or horizontal activation,

And they provide the following to illustrate this, showing five axis in-body stabilization...

I guess I was not clear enough in my post. With the OM1.2 you get the equivalent of 8.5 stops correction for two axes (yaw/pitch) with the lenses on the CPIA approved test apparatus.

It says nothing about the other 3 types of stabilization that OM Systems indicates they control or how many actual stops you get with even the two specified lenses for all 5 stabilization actions.

The stated stops would be the upper limit of stabilization if there was no movement in the other three axis. The number of stops may be different for any other lens at the tested focal lengths.

The camera/lens stabilizes the other three types of movement, but there is no promise of how many stops that allows. The only promise is that you get that 8.5 stops for two types of movement for the specifically stated lenses and focal lengths as tested by CIPA approved equipment.

Can you point me to the OM System documentation that details all that you said?

And while your looking for that I want to reiterate the point that I am making and that is, that with the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses. With the OM-1 Mark II, you cannot. And that's coming right from OMDS.

 

[drj3]

The stated values for stabilization are typically reported for specific lenses at specific focal lengths. One can assume that these give the best numbers. They do not necessarily apply to any other lens at those focal lengths or any other focal length.

Right... by the issue is, with the OM-1 (mark 1) OM System says IBIS provides 7.0 stops and with Sync IS you get 8.0

They further say that with the Mark II you get 8.5 stops IBIS and, this is the important part, with Sync IS, you get 8.5 as well. So Sync IS doesn't get you any better stabilization. At least not based on what OM System is telling us. Specifically they say...

"The OM-1 Mark II boasts an impressive 8.5 EV stops of stabilisation, taking it 1.5 stops further than the already impressive OM-1. It also features Sync-IS up to 8.5 stops."

Also you should note that the reported values are only stabilization for two axes (yaw/pitch). The camera IBIS and Dual stabilization are for 5 axis stabilization.

Really? I read this in the specs for the Mark II under Image Stabilization...

Type: Sensor shift

Modes Five-dimensional, vertical or horizontal activation,

And they provide the following to illustrate this, showing five axis in-body stabilization...

I guess I was not clear enough in my post. With the OM1.2 you get the equivalent of 8.5 stops correction for two axes (yaw/pitch) with the lenses on the CPIA approved test apparatus.

It says nothing about the other 3 types of stabilization that OM Systems indicates they control or how many actual stops you get with even the two specified lenses for all 5 stabilization actions.

The stated stops would be the upper limit of stabilization if there was no movement in the other three axis. The number of stops may be different for any other lens at the tested focal lengths.

The camera/lens stabilizes the other three types of movement, but there is no promise of how many stops that allows. The only promise is that you get that 8.5 stops for two types of movement for the specifically stated lenses and focal lengths as tested by CIPA approved equipment.

Can you point me to the OM System documentation that details all that you said?

And while your looking for that I want to reiterate the point that I am making and that is, that with the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses. With the OM-1 Mark II, you cannot. And that's coming right from OMDS.

Simply read the marketing statement and this is for marketing in that these values are somewhat higher than that of other manufacturers.

Lens used for body-only 8.5-step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II, focal length: f=40mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=80mm), CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

Note that this the basis for 8.5 stop statement for the body and only for two types of camera/lens movement. They do indicate that this is the upper limit for yaw/pitch (they say "featuring up to 8.5 steps) They do not promise that level of stabilization with any other lenses or focal lengths.

For the 5 axis stabilization they used the150-400, and note under a very specific situation of not having stabilization turned on with half press (so no EVF stabilization) using a high speed frame rate at 150mm and only for yaw/pitch stabilization. There is no statement for OM Systems for the other lenses with dual stabilization, but we might assume they offer somewhat lower stabilization limits, or they would have been used for the marketing materials.

Lens used for 5-axis sync IS, 8.5 step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO, focal length: f=150mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=300mm), halfway release image stabilization OFF, high-speed frame rate, CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

My FTs 50-200 SWD allows me to shoot at a minimum 1/10 at 200mm (a little over 5 stops) whereas I can easily shoot the MC20+300mm at 1/10 at 600mm (about 7 stops).

If you want to read the CIPA standards (the only published ones by CIPA are draft) you can download the following

CIPA DC-011 Measurement and Description Method for Image Stabilization Performance of Digital Cameras: Home

--
drj3

 

[DNBush]

And while your looking for that I want to reiterate the point that I am making and that is, that with the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses. With the OM-1 Mark II, you cannot. And that's coming right from OMDS.

Simply read the marketing statement and this is for marketing in that these values are somewhat higher than that of other manufacturers.

Lens used for body-only 8.5-step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II, focal length: f=40mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=80mm), CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

Note that this the basis for 8.5 stop statement for the body and only for two types of camera/lens movement. They do indicate that this is the upper limit for yaw/pitch (they say "featuring up to 8.5 steps) They do not promise that level of stabilization with any other lenses or focal lengths.

For the 5 axis stabilization they used the150-400, and note under a very specific situation of not having stabilization turned on with half press (so no EVF stabilization) using a high speed frame rate at 150mm and only for yaw/pitch stabilization. There is no statement for OM Systems for the other lenses with dual stabilization, but we might assume they offer somewhat lower stabilization limits, or they would have been used for the marketing materials.

Lens used for 5-axis sync IS, 8.5 step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO, focal length: f=150mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=300mm), halfway release image stabilization OFF, high-speed frame rate, CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

My FTs 50-200 SWD allows me to shoot at a minimum 1/10 at 200mm (a little over 5 stops) whereas I can easily shoot the MC20+300mm at 1/10 at 600mm (about 7 stops).

If you want to read the CIPA standards (the only published ones by CIPA are draft) you can download the following

CIPA DC-011 Measurement and Description Method for Image Stabilization Performance of Digital Cameras: Home

<sigh>

But, the issue, and the point I'm making with my original post is...

With the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses.

Specs for the Mark I...

The high-performance image stabilization in the OM SYSTEM OM-1 delivers up to 8.0 steps* of compensation with 5-axis sync IS, and up to 7 steps** with the body alone.

*Lens used for 8.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

**Lens used for body only 7.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO

Specs for the Mark II...

Up to 8.5 EV steps* ((Body only))

Up to 8.5 EV steps** (Sync IS)

*When using M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II

**When using the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

So...

Based on OM System's own specs, with the OM-1 Mark II you no longer get any improvement from Sync IS. At least not with the 150-400mm lens. Whether you do with any other, they do not say.

The best stabilization you can get, 8.5 stops, can be had with a non-Sync IS lens. And no improvement is gained with a Sync IS lens.

 

[Skeeterbytes]

"Up to" doing some heavy lifting here and it's possible the CIPA test does not fully explore and represent the array of field conditions we encounter, nor that each person holding a camera is unique to themselves physically.

An enterprising person could A:B OM-1i fitted with the PL 100-400 and the OM 100-400 mk ii under a variety of conditions and learn things about IS effectiveness of both sets, in dragging the shutter and taming EVF view.

WRT gear I own an OM-1, either version, the EVF stability differs holding a 300mm non-stabilized tele and the 300/4 Pro. OIS contributes here.

Oly back in the day noted they had to deal with minute issues like the earth's spin when further expanding IS tech. At some point there may be an upper bound to what is possible.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[Frontier Photo]

And while your looking for that I want to reiterate the point that I am making and that is, that with the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses. With the OM-1 Mark II, you cannot. And that's coming right from OMDS.

Simply read the marketing statement and this is for marketing in that these values are somewhat higher than that of other manufacturers.

Lens used for body-only 8.5-step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II, focal length: f=40mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=80mm), CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

Note that this the basis for 8.5 stop statement for the body and only for two types of camera/lens movement. They do indicate that this is the upper limit for yaw/pitch (they say "featuring up to 8.5 steps) They do not promise that level of stabilization with any other lenses or focal lengths.

For the 5 axis stabilization they used the150-400, and note under a very specific situation of not having stabilization turned on with half press (so no EVF stabilization) using a high speed frame rate at 150mm and only for yaw/pitch stabilization. There is no statement for OM Systems for the other lenses with dual stabilization, but we might assume they offer somewhat lower stabilization limits, or they would have been used for the marketing materials.

Lens used for 5-axis sync IS, 8.5 step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO, focal length: f=150mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=300mm), halfway release image stabilization OFF, high-speed frame rate, CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

My FTs 50-200 SWD allows me to shoot at a minimum 1/10 at 200mm (a little over 5 stops) whereas I can easily shoot the MC20+300mm at 1/10 at 600mm (about 7 stops).

If you want to read the CIPA standards (the only published ones by CIPA are draft) you can download the following

CIPA DC-011 Measurement and Description Method for Image Stabilization Performance of Digital Cameras: Home

<sigh>

But, the issue, and the point I'm making with my original post is...

With the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses.

Specs for the Mark I...

The high-performance image stabilization in the OM SYSTEM OM-1 delivers up to 8.0 steps* of compensation with 5-axis sync IS, and up to 7 steps** with the body alone.

*Lens used for 8.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

**Lens used for body only 7.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO

Specs for the Mark II...

Up to 8.5 EV steps* ((Body only))

Up to 8.5 EV steps** (Sync IS)

*When using M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II

**When using the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

So...

Based on OM System's own specs, with the OM-1 Mark II you no longer get any improvement from Sync IS. At least not with the 150-400mm lens. Whether you do with any other, they do not say.

The best stabilization you can get, 8.5 stops, can be had with a non-Sync IS lens. And no improvement is gained with a Sync IS lens.

I don't think that is what drj3 is saying. The CIPA numbers Olympus is reporting are ONLY speaking to yaw and pitch control. It tells you nothing about the ability to control roll for example.

That's why it is best to hold body and lens combo's in hand and see for yourself what is better or worse.

 

[lactobacillus_z]

And while your looking for that I want to reiterate the point that I am making and that is, that with the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses. With the OM-1 Mark II, you cannot. And that's coming right from OMDS.

Simply read the marketing statement and this is for marketing in that these values are somewhat higher than that of other manufacturers.

Lens used for body-only 8.5-step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II, focal length: f=40mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=80mm), CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

Note that this the basis for 8.5 stop statement for the body and only for two types of camera/lens movement. They do indicate that this is the upper limit for yaw/pitch (they say "featuring up to 8.5 steps) They do not promise that level of stabilization with any other lenses or focal lengths.

For the 5 axis stabilization they used the150-400, and note under a very specific situation of not having stabilization turned on with half press (so no EVF stabilization) using a high speed frame rate at 150mm and only for yaw/pitch stabilization. There is no statement for OM Systems for the other lenses with dual stabilization, but we might assume they offer somewhat lower stabilization limits, or they would have been used for the marketing materials.

Lens used for 5-axis sync IS, 8.5 step image stabilization: M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO, focal length: f=150mm (35mm equivalent focal length: f=300mm), halfway release image stabilization OFF, high-speed frame rate, CIPA standard compliant. Correction carried out on two axes (yaw/pitch).

My FTs 50-200 SWD allows me to shoot at a minimum 1/10 at 200mm (a little over 5 stops) whereas I can easily shoot the MC20+300mm at 1/10 at 600mm (about 7 stops).

If you want to read the CIPA standards (the only published ones by CIPA are draft) you can download the following

CIPA DC-011 Measurement and Description Method for Image Stabilization Performance of Digital Cameras: Home

<sigh>

But, the issue, and the point I'm making with my original post is...

With the OM-1 (Mark I) you could improve the overall stabilization by using Sync IS lenses.

Specs for the Mark I...

The high-performance image stabilization in the OM SYSTEM OM-1 delivers up to 8.0 steps* of compensation with 5-axis sync IS, and up to 7 steps** with the body alone.

*Lens used for 8.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

**Lens used for body only 7.0 step image stabilization: M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO

Specs for the Mark II...

Up to 8.5 EV steps* ((Body only))

Up to 8.5 EV steps** (Sync IS)

*When using M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II

**When using the M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO

So...

Based on OM System's own specs, with the OM-1 Mark II you no longer get any improvement from Sync IS. At least not with the 150-400mm lens. Whether you do with any other, they do not say.

The best stabilization you can get, 8.5 stops, can be had with a non-Sync IS lens. And no improvement is gained with a Sync IS lens.

No. If you turn off the stablization in 150-400mm lens, with IBIS alone you can't reach 8.5 stops at 150mm. Keep in mind all claimed stablization are only based on specific combinations of body&lens.