OM-3 stabilization, is the stabilization overhyped or is something wrong?

[SimonV]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

 

[SimonV]

No images yet. At a guess the OM-3 just didn’t make the grade & has been returned.

I was just heading to bed when I posted, now well rested and giving the camera some challenges, not returned yet

 

[SimonV]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

I've been wondering this myself, since I feel like I'm getting more handshake that I'm used to with the OM-1 Mark II. On the one hand, this is expected is the OM-3 is a stop less effective on paper. When I've tested in a semi-controlled situation this seems to track - in a high magnification situation where I can easily hand hold 1/60th with the OM-1, I have to use 1/125th to get the same result with the OM-3.

That said, I recently got the 9mm f/8 Lens Cap lens and have been surprised that I seem to be experiencing handshake on this as well, which has been asking the same question you have above.

Unfortunately, I don't have any good answers for you right now - but now that I know someone else out there is questioning this, I'll try to do some more tests to see what I find.

As I've been investigating this, one of the things I've done is turn on "Camera 1 -> 8. Image Stabilizer -> Multi-Shot Image Stabilizer -> IS Priority" on, which prevents the camera from firing if it's not confident in the IS functioning. This is to make sure that the images I'm evaluating were deemed by the camera to be sufficiently stable. Since doing that I've noticed that I do run into situations more often than I would expect where the camera won't fire. Releasing the shutter and re-half-pressing rectifies this, often requiring you to recompose.

So, the unknown thing for me right now (and why I haven't shared this, yet) is whether it's common for this to happen on the OM-1 Mark II as well (where I haven't historically used this).

Is it a camera issue? Is it a me issue? Is it a non-issue? Not really sure, but if others are playing around trying to understand the system and its potential shortcomings that may be a place to explore.

Thanks, I'll try the Multi shot setting as well, maybe it will shed some light on things.

Speaking for myself, I always assume initially that I'm the reason for blurry shots and such. The OM-3 confused me since reviewers kept saying that it can be held for seconds, and since I've used many many cameras with great IBIS and lenses with great IS, it just didn't feel like a "great" stabilization should. Now, it's still quite possible the problem is me, but I'll keep on a testing for some time before deciding if it's workable or if it needs to be returned. Who knows, maybe it's just the less than optimal ergonomics that affects it, but that remains to be seen.

 

[danart]

The A7Rvis rated the same as an OM1 mk i and the A7CR a little behind the OM5/OM3. I find the A7CR is way behind my OM5 in my hands.

TLR I think your OM3 is faulty.

Andrew

OP has A7RV. The RV IBIS is way better than your RIV and CR. I actually feel the A7RV has at least as good IBIS as OM-1, if not better. You should try it yourself and see.

on what basis are you rating the A7rv as being “if not better” than the OM-1?

Show me a 6 sec exposure completely handheld unassisted (not bracing against anything) with an A7RV at 24mm

https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1260162627/photos/4470110/_8200065

Or a 2 second unassisted at 150mm equivalent

https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1260162627/photos/4470124/

These exposures are very close to or hitting the actual quoted rating.

I’d be impressed if you could show me an actual example of the A7RV hitting an effective 5 stops…

 

[ahaslett]

You should use the Anti-Shock setting almost all the time with mech shutter. With fast lenses and very high shutter speeds, it might cause some harsh bokeh. Never been an issue for me!

A

 

[SimonV]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

I've been wondering this myself, since I feel like I'm getting more handshake that I'm used to with the OM-1 Mark II. On the one hand, this is expected is the OM-3 is a stop less effective on paper. When I've tested in a semi-controlled situation this seems to track - in a high magnification situation where I can easily hand hold 1/60th with the OM-1, I have to use 1/125th to get the same result with the OM-3.

That said, I recently got the 9mm f/8 Lens Cap lens and have been surprised that I seem to be experiencing handshake on this as well, which has been asking the same question you have above.

Unfortunately, I don't have any good answers for you right now - but now that I know someone else out there is questioning this, I'll try to do some more tests to see what I find.

As I've been investigating this, one of the things I've done is turn on "Camera 1 -> 8. Image Stabilizer -> Multi-Shot Image Stabilizer -> IS Priority" on, which prevents the camera from firing if it's not confident in the IS functioning. This is to make sure that the images I'm evaluating were deemed by the camera to be sufficiently stable. Since doing that I've noticed that I do run into situations more often than I would expect where the camera won't fire. Releasing the shutter and re-half-pressing rectifies this, often requiring you to recompose.

So, the unknown thing for me right now (and why I haven't shared this, yet) is whether it's common for this to happen on the OM-1 Mark II as well (where I haven't historically used this).

Is it a camera issue? Is it a me issue? Is it a non-issue? Not really sure, but if others are playing around trying to understand the system and its potential shortcomings that may be a place to explore.

Could the lack of grip be a potential issue ? Holding the camera somewhat differently

This is a good point and I hope to see a third party grip or half case soon in my area. There's one case sold in Hong Kong with a bit of a grip but they don't seem to ship overseas.

 

[danart]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.


I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

 

[gary0319]

I have the Panasonic PL100-400 and have, over the years, used it on many Olympus/OM cameras including the most recent OM-1 and OM-3. At long focal lengths when using the earlier cameras the lens OIS was superior to the IBIS, but from the EM1 III and on, the IBIS alone has proven to be the better choice. With the OM-1 II I have noticed that if I employed the lens OIS, the faster camera AF would hesitate ever so slightly waiting for the lens to gain stabilization before it locks autofocus, where no such hesitation is noticed with the camera IBIS only.. For these reasons, I keep my lens OIS turned off on the PL 100-400 when used on the OM-1 II or OM-3.

I should note that I also always use the electronic shutter in all instances. With the faster readouts of the OM-1 II and the OM-3, I find no reason to use the mechanical shutter.

I don’t do a lot of long exposures, but the above observations might add some additional information to the mix.

Gary

 

[John Bean (UK)]

You should use the Anti-Shock setting almost all the time with mech shutter. With fast lenses and very high shutter speeds, it might cause some harsh bokeh. Never been an issue for me!

AFAIK Olympus cameras only use EFC anti-shock at speeds where it is needed so it's never used at high speeds even when enabled. I think the limit is 1/360s or thereabouts. Turn it on and forget about it, no bokeh issues

I know what you mean about the bokeh with EFC at high speeds though - that was one of the things I disliked about the A7C I had for a while, it could get really ugly with busy backgrounds.

--
John Bean [GMT+1]

 

[ahaslett]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

 

[Sam Bennett]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

I've been wondering this myself, since I feel like I'm getting more handshake that I'm used to with the OM-1 Mark II. On the one hand, this is expected is the OM-3 is a stop less effective on paper. When I've tested in a semi-controlled situation this seems to track - in a high magnification situation where I can easily hand hold 1/60th with the OM-1, I have to use 1/125th to get the same result with the OM-3.

That said, I recently got the 9mm f/8 Lens Cap lens and have been surprised that I seem to be experiencing handshake on this as well, which has been asking the same question you have above.

Unfortunately, I don't have any good answers for you right now - but now that I know someone else out there is questioning this, I'll try to do some more tests to see what I find.

As I've been investigating this, one of the things I've done is turn on "Camera 1 -> 8. Image Stabilizer -> Multi-Shot Image Stabilizer -> IS Priority" on, which prevents the camera from firing if it's not confident in the IS functioning. This is to make sure that the images I'm evaluating were deemed by the camera to be sufficiently stable. Since doing that I've noticed that I do run into situations more often than I would expect where the camera won't fire. Releasing the shutter and re-half-pressing rectifies this, often requiring you to recompose.

So, the unknown thing for me right now (and why I haven't shared this, yet) is whether it's common for this to happen on the OM-1 Mark II as well (where I haven't historically used this).

Is it a camera issue? Is it a me issue? Is it a non-issue? Not really sure, but if others are playing around trying to understand the system and its potential shortcomings that may be a place to explore.

Thanks, I'll try the Multi shot setting as well, maybe it will shed some light on things.
Speaking for myself, I always assume initially that I'm the reason for blurry shots and such. The OM-3 confused me since reviewers kept saying that it can be held for seconds, and since I've used many many cameras with great IBIS and lenses with great IS, it just didn't feel like a "great" stabilization should. Now, it's still quite possible the problem is me, but I'll keep on a testing for some time before deciding if it's workable or if it needs to be returned. Who knows, maybe it's just the less than optimal ergonomics that affects it, but that remains to be seen.

I think it depends a bit on your frame of reference. If you’re coming from a camera with no IBIS, it’s pretty incredible. If you’re coming from an OM-1 using lenses that are also stabilized, you could be disappointed.

The other thing to keep in mind that reviewers don’t rigorously test things anymore. It’s possible there’s an issue people are missing because they’re relying on the received wisdom about Olympus (well deserved) reputation in IBIS. So, they may be missing something.

Also keep in mind that magnification matters. Focal length is only part of the story. If you’re using a 25mm lens to take a landscape and a 25mm to take a macro, your ability to handhold is going to be very different. Any assessment of the system should be at the same magnification.

 

[danart]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

Because as a former Sony shooter for nearly a decade until mid 2024. I have tried an A7rv… The A7Rv is not even the best in class IBIS in FF.

The best FF IBIS I have tried is easily the LUMIX S5ii and second place would go to the Canon R6ii. Neither performed well enough to replace my Olympus cameras for a task I have over 10 years of routine experience.

 

[ahaslett]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

Because as a former Sony shooter for nearly a decade until mid 2024. I have tried an A7rv… The A7Rv is not even the best in class IBIS in FF.

The best FF IBIS I have tried is easily the LUMIX S5ii and second place would go to the Canon R6ii. Neither performed well enough to replace my Olympus cameras for a task I have over 10 years of routine experience.

Interesting - IBIS was a definite fail for me on my A7Riv and the A7CR doesn’t perform as well as my OM5, never mind the OM1.

Thanks

Andrew

 

[danart]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

Because as a former Sony shooter for nearly a decade until mid 2024. I have tried an A7rv… The A7Rv is not even the best in class IBIS in FF.

The best FF IBIS I have tried is easily the LUMIX S5ii and second place would go to the Canon R6ii. Neither performed well enough to replace my Olympus cameras for a task I have over 10 years of routine experience.

Interesting - IBIS was a definite fail for me on my A7Riv and the A7CR doesn’t perform as well as my OM5, never mind the OM1.

Thanks

Andrew

? I think you’ll find we are in complete agreement. I say former Sony shooter because my Olympus gear essentially made my FF gear redundant for 90% of my work which is handheld long exposures…

The only IBIS rating that has ever been met in my experience with usable results is from Olympus.

( I have also posted examples above of images that meet the 7 stop rating - that’s an impressive 6 seconds at 24mm equivalent and 2 seconds at 150mm equivalent)

Anyone that thinks the A7RV is giving them 8 stops of IBIS…is well…”Getting a 10 seconds handheld exposure at 24mm” which is just not happening…

I would be very impressed to see a 2 second exposure of around 5.5 stops from any Sony at 24mm. Especially in any routine manner and ease that current M43 achieves this.

 

[ahaslett]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

Because as a former Sony shooter for nearly a decade until mid 2024. I have tried an A7rv… The A7Rv is not even the best in class IBIS in FF.

The best FF IBIS I have tried is easily the LUMIX S5ii and second place would go to the Canon R6ii. Neither performed well enough to replace my Olympus cameras for a task I have over 10 years of routine experience.

Interesting - IBIS was a definite fail for me on my A7Riv and the A7CR doesn’t perform as well as my OM5, never mind the OM1.

Thanks

Andrew

? I think you’ll find we are in complete agreement. I say former Sony shooter because my Olympus gear essentially made my FF gear redundant for 90% of my work which is handheld long exposures…

The only IBIS rating that has ever been met in my experience with usable results is from Olympus.

( I have also posted examples above of images that meet the 7 stop rating - that’s an impressive 6 seconds at 24mm equivalent and 2 seconds at 150mm equivalent)
Anyone that thinks the A7RV is giving them 8 stops of IBIS…is well…”Getting a 10 seconds handheld exposure at 24mm” which is just not happening…

I would be very impressed to see a 2 second exposure of around 5.5 stops from any Sony at 24mm. Especially in any routine manner and ease that current M43 achieves this.

I think we are.

A

 

[gary0319]

I've been reading for years about how the Olympus / OM System cameras supposedly have this ungodly IBIS, and how with the newer models you can get long exposures of several seconds, many reviewers claim this as well. I just got the OM-3 and I can't even get one second handheld without visible camera shake. I'm using the Leica 12-60 and the 75mm 1.8 (which obviously doesn't have IS, but neither is the 12-60 able to use OIS together with the camera body). At 12mm, I can get some semblance of stability, but nothing that I didn't with other cameras or something like the Fuji X100VI.

Is the IBIS really that good compared to other cameras, or is it just good but overhyped for some reason? Or am I doing something wrong? Does it require lens IS in conjunction with IBIS to work well? I've tried with lens IS on and off, with the different S-IS modes, with IS priority on, and Lens I.S. Priority on and off. Nothing seems to have a significant impact. 1 second exposures are possible maybe only 10% of the time, and even then they're not perfectly sharp.

For reference, I can get a 1 second exposure perfectly sharp, and without much effort, with the A7RV and 70-200 GM II at 200mm, but not with the Leica 12-60 at 40mm or even lower (nor the 75mm 1.8). Yes, the Sony's rated at 8 stops vs the 6.5 of the OM-3 and the 70-200 is easier to hold steady (and it's got IS), but still, since the reviews state several seconds, I'm confused that even 1 second seems almost impossible when I try my hardest. Many shots I took at 1/20 or 1/10 came out blurry as well, even though I didn't shoot from the hip but deliberately. The IS does seem to do something though and I can hear the buzzing from the body when I use it, and with the IS off it's even worse, but this just seems like any IS from the last 5-10 years or so at best and nothing close to the hype I've been hearing. I was looking forward to mitigating the low light restrictions of the MFT format with longer shutter times, but if it's not better than this, the OM-3 is heading back.

The IBIS implementation on the OM-3 should see performance far better than you’re experiencing.

I have tried many current FF cameras to see if they can match current M43 for stability since the EM1.3 > because handheld night shooting makes up a bulk of my work. Simply put FF does not match M43 for this task.

If you are getting better results with the A7RV it is due to incorrect settings or a possible faulty IBIS unit in your OM-3

Unless you have tried an A7Rv, how can you say that?

A

Because as a former Sony shooter for nearly a decade until mid 2024. I have tried an A7rv… The A7Rv is not even the best in class IBIS in FF.

The best FF IBIS I have tried is easily the LUMIX S5ii and second place would go to the Canon R6ii. Neither performed well enough to replace my Olympus cameras for a task I have over 10 years of routine experience.

Interesting - IBIS was a definite fail for me on my A7Riv and the A7CR doesn’t perform as well as my OM5, never mind the OM1.

Thanks

Andrew

? I think you’ll find we are in complete agreement. I say former Sony shooter because my Olympus gear essentially made my FF gear redundant for 90% of my work which is handheld long exposures…

The only IBIS rating that has ever been met in my experience with usable results is from Olympus.

( I have also posted examples above of images that meet the 7 stop rating - that’s an impressive 6 seconds at 24mm equivalent and 2 seconds at 150mm equivalent)
Anyone that thinks the A7RV is giving them 8 stops of IBIS…is well…”Getting a 10 seconds handheld exposure at 24mm” which is just not happening…

I would be very impressed to see a 2 second exposure of around 5.5 stops from any Sony at 24mm. Especially in any routine manner and ease that current M43 achieves this.

This image is a handheld hi rez (HHHR) from an E-M1 III which requires 16 shots before stacking. At 1/4 second each that's 4 seconds hand held that has to be within the tolerances for the image alignment before the stack. I'll admit to having leaned my shoulder against the door jam of the chapel....but at 77 years old when this was taken, I was leaning against something most times anyway.

 

[mmartel]

Thanks everyone for your helpful replies!

I've been testing the camera more since yesterday, it's quite bright outside right now so a bit trickier to test long exposures, but I might share some shots later when I'm able to test it more in detail.

Just to be safe I reset all the camera settings and started from scratch. Since I'm using the 12-60mm which has OIS but doesn't work in combination with the in body stabilization, I turned that off, and also kept the in-camera setting Lens I.S. Priority off, since if the camera overrides the IBIS and instead uses the lens OIS (the lens switch is quite easy to accidentally move), it will most likely be much worse. From what I understand, the amount of stabilization a lens IS alone will be able to provide at these focal lengths will be worse than the 5-axis IS of the camera body. I really want to try an Olympus lens one day that will work together with the IBIS.

I did do some testing inside and was actually able to get sharp images at 1 second pretty reliably now, even 2 seconds while standing and at 12mm. Even a 3 or 4 second exposure was almost acceptable albeit with a bit of shake. The Handheld Assist setting seems quite helpful here. Still, at the long end of 60mm, or even at 40mm or as low as 25mm, it wasn't possible to get sharp shots at 2 seconds or more. So it is better than before, but in no ways magical or extracting any oohs and aahs from me. But I will keep on testing.

IBIS effectiveness does vary depending on focal length. Also, IBIS enhances what YOU are capable of with a specific body and lens combination. Just because someone else is getting X seconds at Y focal length doesn't mean everyone else can. Age, caffeine, technique, experience, concentration, exertion, blood pressure medicine, stress, excitement, etc. will all affect what YOU can pull off on any given day, and makes person to person comparisons a bit strained.

At any rate, you must also consider the reciprocal rule of thumb suggests:

At 25mm (50mm equivalent), a 1.5 sec exposure is 6 stops.

At 40mm (80mm equivalent), a 1 second exposure is 6 stops.

At 60mm (120mm equivalent), a 0.5 second exposure is 6 stops.

Thus I wouldn't be expecting to handhold 2 second exposures at anything but the widest focal lengths with a 6.5 stop rated camera body like the OM3 and no dual stab, even if I were "a typical experienced photographer without any significant physical challenges inhibiting my technique".

In addition, one should consider the IBIS ratings are from machine-rigged testing which is different than real life handheld photography. It would surprise me not at all if bar of soap gripless, lighter cameras like the OM3 lose a half to one stop of stabilization in human hands because they're just harder to steady compared to gripped, heavier bodies.

For example, my EM1x is rated "just" 7 stops. But I can routinely get a half to even a full stop higher even at longer focal lengths (I've gotten 1.6 sec at 60mm/120mm ff equivalent for example with an unstabilized lens) thanks to its mass.

Conversely, when I shot with my little rangefinder GX85, which was rated for, I think, 4-5 stops, I could usually only count on 2.5-4 stops.

IBIS is definitely one of those YMMV type features and IMO how we approach it requires due caution.

--
"Gentlemen, it has been a privilege playing with you tonight." - Titanic musician before their final song

 

[SimonV]

The other thing to keep in mind that reviewers don’t rigorously test things anymore. It’s possible there’s an issue people are missing because they’re relying on the received wisdom about Olympus (well deserved) reputation in IBIS. So, they may be missing something.

This is very true and unfortunate. I keep seeing it more and more that they don't even touch certain features of the camera or just skim over them, it's more about getting the views and making the video profitable enough vs. the effort. Some channels like Gordon Laing of Cameralabs I feel is still very reliable, he doesn't sugarcoat things but isn't negative either, just realistic. I like other channels as well but have to take their reviews with a bigger grain of salt. The more flash and entertainment, and often if the video is 15 minutes or shorter, the less you can base a purchasing decision on them.

Also keep in mind that magnification matters. Focal length is only part of the story. If you’re using a 25mm lens to take a landscape and a 25mm to take a macro, your ability to handhold is going to be very different. Any assessment of the system should be at the same magnification.

Good point, I try to always keep these in mind.

 

[Sam Bennett]

Thanks everyone for your helpful replies!

I've been testing the camera more since yesterday, it's quite bright outside right now so a bit trickier to test long exposures, but I might share some shots later when I'm able to test it more in detail.

Just to be safe I reset all the camera settings and started from scratch. Since I'm using the 12-60mm which has OIS but doesn't work in combination with the in body stabilization, I turned that off, and also kept the in-camera setting Lens I.S. Priority off, since if the camera overrides the IBIS and instead uses the lens OIS (the lens switch is quite easy to accidentally move), it will most likely be much worse. From what I understand, the amount of stabilization a lens IS alone will be able to provide at these focal lengths will be worse than the 5-axis IS of the camera body. I really want to try an Olympus lens one day that will work together with the IBIS.

I did do some testing inside and was actually able to get sharp images at 1 second pretty reliably now, even 2 seconds while standing and at 12mm. Even a 3 or 4 second exposure was almost acceptable albeit with a bit of shake. The Handheld Assist setting seems quite helpful here. Still, at the long end of 60mm, or even at 40mm or as low as 25mm, it wasn't possible to get sharp shots at 2 seconds or more. So it is better than before, but in no ways magical or extracting any oohs and aahs from me. But I will keep on testing.

IBIS effectiveness does vary depending on focal length. Also, IBIS enhances what YOU are capable of with a specific body and lens combination. Just because someone else is getting X seconds at Y focal length doesn't mean everyone else can. Age, caffeine, technique, experience, concentration, exertion, blood pressure medicine, stress, excitement, etc. will all affect what YOU can pull off on any given day, and makes person to person comparisons a bit strained.

At any rate, you must also consider the reciprocal rule of thumb suggests:

At 25mm (50mm equivalent), a 1.5 sec exposure is 6 stops.

At 40mm (80mm equivalent), a 1 second exposure is 6 stops.

At 60mm (120mm equivalent), a 0.5 second exposure is 6 stops.

Thus I wouldn't be expecting to handhold 2 second exposures at anything but the widest focal lengths with a 6.5 stop rated camera body like the OM3 and no dual stab, even if I were "a typical experienced photographer without any significant physical challenges inhibiting my technique".

This is okay as a general guideline and illustrates the relative difference between focal lengths, but ultimately what matters most is magnification. The above guideline is only really useful if you’re taking “normal” photos from “normal” distances. From there the differences are due to your subject being magnified. But the same applies if you’re moving closer to your subject. That’s why you can run into problems even with a 25mm (50 equivalent) if you’re very close to your subject, where you can throw that 1.5 sec figure out the window.

 

[mmartel]

Thanks everyone for your helpful replies!

I've been testing the camera more since yesterday, it's quite bright outside right now so a bit trickier to test long exposures, but I might share some shots later when I'm able to test it more in detail.

Just to be safe I reset all the camera settings and started from scratch. Since I'm using the 12-60mm which has OIS but doesn't work in combination with the in body stabilization, I turned that off, and also kept the in-camera setting Lens I.S. Priority off, since if the camera overrides the IBIS and instead uses the lens OIS (the lens switch is quite easy to accidentally move), it will most likely be much worse. From what I understand, the amount of stabilization a lens IS alone will be able to provide at these focal lengths will be worse than the 5-axis IS of the camera body. I really want to try an Olympus lens one day that will work together with the IBIS.

I did do some testing inside and was actually able to get sharp images at 1 second pretty reliably now, even 2 seconds while standing and at 12mm. Even a 3 or 4 second exposure was almost acceptable albeit with a bit of shake. The Handheld Assist setting seems quite helpful here. Still, at the long end of 60mm, or even at 40mm or as low as 25mm, it wasn't possible to get sharp shots at 2 seconds or more. So it is better than before, but in no ways magical or extracting any oohs and aahs from me. But I will keep on testing.

IBIS effectiveness does vary depending on focal length. Also, IBIS enhances what YOU are capable of with a specific body and lens combination. Just because someone else is getting X seconds at Y focal length doesn't mean everyone else can. Age, caffeine, technique, experience, concentration, exertion, blood pressure medicine, stress, excitement, etc. will all affect what YOU can pull off on any given day, and makes person to person comparisons a bit strained.

At any rate, you must also consider the reciprocal rule of thumb suggests:

At 25mm (50mm equivalent), a 1.5 sec exposure is 6 stops.

At 40mm (80mm equivalent), a 1 second exposure is 6 stops.

At 60mm (120mm equivalent), a 0.5 second exposure is 6 stops.

Thus I wouldn't be expecting to handhold 2 second exposures at anything but the widest focal lengths with a 6.5 stop rated camera body like the OM3 and no dual stab, even if I were "a typical experienced photographer without any significant physical challenges inhibiting my technique".

This is okay as a general guideline and illustrates the relative difference between focal lengths, but ultimately what matters most is magnification. The above guideline is only really useful if you’re taking “normal” photos from “normal” distances. From there the differences are due to your subject being magnified. But the same applies if you’re moving closer to your subject. That’s why you can run into problems even with a 25mm (50 equivalent) if you’re very close to your subject, where you can throw that 1.5 sec figure out the window.

 

[SimonV]

IBIS effectiveness does vary depending on focal length. Also, IBIS enhances what YOU are capable of with a specific body and lens combination. Just because someone else is getting X seconds at Y focal length doesn't mean everyone else can. Age, caffeine, technique, experience, concentration, exertion, blood pressure medicine, stress, excitement, etc. will all affect what YOU can pull off on any given day, and makes person to person comparisons a bit strained.

At any rate, you must also consider the reciprocal rule of thumb suggests:

At 25mm (50mm equivalent), a 1.5 sec exposure is 6 stops.

At 40mm (80mm equivalent), a 1 second exposure is 6 stops.

At 60mm (120mm equivalent), a 0.5 second exposure is 6 stops.

Thus I wouldn't be expecting to handhold 2 second exposures at anything but the widest focal lengths with a 6.5 stop rated camera body like the OM3 and no dual stab, even if I were "a typical experienced photographer without any significant physical challenges inhibiting my technique".

In addition, one should consider the IBIS ratings are from machine-rigged testing which is different than real life handheld photography. It would surprise me not at all if bar of soap gripless, lighter cameras like the OM3 lose a half to one stop of stabilization in human hands because they're just harder to steady compared to gripped, heavier bodies.

For example, my EM1x is rated "just" 7 stops. But I can routinely get a half to even a full stop higher even at longer focal lengths (I've gotten 1.6 sec at 60mm/120mm ff equivalent for example with an unstabilized lens) thanks to its mass.

Conversely, when I shot with my little rangefinder GX85, which was rated for, I think, 4-5 stops, I could usually only count on 2.5-4 stops.

IBIS is definitely one of those YMMV type features and IMO how we approach it requires due caution.

Thanks for the in-depth explanation, those reciprocal examples are very illuminating.

It's quite possible I'm just expecting too much, I've just had mostly positive experiences with any IBIS systems on the many cameras I've used, but I've never heard as much hype as with Olympus cameras, and keep hearing that the IBIS can make up for the smaller sensor by making slower shutter speeds possible. Maybe it is indeed like mentioned in this thread, that Olympus was first and thus has that kind of reputation. After quite a lot of more testing and trying to optimize all settings, the OM-3 does seem to be a bit better than the A7RV, when testing with a 35mm on the A7RV and the 12-60@18mm. Curiously, I seem to be getting better results with the 75mm 1.8 than the 12-60@60mm.

That said, the more I use the camera, the more I like it. Ignoring the IBIS, the features of the camera combined with the aesthetics and fun factor of using it is looking like a great combination of something like the X100VI and a more capable body. I think OM did a great decision putting essentially the OM-1 II in a vintage style body. Being a pixel peeper, I'm still getting used to the small 20mp sensor, but as I enjoy JPG shooting much more nowadays, it's not feeling like a huge downside right now.