Why not more IBIS?

[EarthQuake]

Why don't more brands have something like IBIS? After more than 2 years I'm still awed every time I take an indoor shot with my E-M5, even of people, at 1/15 of a second ISO 200, and get great results. Sony's is moving away from the Alpha serious which does have it and toward the e-mount which doesn't. Pentax still has it and I respect them for it. But Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, not on the horizon.

Even if the Fuji X-T1 is an amazing camera, but who cares if one is forced to take photos at 2 or 3 f stops higher ISO than I'd have to with the OMD series. I'd rather have my E-M5 or if I was going to earn more money from photography, buy an E-M1. I'm aware that IBIS doesn't matter with say photography of football at night or race cars, requiring high shutter speeds, but it helps in more situations than I expected.

OIS?

With any and every lens?

Not required.

Slippery slope. Is AF required? Is usable ISO past 200 required? Are digital cameras even required? People took some very nice shots with film after all.

The answer to all of this is no, but it sure is nice to have, just as IS on every lens, regardless if its a native mount lens or a vintage MF lens is very nice to have.

Some say IS isn't required on wides, I beg to differ, I can take sharp shots down to 1 1/3rd seconds with my EM1/7-14mm, quite reliably. What is or is not required is very subjective to each person, there are no absolutes here.

 

[Mark Thornton]

And yet I think some people have taken advantage of IBIS in focal lengths where stabilisation is often thought unnecessary. Panasonic didn't add OIS to their 14mm and 20mm lenses, yet OIS in the kit zoom does help at those focal lengths.

 

[Sergey_Green]

And yet I think some people have taken advantage of IBIS in focal lengths where stabilisation is often thought unnecessary. Panasonic didn't add OIS to their 14mm and 20mm lenses, yet OIS in the kit zoom does help at those focal lengths.

And you would wonder why.

 

[s_grins]

Then there are patents and licensing fees.

What you said about "inertia of mass" is true. Companies tend to stick to our-way-of-doing until they are forced to rethink. I have noticed that they are also a bit blind to what happens around. We are the best...

One more thing with IBIS is size and price. It is a complex structure with sensors and magnets and frames, which takes place (more than double the sensor), needs processing power and coding and adds to power consumption.

The full meaning of IBIS seems to be hard to understand for people who have not really used it. And we have not yet seen the limits of what can be done with IBIS... ;-)

-p-

 

[TrapperJohn]

Plays a greater factor than it should, but let's be honest: cameras today are so close in capability that the differention between one brand and another is often based on... less than relevant factors.

Canon owns the patents on OIS, they developed this in film days when it wasn't practical to shift the film itself. Nikon bought into that for that reason: IBIS wasn't possible with film.

Both have a substantial investment in both tech and prestige in OIS, plus they get a nice revenue stream selling OIS lenses for more than standard lenses, as well as giving customers a pressing reason to upgrade from a perfectly good unstabilized lens to an OIS lens. When you can get a customer to buy an expensive item to replace a perfectly functional item, you make more money.

Minolta developed the first sensor shift IS method, largely to get around Canon's patents. Unfortunately, they went broke in the process and sold out to Sony.

Now that the Oly 5 axis is working as well as it does, including roll stabilization for video that OIS can't do, and EVF's are good enough that they can replace an OVF with stabilized video, the last two shortcomings of IBIS have been addressed: no stabilized VF, and no stabilized video. It does make one wonder if OIS is still competitive. This is especially true in the mirrorless field, where the lenses are small, and OIS will add not only to the cost, but the size of the lens as well.

As well, the micro/mirrorless systems are inherently less stable than a large DSLR: they're lighter, and they're smaller. So one tends to lean more on IS with a small system than they would with a larger, heavier, inherently more stable system. This, on top of the lens size benefits.

But, C/N have committed to the OIS path, have extolled it in their ads, and can't change from it without losing prestige among their faithful customers.

 

[sigala1]

Why don't more brands have something like IBIS? After more than 2 years I'm still awed every time I take an indoor shot with my E-M5, even of people, at 1/15 of a second ISO 200, and get great results. Sony's is moving away from the Alpha serious which does have it and toward the e-mount which doesn't. Pentax still has it and I respect them for it. But Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, not on the horizon.

Even if the Fuji X-T1 is an amazing camera, but who cares if one is forced to take photos at 2 or 3 f stops higher ISO than I'd have to with the OMD series. I'd rather have my E-M5 or if I was going to earn more money from photography, buy an E-M1. I'm aware that IBIS doesn't matter with say photography of football at night or race cars, requiring high shutter speeds, but it helps in more situations than I expected.

Canon makes lots of money from people upgrading their obsolete non-IS lens to more expensive new IS lenses. So why would Canon want to put the kibosh on that profitable upgrade path by providing in-camera IS? To compete with Olympus? Canon is already number one.

 

[Anders W]

Yes, that is true. But you have to buy OIS with each and every lens. And those nice superfast primes aren't going to have it. It gives a real sense of freedom shooting at dusk or in a dark indoors place with the SLR Magic 25mm t0.95 lens or the Olympus 75mm f1.8 lens at <1/30 second.

I guess that's what Sony FF A7/R think too?

Cameras don't have feelings. But if they did, the Sony A7/r would of course envy the IBIS rather than enjoy the freedom they don't have without it.

 

[Anders W]

Why don't more brands have something like IBIS? After more than 2 years I'm still awed every time I take an indoor shot with my E-M5, even of people, at 1/15 of a second ISO 200, and get great results. Sony's is moving away from the Alpha serious which does have it and toward the e-mount which doesn't. Pentax still has it and I respect them for it. But Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, not on the horizon.

Even if the Fuji X-T1 is an amazing camera, but who cares if one is forced to take photos at 2 or 3 f stops higher ISO than I'd have to with the OMD series. I'd rather have my E-M5 or if I was going to earn more money from photography, buy an E-M1. I'm aware that IBIS doesn't matter with say photography of football at night or race cars, requiring high shutter speeds, but it helps in more situations than I expected.

OIS?

With any and every lens?

Not required.

Slippery slope. Is AF required? Is usable ISO past 200 required? Are digital cameras even required? People took some very nice shots with film after all.

The answer to all of this is no, but it sure is nice to have, just as IS on every lens, regardless if its a native mount lens or a vintage MF lens is very nice to have.

Some say IS isn't required on wides, I beg to differ, I can take sharp shots down to 1 1/3rd seconds with my EM1/7-14mm, quite reliably. What is or is not required is very subjective to each person, there are no absolutes here.

Exactly! The "not required" argument is just the same old "sour grapes" story over again. If you can't have it, it isn't "required". ;-)

 

[Anders W]

And yet I think some people have taken advantage of IBIS in focal lengths where stabilisation is often thought unnecessary. Panasonic didn't add OIS to their 14mm and 20mm lenses, yet OIS in the kit zoom does help at those focal lengths.

And you would wonder why.

No reason to wonder about anything. It helps in the kit zoom because it is there. It would help in the 14 and 20 if it were there. It presumably isn't there because it costs something to add OIS to every lens and/or because it would increase their diminutive size. But IBIS is there. Always.

 

[wansai]

i regularly shoot at 1/5 upwards with no shutter shock on em1 or em5. i have had both cameras since launch. it is not a gimmick and it is not just a marketing tool. it has real world uses.

ibis allows you to shoot without a monopod or a tripod where you see other photographers lugging them around. if you brace, you can even go as low as 1 sec with sharp, clear images. i have taken a lot of city scapes and low light/indoor shots using ibis at very slow shutter speeds with great results.

just because you have no use for it for your shooting style doesnt mean that feature is useless. how narrow minded.

 

[Sergey_Green]

i regularly shoot at 1/5 upwards with no shutter shock on em1 or em5. i have had both cameras since launch. it is not a gimmick and it is not just a marketing tool. it has real world uses.

ibis allows you to shoot without a monopod or a tripod where you see other photographers lugging them around. if you brace, you can even go as low as 1 sec with sharp, clear images. i have taken a lot of city scapes and low light/indoor shots using ibis at very slow shutter speeds with great results.

just because you have no use for it for your shooting style doesnt mean that feature is useless. how narrow minded.

The thing is IS is mostly useful (and often needed) with small cameras, where shake and vibrations are easily transferred (on to the camera) from your own hands. It is less indispensable with larger and heavier cameras, that allow you (in addition) more things than IBIS can be helpful with. As panning fast moving object for example, or pretty much anything where motion is involved. Or when shooting from the tripod, as I often do when photographing smaller things.

The problem I would have with it is simply remembering when to turn it off and when to have it on (and expect it to be useful). As my 70-200/2.8, for example, VR is always off, it never fails, as long as my expectations are realistic, and my hand is steady.

 

[Anders W]

i regularly shoot at 1/5 upwards with no shutter shock on em1 or em5. i have had both cameras since launch. it is not a gimmick and it is not just a marketing tool. it has real world uses.

ibis allows you to shoot without a monopod or a tripod where you see other photographers lugging them around. if you brace, you can even go as low as 1 sec with sharp, clear images. i have taken a lot of city scapes and low light/indoor shots using ibis at very slow shutter speeds with great results.

just because you have no use for it for your shooting style doesnt mean that feature is useless. how narrow minded.

The thing is IS is mostly useful (and often needed) with small cameras, where shake and vibrations are easily transferred (on to the camera) from your own hands.

The thing is that IS is useful with any hand-held camera. It's just that some camera users (and manufacturers) have yet to discover that.

It is less indispensable with larger and heavier cameras, that allow you (in addition) more things than IBIS can be helpful with. As panning fast moving object for example, or pretty much anything where motion is involved. Or when shooting from the tripod, as I often do when photographing smaller things.

Interesting. So you think that panning fast-moving objects or shooting from a tripod are something smaller cameras with IBIS can't do?

If not, what's the point of bringing them into the discussion? To say that IBIS isn't always helpful (although it actually is with panning)? Did anyone ever say anything to the contrary?

The problem I would have with it is simply remembering when to turn it off and when to have it on (and expect it to be useful).

Why would you want to turn it off? I've never found any real reason to do that, not even on a tripod (although the book says you should).

As my 70-200/2.8, for example, VR is always off, it never fails, as long as my expectations are realistic, and my hand is steady.

Actually, the expectations of most of us depend on whether we have stabilization available or not. The same is true about the need for steady hands. The nice thing about stabilization is that you can increase your realistic expectations and decrease the need for steady hands.

 

[wansai]

ISO 1600, f2.8, 21mm, 1/6 sec

Just a shot I did the other day. Any issue with it is operator error. I also have a bad habit of targeting the opposite eye.

In a case like this, I'd have to, likely crank my ISO to 12,000 if I wanted, say, a 1/60 sec, non stabilised shot. In reality, I can't shoot at 1/60 non stabilised. the slowest I can go non stabilised is 1/80, which means I'd have to crank the ISO up one.. not ideal.

Obviously, in a less static scene, I'd go with a higher shutter speed.

 

[Anders W]

ISO 1600, f2.8, 21mm, 1/6 sec

Just a shot I did the other day. Any issue with it is operator error. I also have a bad habit of targeting the opposite eye.

In a case like this, I'd have to, likely crank my ISO to 12,000 if I wanted, say, a 1/60 sec, non stabilised shot. In reality, I can't shoot at 1/60 non stabilised. the slowest I can go non stabilised is 1/80, which means I'd have to crank the ISO up one.. not ideal.

Obviously, in a less static scene, I'd go with a higher shutter speed.

Nice example of the fact that it is useful with less than perfectly static subjects too. If only you ask them not to jump around.

 

[n3eg]

Why don't more brands have something like IBIS?

There might even be another reason. In an article I read yesterday, M4/3 sensor stacks (what sits in front of the sensor) are thicker than others. Maybe the M4/3 sensor is easier to control than the APS or FF sensor due to size. Also, everyone seems to like a stabilized preview on an OIS telephoto.

 

[Anders W]

Why don't more brands have something like IBIS?

There might even be another reason. In an article I read yesterday, M4/3 sensor stacks (what sits in front of the sensor) are thicker than others. Maybe the M4/3 sensor is easier to control than the APS or FF sensor due to size. Also, everyone seems to like a stabilized preview on an OIS telephoto.

Not sure there is much of a relationship of that kind. IBIS solutions exist not only for MFT but also for APS-C (Pentax, Sony A-mount) and FF (Sony A-mount). Of course, things get bigger and heavier with larger sensor sizes. But that's not true of the sensor itself only but also of the lens elements to be handled by OIS solutions.

 

[Sergey_Green]

Just a shot I did the other day. Any issue with it is operator error. I also have a bad habit of targeting the opposite eye.

In a case like this, I'd have to, likely crank my ISO to 12,000 if I wanted, say, a 1/60 sec, non stabilised shot. In reality, I can't shoot at 1/60 non stabilised. the slowest I can go non stabilised is 1/80, which means I'd have to crank the ISO up one.. not ideal.

Obviously, in a less static scene, I'd go with a higher shutter speed.

She must have been perfectly steady. Generally even with the larger camera I would avoid this kind static ,

Of course, easy if you do not have to move, or follow what you are shooting ..

Or if you do not care when it moves ..

Not so if you do have to move, and follow what you are after ..

--
- sergey

 

[Anders W]

Of course, easy if you do not have to move, or follow what you are shooting ..

Or if you do not care when it moves ..

Not so if you do have to move, and follow what you are after ..

From the E-M1 manual, p. 66:

"Vertical IS: Image stabilization applies only to vertical camera shake. Use when panning the camera horizontally."

--
- sergey

 

[Midwest]

IBIS does not stabilize an OVF.

 

[Midwest]

Hmm, that makes sense. Thank you. I guess once manufacturers chose one route it is hard to change. It certainly keeps me from looking to jump ship to another brand, well that and accumulated m43 glass. I think, yes I can get maybe maximum 1 stop better noise (though worse DR) with the best of the best, but I'll be shooting everything at 2 or 3 stops higher ISO so what's the use.

No, IBIS makes no sense on a camera with an OVF. Unless you like making tele shots with a jittery viewfinder.