wlaidlaw Posted February 12, 2016 Share #21 Posted February 12, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Olympus itself had a big problem with IBIS when the 5 axis system appeared in the EP-5. It found that a resonance could occur between the shutter at certain speeds and the IBIS system (1/60 to 1/160). They supplied an FW update and then you had to delve into about level 10 of the incredibly complicated menu system to change some parameters to avoid the resonance. The fix did work because before you could get horribly blurred photos, if you had left the IBIS on when not needed. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1254265. I seem to remember you had to change the delay between the shutter firing from the release press. Now in lens stabilisation avoids all this, so other than use on a tripod, it might be a better solution. Of course it is nice in theory to have IBIS on non OIS lenses but to be frank, I have not found it terribly effective with third party (Leica and Zeiss) lenses on my Oly EP-5 and was not as good as I hoped it might be. In contrast it does seem to work very well with the Oly MFT lenses, which were designed after the 5 axis IBIS was available. Wilson 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 12, 2016 Posted February 12, 2016 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here Sensor for OIS?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Peter H Posted February 12, 2016 Share #22 Posted February 12, 2016 CaNikon also have a big investment in their respective OIS systems. At the time these systems were developed (pre-digital) it was the only way to stabilize the image. Fuji also have explained that in-camera OIS is not the optimum solution where image quality is concerned, and they have no such investment to pay off, and are quite happy to work with clean-slate camera designs. I accept the explanations for hanging on to old systems for a while but both Canon and Nikon have demonstrated in many other areas that they fully accept that moving away from pre-digital technologies is essential if you want to compete at the top level. I have a lingering suspicion that Leica and Fuji as well as Nikon and Canon understand a thing or two here that we might be missing, even if it has as much to do with economics as photography. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted February 12, 2016 Share #23 Posted February 12, 2016 Olympus itself had a big problem with IBIS when the 5 axis system appeared in the EP-5. It found that a resonance could occur between the shutter at certain speeds and the IBIS system (1/60 to 1/160). They supplied an FW update and then you had to delve into about level 10 of the incredibly complicated menu system to change some parameters to avoid the resonance. The fix did work because before you could get horribly blurred photos, if you had left the IBIS on when not needed. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1254265. I seem to remember you had to change the delay between the shutter firing from the release press. Now in lens stabilisation avoids all this, so other than use on a tripod, it might be a better solution. Of course it is nice in theory to have IBIS on non OIS lenses but to be frank, I have not found it terribly effective with third party (Leica and Zeiss) lenses on my Oly EP-5 and was not as good as I hoped it might be. In contrast it does seem to work very well with the Oly MFT lenses, which were designed after the 5 axis IBIS was available. Wilson I am not aware of resonance issues with the Sony sensor stabilization and comparing photos made with a 500mm lens on the a7II and on the SL the effectiveness of the Sony's system is quite clear, tripod or no (I have a Series 5 Gitzo). In some cases (i.e., Canon's EF 300mm f/4 L) i also recall the loss of sharpness when IS was added to the lens, and the effect of the several additional air/glass surfaces will reduce contrast and consequently saturation and gradation. One cannot forget Mr. Murphy's influence as well. I'm far more likely to carry a backup camera body than a backup 500mm lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 12, 2016 Share #24 Posted February 12, 2016 Of course it is nice in theory to have IBIS on non OIS lenses but to be frank, I have not found it terribly effective with third party (Leica and Zeiss) lenses on my Oly EP-5 and was not as good as I hoped it might be. In contrast it does seem to work very well with the Oly MFT lenses, which were designed after the 5 axis IBIS was available. The A7R2 IBIS works great with third party lenses, provided you correctly set the FL in the IBIS configurations. OIS (i.e. in-lens) makes sense for Canikon reflex cameras, where you need the AF system to work with stabilized input. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 12, 2016 Share #25 Posted February 12, 2016 The A7R2 IBIS works great with third party lenses, provided you correctly set the FL in the IBIS configurations. OIS (i.e. in-lens) makes sense for Canikon reflex cameras, where you need the AF system to work with stabilized input. You can manually set a focal length on the Olympus which apparently effects a substantial improvement in the IBIS with third party lenses. However it is around 8 layers deep in an obscure and illogical bit of the menu system that you can never remember where it is. By the time you have found it, the moment has passed, everyone else has fallen asleep or gone home. Of course, when you fit an original Olympus lens, it all happens automatically. I found the latter was much more satisfactory, as even if you found the right place in the menu to manually select focal length, you would then forget to change it back to auto and then wonder why IBIS wasn't working properly with the standard pancake 14-42 (28-84) lens. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 12, 2016 Share #26 Posted February 12, 2016 ^^^ agreed, same with Sony. The firmware is crap. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted February 12, 2016 Share #27 Posted February 12, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) ^^^ agreed, same with Sony. The firmware is crap. It makes me wonder why Sony persist with this lack of imagination in an area that you'd think isn't hard to improve on, and which could elevate their otherwise very good cameras to being truly excellent. Or perhaps there are enough people who enjoy playing with buttons that Sony don't have to worry, and we're the ones a little out of step. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted February 12, 2016 Share #28 Posted February 12, 2016 ^^^ agreed, same with Sony. The firmware is crap. I've assigned the focal length selection to a custom button. One button push, set focal length, done. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted February 12, 2016 Share #29 Posted February 12, 2016 I'm no expert, but the fact that Olympus is leading the market in IBIS suggests to me that sensor size is a consideration. Olympus does not build large-sensored cameras. Yes, IBIS is harder with larger sensors, at least according to Sony. I don't know whether that is because of increased inertia or whether there are additional issues such as tip/tilt axes changing plane of focus more with a larger chip in a format with a narrower depth of field (as opposed to translation and rotation--the other three axes) or what the additional challenges might be. I believe that is why you are starting to see hybrid systems where a portion of the IS relies on the lens and a portion on the body. - Jared 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 12, 2016 Share #30 Posted February 12, 2016 Yes, IBIS is harder with larger sensors, at least according to Sony. I don't know whether that is because of increased inertia or whether there are additional issues such as tip/tilt axes changing plane of focus more with a larger chip in a format with a narrower depth of field (as opposed to translation and rotation--the other three axes) or what the additional challenges might be. I believe that is why you are starting to see hybrid systems where a portion of the IS relies on the lens and a portion on the body. - Jared I wonder if bending of the sensor, which all camera makers are trying to make thinner and thinner, might be an issue with 5 axis IBIS. It is obviously vital for the sensor to remain totally plane. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted February 12, 2016 Share #31 Posted February 12, 2016 Olympus itself had a big problem with IBIS when the 5 axis system appeared in the EP-5. It found that a resonance could occur between the shutter at certain speeds and the IBIS system (1/60 to 1/160). They supplied an FW update and then you had to delve into about level 10 of the incredibly complicated menu system to change some parameters to avoid the resonance. The fix did work because before you could get horribly blurred photos, if you had left the IBIS on when not needed. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1254265. I seem to remember you had to change the delay between the shutter firing from the release press. Now in lens stabilisation avoids all this, so other than use on a tripod, it might be a better solution. Of course it is nice in theory to have IBIS on non OIS lenses but to be frank, I have not found it terribly effective with third party (Leica and Zeiss) lenses on my Oly EP-5 and was not as good as I hoped it might be. In contrast it does seem to work very well with the Oly MFT lenses, which were designed after the 5 axis IBIS was available. Wilson A lot has changed since the EP-5, plus I think that camera was just a bit too small for IBIS at the time as the EM5 didn't have the same issues and it was released a bit earlier. That issue certainly doesn't seem to be an issue on more modern implementations. I know people enjoy going on about Olympus and Sony menus and they really are very complex. But isn't that only a result of the huge amount of options they offer. They're the opposite of a Leica, designed to have everything except the kitchen sink. Sony and Olympus cameras are almost an experiment in how much functionality a camera can have and they push many boundaries that lead the way for modern digital camera development. Without Olympus and Sony pushing the bar ever higher we'd be stuck with Canon sensors as top of the line (ewww!!). They do allow more button customisation though and I very rarely need to menu dive except to format a card, which only Leica make assignable to a button. All they need to do is introduce a custom menu and it'd solve almost all their issues. Gordon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted February 12, 2016 Share #32 Posted February 12, 2016 ^^^ agreed, same with Sony. The firmware is crap. I think their firmware is fine. Far less buggy than Leica's with more than double the functionality. It's just the menu layout that's complex, not an issue with the firmware itself. Do you mean "the menu layout is crap" or have you found issues with the firmware itself? Gordon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted February 12, 2016 Share #33 Posted February 12, 2016 I think their firmware is fine. Far less buggy than Leica's with more than double the functionality. It's just the menu layout that's complex, not an issue with the firmware itself. Do you mean "the menu layout is crap" or have you found issues with the firmware itself? Gordon In one aspect the Sony and Olympus give Leica serious competition - the inadequacy of their manuals, with next to useless indices. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 12, 2016 Share #34 Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) I think their firmware is fine. Far less buggy than Leica's with more than double the functionality. It's just the menu layout that's complex, not an issue with the firmware itself. Do you mean "the menu layout is crap" or have you found issues with the firmware itself? The menu layout is crap. And many other functions could be much better, to say the least. Also, the lack of a lossless compressed raw file format is disappointing. I have found no bugs yet, just a lot of nonsense. Sony should hire a camera software director who is actually a photographer, not a nerd. That said, I agree with your comments vs Leica. I can't say more, as mods here are threatening me about banning my account because I am not allowed to say bad things about Leica. Talk about freedom of speech. Edited February 12, 2016 by CheshireCat 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.