Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands
Thread started 20 Apr 2017 (Thursday) 11:15
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?

 
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
RDKirk's Avatar
12,552 posts
Joined May 2004
USA
May 08, 2017 14:41 |  #826

Coimbra wrote in post #18349294 (external link)
Interesting, have you tried this?
My way of thinking is... if an IS lens and a non-moving sensor result in a steady image, then introducing movement to the sensor should negate that effect.

Why should it? IS (body or lens) doesn't apply a fixed amount of correction regardless of actual movement. IS is intelligent enough to determine how much the image is moving and apply accurate correction to the movement. So if lens IS has fully corrected the moment, IBIS would not apply any further correction. However, if the lens has left any movement uncorrected, IBIS ought to correct it further.

A limitation might exist in the amount of time each system is programmed to be active, but if a manufacturer is using both systems, the programming ought to be properly synced. I'd suspect that using both might take too long for some uses, so the user should be able to switch one or the other out.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
May 08, 2017 14:46 |  #827

Optical Image stabilization (OIS) stabilizes 2 axis. IBIS stabilizes 5. If you use an OIS lens with IBIS, the camera will use the two systems in conjunction stabilize the 3 additional axis' that OIS alone does not.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,305 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
Post has been edited 7 months ago by Hogloff.
May 08, 2017 14:59 |  #828

mystik610 wrote in post #18349327 (external link)
Optical Image stabilization (OIS) stabilizes 2 axis. IBIS stabilizes 5. If you use an OIS lens with IBIS, the camera will use the two systems in conjunction stabilize the 3 additional axis' that OIS alone does not.

This is exactly right.

OIS and IS only stabilize for pitch and yaw whereas IBIS stabilizes for pitch, yaw, x, y and roll. When a lens is mounted without any stabilization, the IBIS system is used to stabilize all 5 axis's. When a stabilized lens is mounted, it is automatically detected by the camera and it will not turn on the pitch and yaw and only compensate for x, y and roll, leaving the pitch and yaw to be handled by the OIS in the lens.

So in fact with IBIS, you are gaining stabilization for the x, y and roll which lens based IS do not compensate for.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,305 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
May 08, 2017 15:01 |  #829

RDKirk wrote in post #18349318 (external link)
Why should it? IS (body or lens) doesn't apply a fixed amount of correction regardless of actual movement. IS is intelligent enough to determine how much the image is moving and apply accurate correction to the movement. So if lens IS has fully corrected the moment, IBIS would not apply any further correction. However, if the lens has left any movement uncorrected, IBIS ought to correct it further.

A limitation might exist in the amount of time each system is programmed to be active, but if a manufacturer is using both systems, the programming ought to be properly synced. I'd suspect that using both might take too long for some uses, so the user should be able to switch one or the other out.

Not quite. If the lens based IS does not fully compensate for pitch or yaw, the IBIS will not apply any further compensation in those axis. It will only concentrate on the x, y and roll...totally leaving the pitch and yaw to the lens based IS.




LOG IN TO REPLY
raptor3x
Senior Member
raptor3x's Avatar
Joined Aug 2011
Rutland, VT
Post has been edited 7 months ago by raptor3x.
May 08, 2017 15:08 |  #830

Hogloff wrote in post #18349330 (external link)
This is exactly right.

OIS and IS only stabilize for pitch and yaw whereas IBIS stabilizes for pitch, yaw, x, y and roll. When a lens is mounted without any stabilization, the IBIS system is used to stabilize all 5 axis's. When a stabilized lens is mounted, it is automatically detected by the camera and it will not turn on the pitch and yaw and only compensate for x, y and roll, leaving the pitch and yaw to be handled by the OIS in the lens.

So in fact with IBIS, you are gaining stabilization for the x, y and roll which lens based IS do not compensate for.

Sort of, there are quite a few OIS systems that would be called 4-axis in Sony/Olympus IBIS terminology (yaw, pitch, and x & y translation) but they're mostly reserved for macro/near macro lenses. Roll compensation is the only one that OIS systems cannot do for obvious reasons.


Bodies: X-T1, E-M1, E-M1ii Lenses: µ.Z 7-14 2.8, µ.Z 12-40 2.8, µ.Z 25 1.2, X 18-55 2.8-4, µ.Z 40-150 2.8, µ.Z 45 1.2, µ.Z 60 2.8, µ.Z 75 1.8, Z 150 2.0, µ.Z 300 4.0

LOG IN TO REPLY
Pippan
Senior Member
Pippan's Avatar
Joined Oct 2015
Darwin, Australia
May 08, 2017 15:09 as a reply to Hogloff's post |  #831

Guys, just to help you sound more authoritative, the plural of axis is axes. :)




LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
mystik610's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
Houston, TX
May 08, 2017 15:10 |  #832

Pippan wrote in post #18349341 (external link)
Guys, just to help you sound more authoritative, the plural of axis is axes. :)

lol I knew I was getting it wrong but was too lazy to google it :-)


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART - Sony 70-200GM

LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
RDKirk's Avatar
12,552 posts
Joined May 2004
USA
May 08, 2017 15:24 |  #833

Hogloff wrote in post #18349333 (external link)
Not quite. If the lens based IS does not fully compensate for pitch or yaw, the IBIS will not apply any further compensation in those axis. It will only concentrate on the x, y and roll...totally leaving the pitch and yaw to the lens based IS.

So IBIS does correct it further, instead of making it worse as had been asserted. It just doesn't correct that which is supposedly handled by the lens.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,305 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
May 08, 2017 15:35 |  #834

RDKirk wrote in post #18349350 (external link)
So IBIS does correct it further, instead of making it worse as had been asserted. It just doesn't correct that which is supposedly handled by the lens.

That's right.




LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
CyberDyneSystems's Avatar
47,815 posts
Gallery: 78 photos
Joined Apr 2003
Rhode Island USA
Post has been last edited 7 months ago by CyberDyneSystems. 2 edits done in total.
May 08, 2017 15:47 |  #835

Coimbra wrote in post #18349282 (external link)
I'm pretty sure they would cancel each other out.

Your hypothesis is countered by the fact that they have been designed to work together successfully.

DOH! I Didn't see the replies on the next page.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
CheshireCat's Avatar
2,303 posts
Joined Oct 2008
*** vanished ***
Post has been last edited 7 months ago by CheshireCat. 4 edits done in total.
May 08, 2017 16:51 |  #836

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18349363 (external link)
Your hypothesis is countered by the fact that they have been designed to work together successfully.

Which raises the question about adapted (i.e. untested) Canon IS lenses on Sony cameras.
The possible problem is that different timings of the two IS systems might fight against each other, unless firmware knows which combo is best at the selected shutter speed.

About optical vs sensor IS, Jim Kasson's blog has some useful info:
http://blog.kasson.com ...f4-oss-lens-on-sony-a7ii/ (external link)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY
corndog ­ cabernet
Senior Member
corndog cabernet's Avatar
Joined May 2010
State of chaos
May 12, 2017 00:24 |  #837

This thread has got me to open my mind to the alternatives out there. Sony's OK, but I'm going to Fuji.
It just has more anti SLR goodness to offer, IMO.




LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
CheshireCat's Avatar
2,303 posts
Joined Oct 2008
*** vanished ***
May 12, 2017 01:29 |  #838

corndog cabernet wrote in post #18352499 (external link)
This thread has got me to open my mind to the alternatives out there. Sony's OK, but I'm going to Fuji.
It just has more anti SLR goodness to offer, IMO.

Interested in more anti-SLR goodness. Tell us more !


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY
corndog ­ cabernet
Senior Member
corndog cabernet's Avatar
Joined May 2010
State of chaos
May 12, 2017 02:33 |  #839

^
The promise of mirror less is lightweight and compact, with (maybe) better IQ for a given sensor size. Though this last issue is less determinable and not conclusive.
Fuji X is much more compact and lighter than Sony, FF anyway. Conceding the last Nth of IQ goes to Sony FF, for what I do it mostly doesn't matter. Factoring in the minor size differential of the Sony system makes the Sony a minor step for those looking to downsize. The Fuji is a much larger step towards small and efficient.




LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
CheshireCat's Avatar
2,303 posts
Joined Oct 2008
*** vanished ***
May 12, 2017 08:13 |  #840

corndog cabernet wrote in post #18352545 (external link)
^
The Fuji is a much larger step towards small and efficient.

Is it really ? Sony also has very compact APS-C cameras and lenses, plus the flexibility of scaling to FF.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

60,537 views & 621 likes for this thread
Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?
FORUMS General Gear Talk Changing Camera Brands


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00268 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is xeunskate
810 guests, 377 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017