Canon sensor based image stabilization

You guys seem to be forgetting about primes. Imagine if Canon did have in-body IS, your 135mm f/2 would be magic when used handheld at 1/30th.
Not to mention 50mm f/1.4 at 1/15th.

If You have used a camera with in-body IS you would know what I mean.
Plus it tells you when you can achieve the sharpest shot with the stabilization effectiveness meter in the VF.

JWright wrote in post #8934876
Canon will not release a camera with in-body stabilization. They make way too much money selling IS lenses to kill off that cash cow...

What I think Canon might do is put moving image sensors in their 2 entry level modes: XS and T1i to compete where the sales are, at the low end, with companies like olympus, pentax(hoya) and sony that offer in-camera IS. Canon has a big lead (and always has) with their entry level models but it would be a way to keep the heat on the competition.

middle and high end models would not get moving image sensors because most of the high end lenses have IS in them and lens-based IS is better for longer focal lengths..

Rio Sundoro wrote in post #8933884
I have recently read articles on speculation and various technical issues should Canon put IS on the body. What I've always been curious, has anyone ever tried putting a Panasonic image stabilized lens on an Olympus body which has in built IS? Do the two systems actually contradict one another?

To answer your original question, Olympus tells you to turn off either the lens or in body IS.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #8942212
What I think Canon might do is put moving image sensors in their 2 entry level modes: XS and T1i to compete where the sales are, at the low end, with companies like olympus, pentax(hoya) and sony that offer in-camera IS. Canon has a big lead (and always has) with their entry level models but it would be a way to keep the heat on the competition.

middle and high end models would not get moving image sensors because most of the high end lenses have IS in them and lens-based IS is better for longer focal lengths..

EXCEPT...

They have already competed by putting IS into the 18-55 and 55-250 - the two most common lenses for the average consumer that has a camera in the Rebel line - while pricing them competitively with the competition (i.e. Sony 55-200).

Canon only needs to compete on IS in the consumer/ameture market; they have done this, as it was noted before, by having a great lineup of "digital only" EF-S lenses that contain IS. When you get to the advanced ameture, prosumer, professional models, the most stiff competition is from Nikon, and guess what? They don't have in-Body IS, either...

bjyoder wrote in post #8942925
EXCEPT...

They have already competed by putting IS into the 18-55 and 55-250 - the two most common lenses for the average consumer that has a camera in the Rebel line - while pricing them competitively with the competition (i.e. Sony 55-200).

Canon only needs to compete on IS in the consumer/ameture market; they have done this, as it was noted before, by having a great lineup of "digital only" EF-S lenses that contain IS. When you get to the advanced ameture, prosumer, professional models, the most stiff competition is from Nikon, and guess what? They don't have in-Body IS, either...

Exactly..

I only see them putting IS in body as a last defence if Nikon dominates them in sales for a long time, but that's not really happening.

Bodog wrote in post #8942807
To answer your original question, Olympus tells you to turn off either the lens or in body IS.

Thanks. A pity I could't find the article again, but the author speculated about the effect of in body stabilization with canon's IS lenses. So I thought why not just stick panasonic lens on olympus body and see what they turn up.

bjyoder wrote in post #8942925
EXCEPT...

They have already competed by putting IS into the 18-55 and 55-250 - the two most common lenses for the average consumer that has a camera in the Rebel line - while pricing them competitively with the competition (i.e. Sony 55-200).

Canon is still out in front, but if they really want to put the heat on nikon, moving image sensors is the way to do it. It would also be the way to reduce sony to the 3% to 5% market share level of pentax and olympus.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #8946855
Canon is still out in front, but if they really want to put the heat on nikon, moving image sensors is the way to do it. It would also be the way to reduce sony to the 3% to 5% market share level of pentax and olympus.

I wouldn't consider an inferior Is system to be putting the heat on Nikon. Yes, Sony wouldn't be able to tout it as an "advantage." However, as it has been stated, virtually all of the lenses a typical consumer would buy have IS for a nominal fee - if any!

bjyoder wrote in post #8946966
I wouldn't consider an inferior Is system to be putting the heat on Nikon. Yes, Sony wouldn't be able to tout it as an "advantage." However, as it has been stated, virtually all of the lenses a typical consumer would buy have IS for a nominal fee - if any!

The typical buyer of the entry level systems do not think about IS quality. The seller tells them that camera A has IS in the body, while camera B requires them to buy lenses with IS. The typical buyer notices that IS in the body must be the better solution. In the real world, the majority of decisions will be based on feelings and assumptions and not on real facts.

It is important to realize that the majority of buyers of entry-level cameras are not part of any web forum where they will get any real technical education. They look at the shape/color of the unit instead of the technical specifications. Technical specifications are just gibberish.

pwm2 wrote in post #8947247
The typical buyer of the entry level systems do not think about IS quality. The seller tells them that camera A has IS in the body, while camera B requires them to buy lenses with IS. The typical buyer notices that IS in the body must be the better solution. In the real world, the majority of decisions will be based on feelings and assumptions and not on real facts.

It is important to realize that the majority of buyers of entry-level cameras are not part of any web forum where they will get any real technical education. They look at the shape/color of the unit instead of the technical specifications. Technical specifications are just gibberish.

When I sell cameras, I generally do note that Camera "S" has in-body IS, while Camera "C" has it in the lenses. I tell the advantages of each, and then note that, even though all lenses attached to "S" will be stabilized, if they are starting new, they are likely to only buy lenses for "C" that are stabilized; so at this point, there is no longer an advantage. Not to mention that even the salesman that has basic knowledge should know that entry level cameras from Canon and Nikon come with stabilized lenses, so there is no direct advantage anyway.

It is always good when a seller gives the prospective customer enough information to make an educated decision. But that is quite seldom the case. And - at least where I live - a lot of customers buys their equipment on the net, in which case they normally don't have a seller to talk with.

Regardless everyone is forgetting about the non stabilized primes here.
The 50mm, 85mm and 135mm will highly benefit from in-body-IS unless Canon decides to bring out IS versions.
Plus you can always turn off in-body IS just like IS on the lenses anyway.
IS is better than no IS. In-body or on lens.

Rio Sundoro wrote in post #8933884
I have recently read articles on speculation and various technical issues should Canon put IS on the body. What I've always been curious, has anyone ever tried putting a Panasonic image stabilized lens on an Olympus body which has in built IS? Do the two systems actually contradict one another?

Yes, if you put an IS panasonic lens on an Olympus IS body, the body IS turns off automatically. Canon could easily do something similar. They would probably rather let us wait and buy each L prime in an IS version over the next 10 years, first.

bjyoder wrote in post #8947668
When I sell cameras, I generally do note that Camera "S" has in-body IS, while Camera "C" has it in the lenses. I tell the advantages of each, and then note that, even though all lenses attached to "S" will be stabilized, if they are starting new, they are likely to only buy lenses for "C" that are stabilized; so at this point, there is no longer an advantage. Not to mention that even the salesman that has basic knowledge should know that entry level cameras from Canon and Nikon come with stabilized lenses, so there is no direct advantage anyway.

Except now Sony has some fairly decent cheap primes that would be stabilized. Lots of newbs buy the nifty 50 on their Canon. Sony just came out with a nice 50mm of their own. 50mm 1.8 with 3 stop IS could make for some low light fun for sure.

Bodog wrote in post #8942807
To answer your original question, Olympus tells you to turn off either the lens or in body IS.

Didn't when I fitted a Panasonic 14-45 OS onto an Olympus Pen. No conflicting stuff either.