Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
  

Archive 2015 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?

  
 
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


Aside from a stabilized viewfinder, why IS on the lens rather than on the sensor? If Canon goes mirrorless (EVF in place of OVF), might they finally give us IBIS (in body image stabilization)? After all, it would be nice to have IS on any number of lenses that do not have IS, as well as that pixel-shifting multi-exposure tech Olympus is introducing.


Feb 15, 2015 at 06:46 PM
lowa2
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


A stable viewfinder yields better AF as the AF sensors are also getting a more stable signal.

I'm sure Canon makes a lot of money on having IS in every lens. IE, they can charge more for each lens.



Feb 15, 2015 at 06:56 PM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


takowasa wrote:
Aside from a stabilized viewfinder, why IS on the lens rather than on the sensor? If Canon goes mirrorless (EVF in place of OVF), might they finally give us IBIS (in body image stabilization)? After all, it would be nice to have IS on any number of lenses that do not have IS, as well as that pixel-shifting multi-exposure tech Olympus is introducing.


It's better in the lens, especially for long teles, as it can be designed for the specific lens. IS will work with an optical VF or EVF.

EBH



Feb 15, 2015 at 07:16 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


lowa2 wrote:
A stable viewfinder yields better AF as the AF sensors are also getting a more stable signal.

I'm sure Canon makes a lot of money on having IS in every lens. IE, they can charge more for each lens.


I agree with both points. But IBIS offers some significant advantages over ILIS, not the least of which is the number of lenses that don't have IS. So, if and when Canon goes (adds) mirrorless, which will completely remove any advantage ILIS might have, will Canon finally implement IBIS?

I mean, I'm sure the 22 / 2, 24 / 2.8 STM, and 40 / 2.8 STM would benefit a bit with IBIS on current Canon mirrorless would be welcomed by many.



Feb 15, 2015 at 07:16 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


I'd like to see both sensor and lens based IS. This will give us the best of both worlds. It was once claimed that IBIS could not be done for a full frame sensor...well it has been done and works pretty good from what I hear. I'd love to see Canon plow forward with both types of IS so all lens can benefit from one form of IS or the other.


Feb 15, 2015 at 07:21 PM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


takowasa wrote:
I agree with both points. But IBIS offers some significant advantages over ILIS, not the least of which is the number of lenses that don't have IS. So, if and when Canon goes (adds) mirrorless, which will completely remove any advantage ILIS might have, will Canon finally implement IBIS?

I mean, I'm sure the 22 / 2, 24 / 2.8 STM, and 40 / 2.8 STM would benefit a bit with IBIS on current Canon mirrorless would be welcomed by many.


Well, that's like saying Canon should be Sony. Are you unhappy with Sony?

EBH



Feb 15, 2015 at 07:29 PM
robstein
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


chez wrote:
I'd like to see both sensor and lens based IS. This will give us the best of both worlds. It was once claimed that IBIS could not be done for a full frame sensor...well it has been done and works pretty good from what I hear. I'd love to see Canon plow forward with both types of IS so all lens can benefit from one form of IS or the other.


This... could easily disable sensor IS if an IS lens was enabled....... but Canon will resist to the last cause of the $$$.



Feb 15, 2015 at 08:16 PM
Gerry Szarek
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


If you do the math for long lenses the motions become big at the ccd, so putting it in the lens makes for better IS. You also have the fact that moving the ccd increases the part count which isn't good for the mtbf. Now the advantage of doing both is for long lenses you could the body is off and only use it for the short lenses.


Feb 15, 2015 at 08:21 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


It would be nice to have both worlds, so the option to turn IBIS on/off. The other cool thing that Olympus has done with the new OMD-5II is use the IBIS to create a 40MP image by shifting the sensor around and taking multiple (8 I think) images. Tripod only but they say eventually they will have it work fast enough to do handheld too. The samples of the 40MP images are really nice.


Feb 15, 2015 at 08:21 PM
canon pants
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


Pretty sure I read a while ago in lens works better, give you better is, more stops. Maybe is different now tho.


Feb 15, 2015 at 08:30 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


The IS effect in the lens carries right through to the body, and vice-versa.

Once a lens is attached to the body, you have one image-stabilized unit.

Pretty sure I also read that having the IS unit installed in a super-telephoto lens is more effective than having it installed in the camera.



Feb 15, 2015 at 08:49 PM
kezeka
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


I imagine the reason dSLRs with optical viewfinders don't have IBIS is because you would have to find a way to move the sensor and then immediately have the sensor back in PERFECT alignment with the AF sensor. Odds are, that can't reliably be done with enough precision.

Also, I am not sure I would want in body IS at this point. The IS units in sensors have already been shown to be far and away the most unreliable part of the lenses that it is found in. In the past, when the IS unit failed on one of my lenses, I could continue shooting because I could set the IS element to an off position. I wonder if this would be the case with IBIS? Also, it is a PITA to have to send in a lens to have the IS unit fixed, much less a camera body which leaves me with only my backup body to shoot with.



Feb 15, 2015 at 08:53 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


lowa2 wrote:
A stable viewfinder yields better AF as the AF sensors are also getting a more stable signal.

I'm sure Canon makes a lot of money on having IS in every lens. IE, they can charge more for each lens.


takowasa wrote:
I agree with both points. But IBIS offers some significant advantages over ILIS, not the least of which is the number of lenses that don't have IS. So, if and when Canon goes (adds) mirrorless, which will completely remove any advantage ILIS might have, will Canon finally implement IBIS?

I mean, I'm sure the 22 / 2, 24 / 2.8 STM, and 40 / 2.8 STM would benefit a bit with IBIS on current Canon mirrorless would be welcomed by many.


EB-1 wrote:
Well, that's like saying Canon should be Sony.


I don't follow. How does implementing a useful feature offered by Sony make Canon the same as Sony?

Are you unhappy with Sony?

EBH


Is the implication that if I want a feature that Sony has and Canon does not, that the proper course is to switch to Sony because no way, no how, will Canon ever implement a feature that Sony has implemented?



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:06 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


kezeka wrote:
I imagine the reason dSLRs with optical viewfinders don't have IBIS is because you would have to find a way to move the sensor and then immediately have the sensor back in PERFECT alignment with the AF sensor. Odds are, that can't reliably be done with enough precision.


Doesn't the Olympus IBIS move the sensor half a pixel for it's 40 MP mode in the EM5II? Half a pixel isn't precise enough?

Also, I am not sure I would want in body IS at this point. The IS units in sensors have already been shown to be far and away the most unreliable part of the lenses that it is found in. In the past, when the IS unit failed on one of my lenses, I could continue shooting because I could set the IS element to an off position. I wonder if this would be the case with IBIS? Also, it is a PITA to have to send in a lens to have the IS unit fixed, much less a camera body...Show more

So you're willing to spend thousands of dollars on ILIS lenses, but not an IBIS body? The reason being that you can live without that ILIS lens while it's being repaired but you can't live without the body while it's being repaired? It does pique my curiosity, though: I'll start a poll asking how often the IS feature in their lenses fails on average. Every year, every two years, every three years, etc. It would be interesting to know how much of an issue this is -- I had never thought it was an issue.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:16 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


takowasa wrote:
Is the implication that if I want a feature that Sony has and Canon does not, that the proper course is to switch to Sony because no way, no how, will Canon ever implement a feature that Sony has implemented?


You mean like on-chip ADC's
In-lens IS has been around far longer than the capability of IBIS. Anyone know who holds patents on IBIS (and who licenses them)? I'd bet it's a "patentable" as on-chip ADCs.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:18 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


Imagemaster wrote:
The IS effect in the lens carries right through to the body, and vice-versa.

Once a lens is attached to the body, you have one image-stabilized unit.

Pretty sure I also read that having the IS unit installed in a super-telephoto lens is more effective than having it installed in the camera.


Is there a reason you can't have both? That is, if you're using a lens with IS, is their any reason you wouldn't be able to turn off the IBIS if you prefer ILIS?



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:19 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


takowasa wrote:
Is the implication that if I want a feature that Sony has and Canon does not, that the proper course is to switch to Sony because no way, no how, will Canon ever implement a feature that Sony has implemented?


AJSJones wrote:
You mean like on-chip ADC's
In-lens IS has been around far longer than the capability of IBIS. Anyone know who holds patents on IBIS (and who licenses them)? I'd bet it's a "patentable" as on-chip ADCs.


I was thinking it was more like AF, USM, or dust-busting on the sensor.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:20 PM
NormanPCN
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


A given camera mount is designed to project a specific image circle for a specific film/sensor size. If you are moving a FF sensor around then, the edges of the sensor will move into areas that the lens really was not intended to project into. The quality may suffer. Stabilizing an APS-C sensor in a normal optical system designed for FF should not have this problem.

A new lens mount can be spec'd to cover sensor movement. I think most would want a stable viewfinder so an EVF becomes necessary.

Our DSLRs are really nothing more than film designs with digital "film". Canon controls the EOS mount but in many ways the EOS mount controls Canon.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:21 PM
nads
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


One of the most overlooked problems with IBIS is perspective distortion blur that impacts wider angle shots.

As the body moves, the projected image near the edges of the frame shifts a greater distance than the projected image near the middle of the frame.

The sensor can't shift a greater distance at the edges than it does at the center, so there is no way to compensate for this effect with just sensor movement.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:41 PM
kezeka
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Why IS in the lens rather than on the sensor?


takowasa wrote:
Doesn't the Olympus IBIS move the sensor half a pixel for it's 40 MP mode in the EM5II? Half a pixel isn't precise enough?

So you're willing to spend thousands of dollars on ILIS lenses, but not an IBIS body? The reason being that you can live without that ILIS lens while it's being repaired but you can't live without the body while it's being repaired? It does pique my curiosity, though: I'll start a poll asking how often the IS feature in their lenses fails on average. Every year, every two years, every three years, etc. It would be interesting
...Show more

I can keep shooting at a different focal length without one of my lenses, I can only shoot with one camera at one focal length with only one body. Yes, I am willing to buy my telephoto lenses with superior in lens image stabilization systems at those focal lengths in order to not only better stabilize the final image but also to be able to see a steady image through the viewfinder at all.

If you want IBIS there are plenty of options with other manufacturers. Why come into the canon forum and post this when canon has no IBIS currently or in the rumor mill? I can't help but think that you are just looking for a reason to argue with people here.



Feb 15, 2015 at 09:46 PM
1
       2       3       4       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.