Home · Forums · My Profile · PM · Buddy list · Search · FAQ · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting · Avatar · Software

	Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs Pages: [1] 2 3 ... Last     IS: Canon must show its colours (archived topic)

Tool Tucker Offline [ X ] Registered: Apr 12, 2007 Total Posts: 83 Country: Australia IS: Canon must show its colours Canon (and Nikon) is facing an interesting quandary right now. If the next camera it releases - say, the 40D - omits in-camera Image Stabilization (in which its technology leads the market) in favour of leaving it up to the individual lens, it sends out a strong message that it's not acting in the best interest of its customers, but instead protecting a path it beat long ago. A path its newer rivals in DSLRs aren't following, and they're being praised for it. We now know it's possible to build some degree of IS into the camera, and we all know it's something we want. The question is whether Canon is willing to not only match its competitors, but lead them, and at the same time, partially abandon its legacy of in-lens stabilization. Personally, I see no reason why an element of IS shouldn't be built into the camera, even if it's not as effective as the in-lens technique. It mightn't be perfect, but even one stop's worth would help. Besides which, there's no good reason why they can't offer both. Perhaps one would enhance the other. In any case, Canon is now officially behind the market in this area. And the longer they pretend it's not an issue, the more of us who'll ask where Canon's priorities lie. TT Apr 17, 2007 at 12:45 PM

ocean7 Online Buy and Sell: On Registered: Oct 01, 2004 Total Posts: 1782 Country: Canada Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Tool Tucker wrote:We now know it's possible to build some degree of IS into the camera Yes. Tool Tucker wrote:and we all know it's something we want. No. I don't want this. As a user of superteles I favor in-lens IS. I don't see how in-camera stabilisation could perform better than what we currently have now in-lens. The Canon IS system is excellent, or should I say fantastic, the best there is. In-lens stabilisation allows for engineering the IS system to match the focal length it is serving. I definitely do not want a generic in-camera IS. Tool Tucker wrote:The question is whether Canon is willing to not only match its competitors, but lead them Canon actually leads the DSLR market right now. Tool Tucker wrote:and at the same time, partially abandon its legacy of in-lens stabilization. Sorry to break your dream but this will never happen. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:04 PM

rhorta Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Dec 11, 2005 Total Posts: 887 Country: Netherlands Re: IS: Canon must show its colours IS is great, I really love it, for example when I use a GP Zoom it gives a maximum of flexibility. But once I use Primes* I want the best image, with or without tripod, that the glass can provide. And IS elements will detract from what a good prime can offer. Having IS inside the lens separates the IS from the body, which IMHO is still the way it should be at the current stage of development. IS is still an extra element between an optimal lens (prime) and the sensor. I wouldn't buy an IS SLR with today's standard of technology. *I didn't write this with superteles in mind, since I don't use them... Apr 17, 2007 at 01:05 PM

Tool Tucker Offline [ X ] Registered: Apr 12, 2007 Total Posts: 83 Country: Australia Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Well I own a 135 mm f/2, some say the finest lens Canon makes. It could certainly use a touch of IS. If the next Canon camera I buy - or the one after that - has built in IS, even if it's not in the same league as that in the new 70-200 F/4 L, then that lens has added value to me. It doesn't necessarily mean the 70-200 IS has less value. However, if Canon is already capable of building in-camera IS as good, or even superior to that being currently offered in its new range of lenses, and refuses to implement it because it makes more money multiple selling a redundant technology, that adds weight and price to a lens, then we're being dudded, and it deserves to gradually lose market share. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:11 PM

Tool Tucker Offline [ X ] Registered: Apr 12, 2007 Total Posts: 83 Country: Australia Re: IS: Canon must show its colours You can always switch if off if you don't want it. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:12 PM

RikWriter Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jun 22, 2004 Total Posts: 1949 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours I don't want it and I don't want to pay extra for it. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:22 PM

Sam Bennett Offline Buy and Sell: On Registered: Sep 26, 2004 Total Posts: 3856 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours I couldn't care less about in-camera IS. I think it's more likely that Canon will end up sticking IS in its kit lenses to satisfy marketing demands. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:22 PM

Tone M Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Sep 05, 2006 Total Posts: 213 Country: Norway Re: IS: Canon must show its colours The solution is pretty simple, all they need to do is build it into the body but make it automatically switch off when an IS lense is mounted, this should make everyone happy. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:25 PM

Sam Bennett Offline Buy and Sell: On Registered: Sep 26, 2004 Total Posts: 3856 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Tone M wrote: The solution is pretty simple, all they need to do is build it into the body but make it automatically switch off when an IS lense is mounted, this should make everyone happy. I don't think pro shooters using 1 Series cameras would accept this argument. Its one more thing to break in a camera people buy because they break less often than other. Imagine the fury a Sports Illustrated photographer using the dedicated IS lenses would have when a feature he doesn't even use forces him to miss a shot. It doesn't make any sense. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:30 PM

gasrocks Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: May 23, 2005 Total Posts: 890 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours The only system I know of that provides IS in the body does affect image quality. So, no thanks. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:39 PM

Steve Ickes Offline Buy and Sell: On Registered: Mar 24, 2007 Total Posts: 1120 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Tool Tucker wrote: . . . it sends out a strong message that it's not acting in the best interest of its customers, but instead protecting a path it beat long ago. A path its newer rivals in DSLRs aren't following, and they're being praised for it. I don't get that message at all so it can't be all that strong. For me low noise, sharp imaging, and fast and accurate AF are what I need. In that respect Canon is working in MY best interest. And who is praising these newer rivals? Popular photography? We now know it's possible to build some degree of IS into the camera, and we all know it's something we want. The question is whether Canon is willing to not only match its competitors, but lead them, and at the same time, partially abandon its legacy of in-lens stabilization. Well I don't know you so how do you know its something I want? As a matter of fact I don't really see anyone in this forum ranting about Canon's lack of in-camera IS. So the "we" you refer to must be "you". If that's the case, there are a number of so called competitors who offer it. This is a free-market economy - go buy one. Quite frankly the only competitor I see to Canon in "my" market segment is Nikon and I just sold all my Nikon gear to buy Canon. Personally, I see no reason why an element of IS shouldn't be built into the camera, even if it's not as effective as the in-lens technique. It mightn't be perfect, but even one stop's worth would help. This makes ABSOLUTELY no sense whatsoever. Essentially you are saying you want in-camera stabilization EVEN if it's not as good as in-lens IS. So its the old "technology for technology's sake" arguement. Well, sorry to say that is not my desire. I want the right tool for the right job. As a matter of fact before selling my Nikon gear, I still regularly used several, brace yourself, MANUAL FOCUS LENSES!!!! Why? Because they were incredibly sharp, had great color rendition and contrast, and just happened to be the right lens for the given task. If your imaging is suffering that much try a tripod. Besides which, there's no good reason why they can't offer both. Perhaps one would enhance the other. In any case, Canon is now officially behind the market in this area. And the longer they pretend it's not an issue, the more of us who'll ask where Canon's priorities lie. There's probably a lot of very good reasons why Canon chooses not to pursue in-camera IS (at this time at least). Personally I don't care. If I wake up tomorrow and suddenly need in-camera IS, I know where to find it. Does that mean I will sell my 1D MKII? No. As far as I'm concerned Canon's priorities lie exactly where I need them to be as evidenced by the 1D MKIII. Obviously they've done something right since there's a ton of anticipation, buzz, and pre-orders for this camera. Not too bad for not having in-camera IS. Again, if you're not happy with Canon fine. You're free to express YOUR viewpoints. However, I don't really think that you need to speak on everyone's behalf especially since, in this case, it doesn't seem to be the majority opinion. Again, if in-camera stabilization is what you desire, stop complaining and go buy from on of those other cutting-edge competitors. Apr 17, 2007 at 01:47 PM

Steve Torelli Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Oct 02, 2005 Total Posts: 1125 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours You're looking at this from an "entry level" point of view. The best IS is in-lens IS. Quality lenses are all about maximizing quality, not pleasing the P&S crowd looking to get into something better. If the IS in your lens fails ( not unheard off ), you can grab another lens. If the IS in your camera fails, you're done. Think about it, do you really want your sensor vibrating around like that ? Besides, with in-camera IS, how do you know it's even working as you're framing the shot ? Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. It's a mistake to rely on technology to make up for lack of effort or technique. I don't see any outcry from photographers to include IS in Canon's bodies and I personally don't want to see the next generations of DSLR turned into a farce of pointless technologies. Improve the things that will improve our photography, don't just add a bunch of gimmicks because a certain percentage of people are impressed by them. Good luck. Apr 17, 2007 at 02:16 PM

Tool Tucker Offline [ X ] Registered: Apr 12, 2007 Total Posts: 83 Country: Australia Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Such aggressive brand loyalty. It's quite amusing to the see the response "if you don't like it, leave." I too, have invested in Canon lenses, but to me, this puts me in the camp of wanting to see Canon lead in technology, and protect my investment, rather than the one that defends everything it does on principle. I don't actually know whether Canon is capable of building useful IS into the body that won't adversely affect image quality, all I'm saying is that many of its competitors have achieved reasonable success with it, and if anyone should be able to do it properly, it should be Canon. And once again, none of my lenses currently have IS, and no variants of them offered it, so yes, it would add value to my investment. Apr 17, 2007 at 02:21 PM

Jennifer H-L Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Feb 04, 2007 Total Posts: 89 Country: United Kingdom Re: IS: Canon must show its colours If you're reading Canon - we DON'T want it! Apr 17, 2007 at 02:27 PM

Ed Peters Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Jul 25, 2003 Total Posts: 4236 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours May be good for entry level cameras, but please don't put it into the middle and 1 series cameras!! YMMV Apr 17, 2007 at 02:34 PM

trenchmonkey Online Image Upload: On Registered: Oct 22, 2004 Total Posts: 11212 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Yeah, please leave IS out of my body's...thank you very much! Apr 17, 2007 at 02:40 PM

Steve Torelli Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Oct 02, 2005 Total Posts: 1125 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours I don't think "brand loyalty" enters into it. At this stage of the game, it's just not the way to go. Remember, the companies offering in-camera IS, Pentax, Sony, compete exclusively at the entry level, at least in the DSLR market, and have never offered IS lenses. Canon and Nikon must please a more discriminating market by and large, a high percentage of which are professional or semi-pros and want the highest IQ and reliability they can get and to whom IS is less important than the right lens for the job. Good luck. Apr 17, 2007 at 02:41 PM

CKrueger Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jul 06, 2005 Total Posts: 2646 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours For me at least, Canon has painted itself into a bit of a corner. They made nearly the perfect camera for me, the 5D. There's few upgrades they could make to the body that would entice me to upgrade from the 5D. At least, no upgrades that they're actually going to make, lest they shove the 1DsMk2 out of the market (ie: 45-point AF, higher FPS, weather sealing, viewfinder niceties). The only thing they could do that would entice me to upgrade would be to greatly increase my ability to shoot in low light and/or with slow lenses. Since we've already seen that the state-of-the-art (the 1DMk3) ISO performance is somewhere a bit less than one stop better than the 5D, IS is really the only way to dramatically improve upon the 5D in the near future. So what does Canon do to keep high-end amateur sales going? Bump resolution a bit, tack on a slightly-noisier ISO6400, and give us an AF button, and call it a 5DMk2? I can't see that driving many upgrades, not for $3000 in an amateur market. Or do they take the current camera and add in-body IS? Personally, I'd buy one on day one JUST for that feature. I can't imagine I'm the only one fairly satisfied with his 5D. Personally, I'm not going to upgrade my 5D until Canon either adds in-body IS, or improves ISO performance to the point where I don't care about IS (an ISO12800 that looks like today's ISO800? Not happening anytime soon!). RikWriter wrote: I don't want it and I don't want to pay extra for it. I'm sure Canon could make a version of each body with and without IS. Even tiny Pentax can do it. Of course, with Canon's economies of scale, I imagine they could get the price of IS down to the point where nobody would care about the extra cost. Especially since Pentax places the cost of in-body IS around $100. Sam Bennett wrote: I couldn't care less about in-camera IS. I think it's more likely that Canon will end up sticking IS in its kit lenses to satisfy marketing demands. But they already did that, with the 17-85IS and 70-300IS. Neither of those really are applicable to what those of us who want in-body IS want. gasrocks wrote: The only system I know of that provides IS in the body does affect image quality. So, no thanks. How does it affect image quality? Can you provide a link? Apr 17, 2007 at 02:43 PM

Carlo Botteghi Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Mar 30, 2004 Total Posts: 492 Country: Italy Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Tool Tucker wrote: it would add value to my investment Sorry: it would only add value to that IS camera to you, it would never add a cent of value to your equipment. You have a bunch of lenses that are already considered extremely valuable in tha Canon community and that are ofter listed as the best value for money. I have 1 series cameras and a 20D and never thought that an IS system inside my cameras could add anything to my pics. As others wrote in camera IS is absolutely useless as who need IS buys IS lenses and who prefer simple lenses buy them, as Canon offer us the possibility to chose between them. I've already ordered a 1D MKIII and I think that Canon has perfected a camera that was already very good adding functions that will help me shooting still more relaxed and confident. I prefer being confident in a manufacturer that technically leads the crowd of manufacturers than in one obliged to follow the market trends only to stay in alive. Ciao Carlo Apr 17, 2007 at 02:44 PM

mh2000 Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Oct 06, 2005 Total Posts: 4727 Country: N/A Re: IS: Canon must show its colours >>I don't want it and I don't want to pay extra for it. All the competing companies are offering it for peanuts (and the new Oly looks like it might be nice)... maybe it's like all the money you save not putting a popup flash in the 5D... hahaha! Apr 17, 2007 at 02:50 PM

mh2000 Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Oct 06, 2005 Total Posts: 4727 Country: N/A Re: IS: Canon must show its colours >>As a matter of fact before selling my Nikon gear, I still regularly used several, brace yourself, MANUAL FOCUS LENSES!!!! Why? Because they were incredibly sharp, had great color rendition and contrast, and just happened to be the right lens for the given task. If your imaging is suffering that much try a tripod. If the tripod is the answer, why have IS in a lens? And I shoot MANUAL FOCUS lenses on my Canon gear still for all your old reasons... and GUESS WHAT? In-body IS would work with them too!!! Apr 17, 2007 at 02:56 PM

mrladewig Online Image Upload: Off Registered: Dec 20, 2005 Total Posts: 1736 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours I intend to own my lenses for longer than I own a camera body. I think IS in the lens is the technology that will keep me from buying it over and over. My lens requirements are not all that complicated. A normal zoom suits 95% of my needs and I think it is likely that Canon will develop a 24-70 IS soon and they already have a 17-55 f2.8 IS for EF-S. A couple fast primes, a wide angle zoom and telephoto lens takes care of the rest. The wide angle lives on my tripod, so no IS needed. The telephoto is the lens where I need the IS most and here Canon's solution works best. Apr 17, 2007 at 03:08 PM

JSeaman Offline Image Upload: Off Registered: Aug 03, 2005 Total Posts: 373 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Just me wondering .... With Canon's full frame sensor on various models, wouldn't it require a larger-than-full-frame sensor to accomplish in-body IS? I'm sure that in-body IS is relatively easy to accomplish on the smaller, lightweight sensors that other companies may use but on the Canon's larger, heavier sensors it may actually be a problem. Also ... I'm sure IS tuned for a particular lens has to be more effective than a generic in-body IS system could be. Just my 2 cents. Apr 17, 2007 at 03:09 PM

Tool Tucker Offline [ X ] Registered: Apr 12, 2007 Total Posts: 83 Country: Australia Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Exactly. As for the notion that it's something that only beginners would want. Well trial it in a Rebel first, as they did with the dust removal system, and watch those with the x0D series bleat. Apr 17, 2007 at 03:11 PM

RikWriter Offline Image Upload: On Registered: Jun 22, 2004 Total Posts: 1949 Country: United States Re: IS: Canon must show its colours Tool Tucker wrote: Such aggressive brand loyalty. Nothing to do with brand loyalty. Nikon is smart enough to keep the stabilization in the lens as well. In-camera stabilization is a gimmick for consumers. Apr 17, 2007 at 03:12 PM

	FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs Pages: [1] 2 3 ... Last