December 22, 2014, 09:27:08 PM

Author Topic: Stabilization for IS lenses?  (Read 7952 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2013, 08:24:30 PM »
Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

Have you actually looked?  I just tried with my 100L, and stabilization clearly isn't 'instantaneous'.  If I just fully press the shutter with a handheld shot, it's not much better than no IS with a slow shutter (1/25 s). 

I took a few tripod test shots with the 100L and the 600L, I'll have a look at the results in a day or two.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2013, 08:24:30 PM »

Plainsman

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2013, 07:03:52 AM »
This is a very interesting topic!

My most used lens is the 100-400L IS and I think I have got a good copy of it.

My modus operandi is to support it from a car window or off the car roof or solid wall or sometimes a monopod at f5.6 with the IS always on. The shutter speed in sunny conditions will be about 1/1000 sec and 90% of the time I always get a  good sharp image at 400mm - the image swims about a bit initially for 2 secs max and then stabilizes - that's when I press the shutter.

The 400/5.6 gives slightly sharper images but never supported as above - only if mounted on a tripod using cable release.

There may be an upper shutter speed limit for effective IS but 1/focal length is to low for Canon IS.
Maybe it applies to Nikon VR.
Then maybe Canon IS is the best image stabilizer you can get!

AlanF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1181
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #17 on: August 20, 2013, 12:40:23 PM »
Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

Have you actually looked?  I just tried with my 100L, and stabilization clearly isn't 'instantaneous'.  If I just fully press the shutter with a handheld shot, it's not much better than no IS with a slow shutter (1/25 s). 

I took a few tripod test shots with the 100L and the 600L, I'll have a look at the results in a day or two.

Neuro
I have been using mode 3 stabilisation recently. It seems to work but I haven't rigorously tested it. What's it like on your set up.
5D III, EOS-M, Powershot SX50, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, 70-200/4 IS, 24-105, 15-85, 100-400 II, Sigma 10-20, EOS-M, 18-55, f/2 22.

tq0cr5i

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 34
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #18 on: August 20, 2013, 11:46:19 PM »
I usually use my 100L on my 5D2 handy shot without tripod. Last Sunday I used my friend’s Non-L 100 macro USM lens on the same camera to shot some macro pictures. The Non IS lens was a nightmare for my handy shot. It really need a tripod for clear and sharp! The IS can really save your some photos!

My question for images when taken with Canon IS lenses:

Is there some data in the EXIF can show the Image Stabilizer was ON or OFF? If yes, where?
Canon EOS 5D Mark II;
CANON EF LENSES: 24mm F1.4L II, 24-105mm F4L, 40mm F2.8, 50mm F1.8 II, 50mm F2.5, 100mm F2.8L, 135mm F2L, 70-200mm F4L IS;
Canon SPEEDLITES: 430EX II, 90EX

TAF

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2013, 12:00:07 AM »
Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

Have you actually looked?  I just tried with my 100L, and stabilization clearly isn't 'instantaneous'.  If I just fully press the shutter with a handheld shot, it's not much better than no IS with a slow shutter (1/25 s). 

I took a few tripod test shots with the 100L and the 600L, I'll have a look at the results in a day or two.

But of course.

On my 70-300L, as soon as I push the shutter button part way down, the jiggling appears to stop.  Same with my 24-105L.  So it's fast enough I don't see it dampen out - or I'm shaky enough that it looks so good I can't tell how quickly it settles down.

I'll play with the tripod over the weekend.


neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2013, 10:53:25 AM »
I ran a few 'quick-and-dirty' test shots of an ISO 12233-type chart (I have the same type of charts as Bryan at TDP uses for his tests) over the weekend.  I didn't spend a lot of time on the setup, just natural light from the windows - so, while the light was essentially constant within each set (6-9 shots taken over less than 2 mintues), between each set of comparisons there were time lags (kid-related) so the light was changing - the afternoon got progressively darker, so ISO values had to be increased - like I said, quick and dirty.

Shot RAW, processed in DPP with Neutral picture style, sharpness set to zero and NR off. Each set of shots was taken without refocusing, and three shots per setup were captured, with the sharpest shown for the crops.  For each comparison, a set of crops from the center of the ISO 12233 chart is shown, followed by a set from the upper right corner. 

This set of shots was with the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, shot handheld at 1/25 s, f/5.6 and ISO 800, and addresses the need to let the IS system start working. 

  • Top panels: IS on, half-pressed the shutter and allowed ~2 seconds for the IS system to operate before fully pressing the shutter.
  • Middle panels: IS on, fully pressed the shutter in one smooth motion, no delay for IS 'warm-up'
  • Bottom panels: IS off

It's very clear that it's important to let the IS system operate for a brief period before the shot is taken.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2013, 10:54:12 AM »
This set of shots was with the 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, on a stable tripod (RRS TVC-33 with BH-55 LR, mounted via the tripod collar on the 100L).  Exposure was 1/25 s, f/5.6 and ISO 100 (this was actually the first set, so the light was brightest).   Shots were taken with a 10-second timer.  The intent was to test if having IS on vs. off matters while on a tripod, when using a lens with tripod-sensing IS.

  • Top panels: IS on
  • Bottom panels: IS off

It's been claimed that IS can cause a reduction in sharpness if left on while on a tripod - if so, I'm not seeing that under these conditions (but it's possible that at other shutter speeds, it makes a difference).
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2013, 10:54:12 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #22 on: August 21, 2013, 10:56:00 AM »
This set of shots was with the 600mm f/4L IS II, on a stable tripod (RRS TVC-33 with BH-55 LR, mounted via the tripod foot on the 600L).  Exposure was 1/800 s, f/5.6 and ISO 3200 (really should have added light for this one, that was higher ISO than I would have liked and the shots still had to be underexposed relative to my preference for a chart, although these were still exposed higher than metered).   Shots were taken with a 10-second timer.  The intent was to test if having IS on vs. off while shooting with a shutter speed faster than 1/focal length affects sharpness.

  • Top panels: IS on
  • Bottom panels: IS off

It's been claimed that IS can cause a reduction in sharpness at fast shutter speeds - if so, I'm not seeing that under these conditions (might have been useful to try an even faster shutter speed - I usually shoot at 1/1600 s for BIF, but there just wasn't enough light; I'll likely repeat this one more carefully at some point).
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2013, 11:00:44 AM »
I have been using mode 3 stabilisation recently. It seems to work but I haven't rigorously tested it. What's it like on your set up.

I usually use Mode 3 when on a monopod/tripod, and Mode 1 when handholding (for a more stable VF).  Both work very well.  Based on the above, I see no need to ever turn IS off.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

surapon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2475
  • 80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #24 on: August 21, 2013, 12:50:13 PM »
I have been using mode 3 stabilisation recently. It seems to work but I haven't rigorously tested it. What's it like on your set up.

I usually use Mode 3 when on a monopod/tripod, and Mode 1 when handholding (for a more stable VF).  Both work very well.  Based on the above, I see no need to ever turn IS off.

Thank You, SIR, Dear Teacher, Mr. Neuroanatomist, Thanksssss for your times that you spend to prepare/ to let us learn some thing that we trust the camera with out know the truth of the function of the cameras.
Surapon.

Click

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 3625
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #25 on: August 21, 2013, 01:31:33 PM »
Thanks for your time and the results of your test Neuro. It’s really appreciated.

tpatana

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #26 on: August 21, 2013, 01:55:20 PM »
Good job Neuro! Thanks for doing the tests.

Interestingly the middle version is almost stabilized but not quite, so I guess the IS just kicks in but needs just a bit more time to really work 100%.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2013, 01:58:49 PM »
Interestingly the middle version is almost stabilized but not quite, so I guess the IS just kicks in but needs just a bit more time to really work 100%.

Correct - the VF stabilized quite fast, but it seems that's not sufficient for a sharp shot.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2013, 01:58:49 PM »

Viggo

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2140
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2013, 02:13:33 PM »
Based on my experience with several Canon IS lenses (and their IS binoculars), I would say that the IS is essentially instantaneous (below my reaction/sensing threshold, anyway).

Have you actually looked?  I just tried with my 100L, and stabilization clearly isn't 'instantaneous'.  If I just fully press the shutter with a handheld shot, it's not much better than no IS with a slow shutter (1/25 s). 

I took a few tripod test shots with the 100L and the 600L, I'll have a look at the results in a day or two.

I agree, although I discovered something a couple
Of days ago. My 200 f2 is MUCH faster to start IS after I assigned it to the AF-stop button on the lens itself, compared to start it with the AF-ON button that I also use
For AF . I set it up that way so that when using it normally I don't have is activated, but push the button on the lens when needed .

Have you tries if there's any speed difference in start up with your
600 also?

Ps; I turn it off to save batterylife. It's actually quite draining in my experience.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2013, 02:18:06 PM by Viggo »
1dx, 24-70 L II, 50 Art, 200 f2.0 L

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15238
    • View Profile
Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2013, 02:20:26 PM »
I agree, although I discovered something a couple
Of days ago. My 200 f2 is MUCH faster to start IS after I assigned it to the AF-stop button on the lens itself, compared to start it with the AF-ON button that I also use
For AF . I set it up that way so that when using it normally I don't have is activated, but push the button on the lens when needed .

Have you tries if there's any speed difference in start up with your
600 also?

Ps; I turn it off to save batterylife. It's actually quite draining in my experience.

Haven't tried using the lens button.  I don't usually concern myself with battery life - I haven't come close to exhausting a battery in a day of shooting, and I have two.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Stabilization for IS lenses?
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2013, 02:20:26 PM »