The day the Canon Grinch stole the OS/VC

[axtstern]

So Tamron and Sigma got some RF licences.
Looks like there are boundaries.
Everyone complains that they are not FF but I don't need that anyway...
but where is the OS or VC?
I mean only IBIS ?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Are the lenses those manufacturers are releasing in the RF mount also available in other mounts? Do the lenses for other mounts have lens based image stabilization? How much does lens stabilization actually help with wide and standard focal lengths? My 28-70/2 has 8 stops with just IBIS.

Having said that, it does does leave those without IBIS bodies out in the cold… Which is exactly where they don’t want to be, shivering and holding a non-stabilized rig.

 

[axtstern]

Are the lenses those manufacturers are releasing in the RF mount also available in other mounts? Do the lenses for other mounts have lens based image stabilization? How much does lens stabilization actually help with wide and standard focal lengths? My 28-70/2 has 8 stops with just IBIS.

Having said that, it does does leave those without IBIS bodies out in the cold… Which is exactly where they don’t want to be, shivering and holding a non-stabilized rig.

Well said but Neuro your equipment EOS R3 + 28-70 2.0 is heayvy enough to be a stabilizing force in itself and based on how long you are taking pictures you can probably hold 1/20 of a second with good results.
But somehow I assume that the typical R10 Customer who upgrades from the (stabilized) cheapo kit lens to a 17-50 Tamron would apreciate any aditional VC

 

[axtstern]

Ups... ment to say you can hold the 1/20 without any IBIS IS or other features...

 

[koenkooi]

Are the lenses those manufacturers are releasing in the RF mount also available in other mounts? Do the lenses for other mounts have lens based image stabilization? How much does lens stabilization actually help with wide and standard focal lengths? My 28-70/2 has 8 stops with just IBIS.

Having said that, it does does leave those without IBIS bodies out in the cold… Which is exactly where they don’t want to be, shivering and holding a non-stabilized rig.

AFAICT only the R7 has IBIS when it comes to Canon RF bodies with APS-C sensors.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But somehow I assume that the typical R10 Customer who upgrades from the (stabilized) cheapo kit lens to a 17-50 Tamron would apreciate any aditional VC

I don't disagree with the sentiment. But I do disagree with the title of your post, "The day the Canon Grinch stole the OS/VC." I had a look at the Sigma lineup for mirrorless, only 5 of their many offerings have OS and they comprise four telephoto zooms starting between 60-150mm and a 500mm prime. None of the lenses being offered in the RF mount have OS. Likewise, Tamron's one RF offering lacks VC in the other mounts. The Tamron 17-50/4 (to which I assume you're referring above) does not have VC, either.

So, why do you conclude that it's the Canon Grinch that stole stabilization from these lenses? They don't have stabilization for Sony or Nikon, either.

 

[EricN]

Well said but Neuro your equipment EOS R3 + 28-70 2.0 is heayvy enough to be a stabilizing force in itself and based on how long you are taking pictures you can probably hold 1/20 of a second with good results.
But somehow I assume that the typical R10 Customer who upgrades from the (stabilized) cheapo kit lens to a 17-50 Tamron would apreciate any aditional VC

I wonder how many people moving from the optically stablized f4.5-6.3 kit lens to these faster lenses without stabilization will notice. I like tripods, but I know I'm not everyone.