From Imaging Resource & SLRGear
The folks at Imaging resource have come up with their own way of testing the effectiveness of image stabilization in lenses. There first test subject? The 70-200 f/4L IS.
There is all sorts of charts and graphs and fun stuff to read.
The Verdict? At best, the 70-200 f/4L IS came away with a maximum improvement of 2.8 stops with IS turned on. That's pretty impressive. Canon claims “4 stops”, but we all know about the validity of manufacturer claims.
Yes, you'll get 30mpg if you're driving down a hill, newly paved, with the wind behind you on racing slicks and the engine off.
I'd like to see a good comparison of this lens and Sony's 70-200. What's better, in-body or in-lens? Get it done IR!
Read More: http://www.slrgear.com/…
cr
11 Comments
That’s odd, around 80% of my shots at 1/15s at 200mm are tack sharp with that lens and my 5D2…
And I thought they’ve come up with a brilliant technique to measure stabilization effectiveness. Doh! It’s just a few dudes holding the lens as best as they can. Ya, right…. so much for credibility.
I’ll rather look at DPReview results.
I’m not sure if 2.8 stops meshes with what I’ve experienced either. But remember, the 1/focal length rule is just a rule of thumb, so Canon might be calculating the 4-stop benefit by using a shutter speed higher than 1/200 (1/320 for croppers).
But hey, as long as SLRGear uses the same methodology and repeatable techniques in all of their tests, such tests will finally allow one to make an apples to apples comparison between different IS versions in Canon’s lens line-up, as well as the effectiveness of IS/VR/OS/In-body compared across the board. Kudos to SLRGear.
BTW, I personally appreciate CanonRumors posting relevant photo-related news; especially when the rumor mill dies down after major photo shows & announcements.
Keep up the great work!
Racing slicks will not improve gas mileage, they will do the opposite. You need tall, skinny, hard tires as one of the factors toward good gas mileage.
It is an impressive attempt to standardize the test measurements rather than DPR’s method of having not only one person hand holding the camera, but then a subjective estimate as to how sharp the image is.
One person can take photos and declare them tack sharp, but the blur analyzer is a more accurate measure of sharpness than a persons perception, so it helps remove individual subjective ratings of blur.
Mechanized vibration fixtures could be used to hold the camera, but they do not correlate to a real person holding the camera because there are so many variables.
The results are pretty much as expected, Up to 4 stops does not mean average of 4 stops, its the very highest result that could be obtained under perfect conditions.