5 axis IBIS coming to next Canon EOS R series camera [CR2]

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
One step closer but irrelevant if pricing of the EOS R stays the same. Based on the specs the EOS R is more of a $1600 camera.
All depends on what you consider important. Had a chance to pick up and look through the EVF on the Nikon Z6 and Sony a7III. Neither one comes close to the EVF on the Canon R. (The Nikon EVF was especially dull and dark). I consider the sensor protective curtain to be an important addition to the R that the others don't have. The fully articulating screen even more so. The R has the best ergonomics as well and, yes, the best touch screen functionality, too. I would definitely consider all of these things, along with the usual top of the class Canon color, to easily be worth an extra $200-400.
 
Dec 6, 2018
29
40
I’ve found, over the years, that in lens IS better than in camera. For whatever reason, the i ,lens stabilization seems smoother. The in camera seems more jittery. Hard to explain, but you can see the difference in big enlargements, or on a good monitor.
Curious ... do you know if IBIS can be enabled and disabled in a camera body? I don't own an IBIS body, but was wondering if it's an always-on feature.
 
Reactions: HankMD

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,892
281
No, he’s right. That’s pretty much what I’ve read in interviews with Canon executives. This sensor, is not ready for it, and they didn’t think it would work as well as it should.
I believe you and Sharlin that they made such statements. I don’t believe the statements, if the implication is that they tried but were unable due to the body design. That isn’t how system engineering works.

Had they started with a baseline body I would buy it, but this is a new body, designed to current hardware requirements. If anything, IBIS (for better or for worse) was an afterthought.
 
Last edited:

dak723

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 26, 2013
1,141
434
No, he’s right. That’s pretty much what I’ve read in interviews with Canon executives. This sensor, is not ready for it, and they didn’t think it would work as well as it should.

I’ve found, over the years, that in lens IS better than in camera. For whatever reason, the i ,lens stabilization seems smoother. The in camera seems more jittery. Hard to explain, but you can see the difference in big enlargements, or on a good monitor.
The "jittery" quality is exactly what others have found in the Sony FF IBIS.

And, yes, the Canon execs said that they did not (as yet) consider IBIS to be usable due to heat issues. But, as we have seen before, whether IBIS is a good idea or not, Canon will have to add it because of the loud and persistant critics and internet reviewers. Unfortunately, for those looking for dependability and quality, camera companies will have to follow Sony's lead and produce cameras with lots of specs - regardless of how well they work or if they are actually ready for production. Sony has demonstrated again and again, that specs are the thing - not whether the specs actually work well.
 
Reactions: Berowne

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
806
173
Turku, Finland
That sounds like spin. The camera certainly has hardware requirements. If IBIS were a requirement, and this body is a contraindication to it (is that the c word?), the body would have been designed differently. I don’t believe IBIS was a requirement, for whatever reason.
No. It just means that a) their IBIS tech wasn't mature enough when the decision to include/exclude had to be made (engineering constraint); or b) their IBIS wasn't feasible at the price point established for the R (engineering/business constraint); or c) IBIS was feasible but they wanted to cripple (the C word) the camera to protect an upcoming pro body (business constraint); or d) IBIS was feasible but they wanted higher profit margins at the expense of bad press (business constraint); or e) any combination of the above. None of these excludes the possibility of putting IBIS in a future body.
 
Reactions: 4fun
Aug 1, 2017
256
148
Be a nice addition to that high MP 5DSR replacement that's been rumored. A sensor with pixels that small will be highly sensitive to camera shake. FujiFilm has announced their intention to add IBIS to next year's GFX 100s MF camera for the same reason. 75MP's in full frame sensor would be that much more of a challenge for hand holding sharp images. Sounds like a move in the right direction.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,110
678
Irving, Texas
And it doesn't mean much with a fast shutter or a tripod either. So how many photographs of immobile objects are your going to take without using a tripod and using a slow shutter and a lens that doesn't have IS?
Well, I take lots of photos of immobile models at slow shutter speeds, in low light, with lenses that do not have IS. Everybody has their use case. We shouldn't assume that because we ourselves do or don't do something that others do or don't. A tripod or mono-pod isn't always practical.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Del Paso

snappy604

EOS RP
Jan 25, 2017
238
101
I'm all for it. I find the arguments against it amusing as always.

Do we need it? no.. does it it bring value, yes!

You could say similar things about autofocus, tracking, dynamic range, live view, digital zoom in live view, tilty screens, high mega pixel etc etc.. people were able to take pics before all of these... so not needed. Do they help, heck yes. Especially those of us that like taking pics of objects in low light (wildlife, kids, bands etc)

I can tell you from a looong history with digital cameras (yes used ones with floppies in them) that each improvement does bring value and had its neighsayers. Many of those same people are converts now.. don't like the features? great, there is a pretty extensive used camera market you can get older cameras without those features for cheap!
 
Reactions: lexptr and shunsai

tiggy@mac.com

Pentax K-1000
Jan 20, 2014
473
143
Thetford, VT
www.ForestMetrix.com
Why would there be any doubt that Canon could get IBIS and lens IS to work together? They do this already (albeit in a more primitive way) for IS on video with the EOS M50.
I don't doubt Canon will figure it out, but there *IS* a very big difference between those types of stabilization integrations.

A)
In your M50 example, the digital stabilization is taking data from the sensor that is already stabilized through the lens and merely applying stabilization algorithms that are independent of the camera's movement. As opposed to...

B)
In an in-camera and in-body stabilization combination, the lens first stabilizes by employing corrections to its perceived movement in space. That light then reaches the camera system, which is referencing its perception of *its* movement in space. The problem is, the body doesn't know how much of the movement it perceives has or hasn't been corrected - and how - by the lens. Without communication between the systems, the body really can't be useful for stabilization when the lens is shifting things around too. This requires the lens to tell the body what it's doing with very high frequency.

That might have something to do with RF's extra pins, by the way. It's also why I don't expect older lenses with IS to be as useful with an IBIS integration.
 
Reactions: 4fun and pj1974

YuengLinger

EOR R
Dec 20, 2012
2,242
272
Southeastern USA
I'm all for it. I find the arguments against it amusing as always.

Do we need it? no.. does it it bring value, yes!

You could say similar things about autofocus, tracking, dynamic range, live view, digital zoom in live view, tilty screens, high mega pixel etc etc.. people were able to take pics before all of these... so not needed. Do they help, heck yes. Especially those of us that like taking pics of objects in low light (wildlife, kids, bands etc)

I can tell you from a looong history with digital cameras (yes used ones with floppies in them) that each improvement does bring value and had its neighsayers. Many of those same people are converts now.. don't like the features? great, there is a pretty extensive used camera market you can get older cameras without those features for cheap!
I think the arguments against IBIS or lens IS amount to: I don't need it and resent paying for it. That's fine--Canon has many options. And value of IS goes up with age!
As for Eye AF tracking, that's one I don't see much need for personally, at least not in portrait work. If the subject's eye is moving, my camera moves too so that the framing remains consistent. Action photography? I'm lucky to stay focused on a head when somebody is skateboarding or running, much less an eye.

Is Eye AF very helpful for video? Of course if Canon offers the feature, it should be top notch--and available in Servo AF!
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,892
281
No. It just means that a) their IBIS tech wasn't mature enough when the decision to include/exclude had to be made (engineering constraint); or b) their IBIS wasn't feasible at the price point established for the R (engineering/business constraint); or c) IBIS was feasible but they wanted to cripple (the C word) the camera to protect an upcoming pro body (business constraint); or d) IBIS was feasible but they wanted higher profit margins at the expense of bad press (business constraint); or e) any combination of the above. None of these excludes the possibility of putting IBIS in a future body.
Ah, perhaps that is the proper interpretation. “This body” from a timeline perspective, not this body from a technical perspective.
 

rjbray01

EOS T7i
Jan 19, 2017
88
38
And it doesn't mean much with a fast shutter or a tripod either. So how many photographs of immobile objects are your going to take without using a tripod and using a slow shutter and a lens that doesn't have IS?
Well, I can't speak for others, but I'm just an enthusiast, and most of my photos are of my family, and at a guess, about half are indoors in all sorts of locations.

There is *no way* they are going wait for me to set up and then pose in front of a tripod, but if I whip out a camera then they are normally good for a picture or two.

I've got a number of Sigma Art prime lenses which have fantastic resolution but no IS.

So, for me at least, this should DRAMATICALLY improve the quality of about 50% of all my pictures by way of serious noise reduction.

Its enough to convince me to buy the camera ...
 
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,160
336
No. It just means that a) their IBIS tech wasn't mature enough when the decision to include/exclude had to be made (engineering constraint); or b) their IBIS wasn't feasible at the price point established for the R (engineering/business constraint); or c) IBIS was feasible but they wanted to cripple (the C word) the camera to protect an upcoming pro body (business constraint); or d) IBIS was feasible but they wanted higher profit margins at the expense of bad press (business constraint); or e) any combination of the above. None of these excludes the possibility of putting IBIS in a future body.
I agree. I think historically Canon will put technology in a body only when it meets their expectations of what they think the customers want to see. Sony seems to take Microsoft's position of 'customer as beta-tester'. Will Canon change their approach now under market pressures?
 
Reactions: Del Paso

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,160
336
With recent news of Canon's partnering with GoPro, is this a tacit admission they cannot get IBIS working as hoped and will go for a souped-up stabilisation as in their video cameras (tracking the moving frame around the sensor)?
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
357
302
The "jittery" quality is exactly what others have found in the Sony FF IBIS.

And, yes, the Canon execs said that they did not (as yet) consider IBIS to be usable due to heat issues. But, as we have seen before, whether IBIS is a good idea or not, Canon will have to add it because of the loud and persistant critics and internet reviewers. Unfortunately, for those looking for dependability and quality, camera companies will have to follow Sony's lead and produce cameras with lots of specs - regardless of how well they work or if they are actually ready for production. Sony has demonstrated again and again, that specs are the thing - not whether the specs actually work well.
You are, very unfortunately, absolutely right!
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
my expectations are:
* IBIS will not be in next up "entry level R"

* it will be in both pro level R bodies ... hi-rez model ("5D V")and hi-speed body ("1DX-III")

* IS plus IBIS will only work in parallel with RF (IS) lenses - due to high speed data comm requirements

* with adapted EF (IS) lenses only 1 system will be active at any time. maybe user-selectable which one.

makes sense commercially and technically. :)
 
Last edited:
Reactions: YuengLinger