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

One of the peculiarities of camera forums is the propensity of people to latch onto single techniques or architectures as panacea for all problems.

Personally, I enjoy discussing and learning about technology without advocating for any flavor of it.
I’ve got a lot of familiarity with these. IBIS came about because of cost issues. It was felt that it would be a whole lot cheaper, and it is. The first years were a disaster though. IBIS was simply terrible. Each generation gets better. Five years ago I would even think of using IBIS fir anything, I’d rather take the chance with shake.

Now, it’s fine most of the time. In camera is still better, but that may change later on.
 
Upvote 0
sorry, but i cannot follow you here and consider the statement BS. No disrespect to you, just to this statement.

I Do NOT believe any human being can differentiate "the look" of images captured using a) in-lens stabilizer (IS) or b) in-body (IBIS) or c) both systems active.

But maybe it's just my poor pair of eyes. My ears also fail to hear significant differences between a well mastered CD and a well-mastered Vinyl LP. But I do notice bandwidth compressed streams.
You may not believe it, but it’s true nevertheless. I’m by far from the only one seeing it.
 
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
It won't work! - I haven't really seen that said here.

It will break the camera! - I haven't really seen that said here.

It isn't necessary and I don't want to pay for it! - personal opinion.

Stop responding to the competition! - Really?

Now who's painting a bad light on others?

I'm not sure about "bad light," but it is a little early to be fretting over a feature that promises improved control over camera shake, while at the same time scolding those who want IBIS. Such naysayers, sounding like Eeyore from Winne the Pooh, are entitled to a "spot light."

I've paraphrased, but the above sentiments have been expressed throughout this thread. Please go back and read the thread and you'll see examples of each. I'm surprised, even scanning through, you didn't catch them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
Ah yes, a few cheap, tiny acceleration sensors [from any smartphone] could still be placed near front end of lens. But not the moving around of glass elements. But ... innovative Canon.
Silly me. I keep forgetting about your masterful design and engineering chops. Disassembling my smartphone now to install those parts onto my EF 35mm f/1.4L II.
 
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
You may not believe it, but it’s true nevertheless. I’m by far from the only one seeing it.
Melgross, "etched" is the perfect description. I have been looking for the right word since getting my Olympus. Etched is the word.

I think the problem people (including me) are having with our friend here is not his desire for IBIS. Just his obnoxious manner when he makes his claims/demands. I don't think anyone is against IBIS. I know I am not. Heck, if a combination of IBIS / lens IS makes things better then I am all for it. Who wouldn't be?

But for a guy constantly running around like he does, well, it kind of reminds one of a puppy that hasn't quite mastered the training pads nor the doggy door.

But that's who he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
It won't work! - I haven't really seen that said here.

It will break the camera! - I haven't really seen that said here.

It isn't necessary and I don't want to pay for it! - personal opinion.

Stop responding to the competition! - Really?

Now who's painting a bad light on others?
Oh! Here's a quote from you.
"Throw in the fact the size of the stabilization mechanism and I think there is going to be a lot of trade off versus robustness."
And you were responding to an earlier post fretting about IBIS related failures, I believe.
Yes, I'm paraphrasing such sentiments by saying, "It will break the camera."
 
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
Melgross, "etched" is the perfect description. I have been looking for the right word since getting my Olympus. Etched is the word.

I think the problem people (including me) are having with our friend here is not his desire for IBIS. Just his obnoxious manner when he makes his claims/demands. I don't think anyone is against IBIS. I know I am not. Heck, if a combination of IBIS / lens IS makes things better then I am all for it. Who wouldn't be?

But for a guy constantly running around like he does, well, it kind of reminds one of a puppy that hasn't quite mastered the training pads nor the doggy door.

But that's who he is.

Interesting. I've never noticed the etched look before, though some friends have shown a lot of pics from their newer Olympus cameras. Do you have any examples? That would be helpful.

So, your shots without IBIS don't look etched? Examples, examples.

Great. We now have another worry, "IBIS will make my photos look etched!"

But at least we could then use the old line, "Hi! Would you like to come up to my room to see my etchings?"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Jul 28, 2015
3,368
570
Canon chose a route that works for big white teles. They were not innovative enough to even think about anything else. that's all.
How do you know?
They were talking about the superiority of inlens IS at long focal lengths for years which means to me that they tried doing it. Or do you not have the imagination to think of that?
[sarcasm off]

By the way, Canon's in lens stabilitsation is now pretty much up to 5 stops. Reportedly Sony's heroic IBIS is barely 3 stops even on their short to medium focal lengths. I know which I would rather have.But as others have said, I would not object to both, I just don't take the pueriley oversimplistic antagonistic view of it that you do.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Mar 2, 2012
3,187
543
For me, having IBIS is a deal-breaker. I consider IBIS an unwanted and unneeded complication to an otherwise great camera. YMMV.
I am wary of such declarations. At the moment, I don’t want a camera without an optical viewfinder. However, it’s possible that in the future, “great cameras” all come without them. Same possibility with IBIS.
 
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
For me, having IBIS is a deal-breaker. I consider IBIS an unwanted and unneeded complication to an otherwise great camera. YMMV.
[Facetiousness detector beeping.]

That's exactly what I said when Honda added ABS. Then I said it again when they added TCS. Backup camera? No way. I remember being upset when the Accord no longer offered manual transmission! Automatic just adds too much weight and complication!
BTW, we are buying a new Honda this week.
 
Upvote 0
Oh! Here's a quote from you.
"Throw in the fact the size of the stabilization mechanism and I think there is going to be a lot of trade off versus robustness."
And you were responding to an earlier post fretting about IBIS related failures, I believe.
Yes, I'm paraphrasing such sentiments by saying, "It will break the camera."

From robustness to breaking the camera is quite a hyperbolic leap. So who's going into a tizzy?
 
Upvote 0
Oct 26, 2013
1,140
426
I'm not sure about "bad light," but it is a little early to be fretting over a feature that promises improved control over camera shake, while at the same time scolding those who want IBIS. Such naysayers, sounding like Eeyore from Winne the Pooh, are entitled to a "spot light."

I've paraphrased, but the above sentiments have been expressed throughout this thread. Please go back and read the thread and you'll see examples of each. I'm surprised, even scanning through, you didn't catch them.

I strongly suggest that you read more carefully. No one has fretted over IBIS, merely asked questions about possible long term alignment issues.
No one has scolded those who want IBIS. What people have mentioned is that in their experience, or in the experience of some photographers, IBIS on a FF camera may not be as effective as those who champion it's wonderfulness believe. People (like me) have said that as long as they have lenses with IS, then IBIS is not necessary. That doesn't imply it won't be necessary for others or that it won't be beneficial to everyone.

I don't believe that you are intentionally inflaming the issue, but like many forum members, your posts often tend to exaggeration and misinterpretation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0