Is there still hope that we see in-body stabilization in the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III?

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,105
543
Hi, Anyone can use the camera and obtain outstanding results if they know how to tell the camera what to do. Now spend another $60 to $70K on glass and a total of 18K for three bodies and you have a kit. Now add your wifi, 3 Canon 600 series flashes, your pelicans, mono and tripods, gimbals, cards, heads and we're at about 100K before we even step off the field and into the studio where another 100K with strobes, fixed lighting, modifiers, scrims, backdrops, gscreen, PC's and on and on. We are the guys paying the Bill's. "I am the person " paying the bills. I SHOOT ZERO video. And every major sports magazine, team, leauge, sports agent, athlete, newspaper, TV Network, website at some point has paid one if not all of my bills.

What I want as someone who has paid their dues is 30MP at 15fps in RAW with cross-points across my entire OVF. The video/broadcast cameras I stand next to have $250,000 lenses on them. I don't do their job and they don't do mine. I've been hit twice on the sidelines once taken out in a stretcher with a TBI. Once for water sports I was hit by boat and dragged unconcious with a hole in my head and almost lost an eye.

I AM A SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHER
You and the 20-30 others that are left. None of whom could afford to replace all of that 100K worth of lighting and $60-70K worth of lenses you claim you own/need on what being a "SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHER" pays these days. Canon needs to sell more than a couple of hundred or even a couple of thousand 1D X Mark III bodies to break even on it. Once upon a time a couple of decades ago there were tens of thousands of you. Now there aren't.

Every currently employed PJ I know loves to bitch about being expected to come back from every single assignment they're given with video footage as well as stills.

P.S. I'm pretty sure Iooss and Leifer never owned anywhere near that much in lenses, much less lighting. They knew how to rent it when they needed it, if they couldn't check it out of the SI equipment locker.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,105
543
Lens IS moves only in two dimensions, IBIS also tilts. 10 micrometers of
play will give you unsharp corners. Have seen that on Nikon Z cameras already.
Canon claims that the "Hybrid IS" in the EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro also corrects for shift movement as well as rotational pitch and yaw.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and Joules

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
369
288
Hamburg, Germany
My point is not that implementing IBIS is a simple endeavor and Canon is "behind" for not including it. There are a number of valid concerns with such an implementation, you named a fair number of them.


My point is that Canon didn't put a half baked IBIS system into any body yet, so if the 1DX III is one of the first ILC where we'll see it, I don't see any reason to fear that to be a half baked implemtation either. They have their standard and know what the market expects such a camera to deliver better than any of us, and if a feature is unable to meet those demands it won't be present in the 1DX III.

I can understand not wanting to have a poorly implemented version, and going with none instead of that. But preferring not to have it over having a good implementation which can be ignored if one wishes so is something I find hard to comprehend.

You obviously have no idea about what the wiring to the sensor looks like,
and what it means for the lifespan of thin conductors if they are constantly
moved, bent back and forth.
I can't have any idea about the wiring of an IBIS implementation that's not on the market. You seem to have that anyway, since you assume it must use thin conductors.

You are right in that I don't know much about wiring, I certainly would not know how to dimension cables for a given amount of expected static and dynamic stress. I would hope that Canon has people in their team who are more capable in this regard though, and could solve the issue with an appropriate design if there is a sufficient economical incentive. If that is the case will be seen over the course of the next year, when more high end Canon bodies are released.

Anyway, since you appear to have some grasp of the subject, I'm sure we would all appreciate if you could let us in on the knowledge a little instead of telling us what we don't know. What are the typical increases in design complexity and cost associated with making data cables compatible with constant motion? Is it outright impossible to find a suitable material / design to reach a target life time?

You are obviously not an engineer.
Engineering has many disciplines and is not just about technical insight, but also about methods and more general design principles. I won't claim to have the expertise typically associated with a mechanical or electrical engineer, but I actually have the right to name myself an engineer. I don't think that matters in this context though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Janek and jazzytune

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,408
786
Canon claims that the "Hybrid IS" in the EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS Macro also corrects for rotational movement as well as pitch and yaw.
It doesn't. It compensates for camera shifts.

We don't know yet how to make roll compensation by moving passive optical elements in the path of light possible without huge degradation of the image quality.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
545
412
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Good shot! But on the technical side, 200mm and crop sensor = 320mm FF equivalent which is even more sensitive. 1/800s at 320mm is basically the same as 1/500s at 200mm, so in fact you're kinda proving the point that 1/500s is enough at 200mm :)

In terms of the blur, all what matters is the angular speed. Say a 100m sprinter does roughly 10m a second, shooting at 1/500s from the side when he's moving perpendicularly to your line of sight, he'll pass 2cm in 1/500s, so it's a bit too much. But even 1/2000s won't be enough (he'll make 0.5cm in 1/2000s).

However if you shoot say at 1/500s and 15 degrees along his movement direction, 2cm turn into 2 * sin( 15 degrees ) = 0.51 cm, as if you were shooting at 1/2000s in the first example. So changing the angle from 90 to 15 degrees is like adding 2 stops of freedom.

Anyway, whatever the speed is, panning helps compensate that, but a good IS will help you with panning. Panning handheld without IS isn't that efficient.

Typical high school athletes running across the camera's field of view. I was panning with the torso, which is reasonably stable, but the extremities, particularly the feet, are blurred at 1/800. EOS 7D + EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II (200mm and moderately cropped, 1/800, f/2.8, ISO 3200). I was on the walkway of the home stands (roughly the same height and distance from the center of the field as the visitor stands seen in the background) moving from up in the stands where I had been shooting band members and students cheering and was moving back to the field level when #4 broke a long run that wound up being a touchdown.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
105
63
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
You and the 20-30 others that are left. None of whom could afford to replace all of that 100K worth of lighting and $60-70K worth of lenses you claim "Claim" ??? You're insulting! you own/need on what being a "SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHER" pays these days. "It pays well Canon needs to sell more than a couple of hundred or even a couple of thousand 1D X Mark III bodies to break even " So a 30MP frame at 15fps RAW is going to stop them? on it. Once upon a time a couple of decades ago there were tens of thousands of you. Now there aren't.

And those of us left are some of the most dedicated and talented. That's why we get paid and work when WE want.

Every currently employed PJ I know loves to bitch about being expected to come back from every single assignment they're given with video footage as well as stills. AGAIN.... I shoot stills and edit stills. Someone else shoots video and edits video; This is not HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS.

P.S. I'm pretty sure Iooss and Leifer never owned anywhere near that much in lenses, much less lighting. They knew how to rent it when they needed it, if they couldn't check it out of the SI equipment locker.

The cost of my equipment is not a lot compared to others.. I know many who far exceed that in Fashion. Do you even know what an H6D-400C Costs and a single Profoto 10-2400 costs?


What I own, what is rented and what is given by Canon CPS at events are three separate pools of equipment. I make more money by owning my equipment. When I travel I don't pay for my equipment to be shipped my clients do. Or the Airlines honor my press credentials.


You'll never make it in the industry with your attitude or poor manners!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

peters

EOS 80D
Dec 25, 2017
111
102
Not even sure why IBIS would be a priority for the 1DxIII line -- it's not a benefit for sports or other action.
I think it is a big benefit. The 1DX III appears to be very video-friendly with the 4k60 in camera RAW on a fullframe sensor. Just like the 1DX II, which had also an excellent 4k image and is still the only (nearly) Fullframe camera with 4k60. For video IBIS would be a great win. Especialy since its a quite small camera, compared to Cinema Cameras, which it can easily compete with (C200 for example)
 

sanj

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 22, 2012
3,219
82
I think it is a big benefit. The 1DX III appears to be very video-friendly with the 4k60 in camera RAW on a fullframe sensor. Just like the 1DX II, which had also an excellent 4k image and is still the only (nearly) Fullframe camera with 4k60. For video IBIS would be a great win. Especialy since its a quite small camera, compared to Cinema Cameras, which it can easily compete with (C200 for example)
Yes yes. And who says people with 1dx can't/don't shoot street or landscape with it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

sanj

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 22, 2012
3,219
82
Hi, Anyone can use the camera and obtain outstanding results if they know how to tell the camera what to do. Now spend another $60 to $70K on glass and a total of 18K for three bodies and you have a kit. Now add your wifi, 3 Canon 600 series flashes, your pelicans, mono and tripods, gimbals, cards, heads and we're at about 100K before we even step off the field and into the studio where another 100K with strobes, fixed lighting, modifiers, scrims, backdrops, gscreen, PC's and on and on. We are the guys paying the Bill's. "I am the person " paying the bills. I SHOOT ZERO video. And every major sports magazine, team, leauge, sports agent, athlete, newspaper, TV Network, website at some point has paid one if not all of my bills.

What I want as someone who has paid their dues is 30MP at 15fps in RAW with cross-points across my entire OVF. The video/broadcast cameras I stand next to have $250,000 lenses on them. I don't do their job and they don't do mine. I've been hit twice on the sidelines once taken out in a stretcher with a TBI. Once for water sports I was hit by boat and dragged unconcious with a hole in my head and almost lost an eye.

I AM A SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHER
I AM A SPORTS PHOTOGRAPHER and want my camera to help me take various kinds of photographs.
 

peters

EOS 80D
Dec 25, 2017
111
102
Yes yes. And who says people with 1dx can't/don't shoot street or landscape with it?
Yeah indeed =) People allways act like its not allowed to ever expect any kind of feature of the 1D that is not exklusively good for sports photographers. Like not including an intervallometer in the 1DX II - "I am a sports photog. I dont need this. Its good its not in there". There is simply no good reason AT ALL to not include basic stuff like this, even if it is MAINLY a sports camera.
 

sanj

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 22, 2012
3,219
82
Yeah indeed =) People allways act like its not allowed to ever expect any kind of feature of the 1D that is not exklusively good for sports photographers. Like not including an intervallometer in the 1DX II - "I am a sports photog. I dont need this. Its good its not in there". There is simply no good reason AT ALL to not include basic stuff like this, even if it is MAINLY a sports camera.
Agree. 1dx is much much more than a sports camera. It is a great choice for people on expedition, people shooting difficult street photos, difficult concert photos, photos in low light, landscapes (it is the best landscape camera that Canon makes) and it is the best DSLR video camera that Canon makes. The ONLY 'drawback' it has is lower mpx than other models - and the lower mpx is welcome by many including me in this camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
3,185
711
Seriously, who has been complaining about the lack of quality IS in the latest batch of Canon lenses? They have it right with it being in the glass. I'd rather choose stabilization per lens and focal length than have it all the time in body with heating issues and the need to turn it off and on again. The lens setting is right there, not lost in menus and ready for tripod and low light work. I see no need to reinvent the wheel here just for the sake of doing what other brands do.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,627
746
Southeastern USA
Seriously, who has been complaining about the lack of quality IS in the latest batch of Canon lenses? They have it right with it being in the glass. I'd rather choose stabilization per lens and focal length than have it all the time in body with heating issues and the need to turn it off and on again. The lens setting is right there, not lost in menus and ready for tripod and low light work. I see no need to reinvent the wheel here just for the sake of doing what other brands do.
Canon is going to cater to their market. I'm not sure about the 1DX III having IBIS. Nobody but Canon and their trusted partners know at this point.

But IBIS is a strong selling point for Olympus, and faithful Canon shooters who are getting older with less steady hands see IBIS as a no-brainer. If Canon implements it properly, it should be a great marketing tool. Many customers of higher-end gear are now approaching or entering retirement age. They have the time and financial resources to buy the best. If they want IBIS, and they see the IBIS is effective, whether combined with IS lenses or with primes that don't currently have IBIS, give it to them.

I'd love a few stops of IBIS with the Rf 50mm f/1.2L, and even more so the Rf 85mm f/1.2L.

Related question: If sports photographers don't need IS, why did Canon include it on the Big Whites?

Over and over on this forum we learn about Canon mulling over some additional feature that upsets a few reactionary photographers. Was AE controversial? Was AF? Was digital? Was lens IS? It's like there is a fear that a new feature is going to positively ruin photography.

Or maybe it's a fear that Canon is going to start putting out half-baked, inferior products just to satisfy a market segment, and positively ruin its own brand?

I'd say we are enjoying the golden age of photography. Who cares if everybody is taking pictures? The fact is, more people can take better pictures than ever before in history. If somebody loves photography, it shouldn't matter if they are the only photographer in the world, or only one of billions.

It is frustrating to invest money, to have built a skill-set over years, and see that the market for professional photographers' services and products has become profitable for only a slim few. Maybe this is a "bad" thing, like Amazon's displacement of untold numbers of businesses has been bad, and the Internet making it possible for radiologists and accountants and para-legals to be outsourced to nations with dirt cheap labor costs.

But it sure gets tiresome to hear over and over how photography is falling down around our heads. Either pursue it as a hobby, a tough business, a crazy passion...Or find a better way to spend our limited days. And consider reading Seneca's On the Brevity of Life.

Happy Thanksgiving!
 
Last edited:

Quackator

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2011
244
52
But preferring not to have it over having a good implementation which
can be ignored if one wishes so is something I find hard to comprehend.
It is to be doubted that there is such a thing as a good implementation
at the current state of technology. Current implementations of high rez
and high framerate video imagers all face massive heat problems already
without IBIS. Flying a sensor for IBIS aggravates the problem dramatically.

Imager heat is the natural enemy of IBIS.

I can't have any idea about the wiring of an IBIS implementation that's not
on the market. You seem to have that anyway, since you assume it must
use thin conductors.
Simple physics. A quarter inch copper wire isn't flexible enough.
Thickness/durability or flexibility, can't have both.

Wiring needs to be flexible in order to allow for movement,
and movement introduces embrittlement over time.

Next is cooling. Electronics age faster at higher operating
temperatures, and for lack of heat transfer to a cooler block
or heat pipe, there is only convection cooling or force air
cooling available. Which in turn is an intrusion vector for
moisture and dust. Not likely to be introduced in a 1 series
body.

Last is shock proofing. IBIS sensors are usually locked down
with magnetic force. Impacting the camera will introduce
impacts on the fragile sensor array. Nothing to add to precision.

What are the typical increases in design complexity and cost
associated with making data cables compatible with constant
motion? Is it outright impossible to find a suitable material / design
to reach a target life time?
"Target life time" is pretty clear sighted wording.
Are you happy with maybe the regular two year warranty
time frame plus a little?

I'm happier with tools that have no predetermined breaking point.
 

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
369
288
Hamburg, Germany
I'm happier with tools that have no predetermined breaking point.
No offense, but that seems impossible if you talk about consumer devices. In the case of DSLR in particular, Canon even goes so far as to publish the number that the shutter mechanism is designed to life up to. The mirror assembly or buttons don't have such numbers publicly available I believe, nonetheless there will be a target life time that was set by Canon for these parts to match the desired compromise of cost and adding value to the customer.

If everything were build to last almost to infinity, we would have to carry larger, heavier gear and pay more for it. If Canon is able to design an IBIS system that performs well enough to increase the number of sales enough to offset the development and construction cost and they can dimension the hardware so that it lasts longer than a certain threshold that is set by the market, they will put it in a 1DX III body. Otherwise they won't. I don't feel like there's any need to fear some new features for the 1DX III. And maybe there won't be any. Some people will be upset either way, unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Janek and pj1974