Patent: Here is Canon’s IBIS unit

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,962
1,172
119
If my 5DMkIII had IBIS...I would have already purchased the EF 11-24 lens.

Part of the reason my M Canon bodies have seen so much use over the years is that the format's 'best' lens, the EF-M 11-22...is IS.

In my hands...over and over again... lens-based IS has been invaluable. I imagine that Canon, when they implement IBIS...that it will also prove to be an excellent tool.
I don't understand that comment.

The EF-M is an equivalent 18-35 F/4– 5.6, put the EF 16-35 f4IS on your 5D MkIII and you get over one stop of ISO performance at 18mm and over two stops at 35mm. Also your enlargement ratio is 50% less so you can use a slower shutter speed for the same visible shake.

The EF11-24 is not the EF-M 11-22 equivalent, the EF 16-35 f4 IS is, and that has IS!
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,962
1,172
119
Put it like this...IT HELPS.

To have a debate on whether ibis is needed is pure ignorance or 'head in the sand' mode.

All the other manufacturers seem to have it working fine.
Well not necessarily for everybody as well as some. For instance the lens IS takes a half a second (approx) to become effective, if you are used to fully pressing the shutter button within the half second window your particular experience of lens IS might be that it is worse than no IS. I'm sure the IBIS will have similar technical capabilities that some subsets of shooters will fall into that simply dont get on with it.

In theory the majority of photographers will get an advantage from IBIS most of the time, I don't believe all photographers will always see benefits from using it.
 
Jul 12, 2013
248
78
I don't understand that comment.

The EF-M is an equivalent 18-35 F/4– 5.6, put the EF 16-35 f4IS on your 5D MkIII and you get over one stop of ISO performance at 18mm and over two stops at 35mm. Also your enlargement ratio is 50% less so you can use a slower shutter speed for the same visible shake.

The EF11-24 is not the EF-M 11-22 equivalent, the EF 16-35 f4 IS is, and that has IS!
Very good post that makes very good points. Allow me to clarify.

I have found very few 11-22 opportunities, when paired to the M6 (or even the M10)...where a stop or two makes the difference between a keeper and a throwaway. Perhaps my standards aren't as high as many who post here (no snark intended)--but I've managed quite nicely with whatever M I have at the time, in terms of family, vacation and travel pictures...with the 11-22 as the lens of choice. But make no mistake: the IS of the EF-M 11-22 is critical for me.

When I need low-light/IS EF-M capabilities, I try to manage with the EF-M 22mm...but for reasons you've pointed to the M6/EF-M 22 combination, while good (and stealthy...for concerts etc)...is not optimal--and of course the EF-M 22 is not image-stabilized.

For 'important' low-light situations (where I'm willing to have much larger/heavier gear on hand), I've had real good luck with the 5D MkIII/EF 35mm 2.0IS rig, although I do wish the lens was wider at times.

The 11-24 EF is just so wide...it is one of the only lenses that I would consider renting. Using it offers access to images that can't be acquired any other way--but for my usage (lots of low-light situations)...the IS feature would be extremely useful.

To add what may be obvious to some, the EF-R 15-35 2.8 IS looks very appealing!

I've yet to pull the trigger on the R body, though...still waiting. I wonder how many of us (the waiters) are out there?!

Sorry for a rambling post.
 
Last edited:

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,547
770
To be fair, Canon's done more IBIS patents than I care to count. There's a lot that I read and skip, simply because I can't figure out what the freaking patent is about enough to write it up in plain english. Same goes with sensor patents but that's alot more than IBIS patents about (50-75% of them i skip). I have 10 patents collected under IBIS of this nature, and there's probably 5 or so that I didn't' publish.

Someone emailed me yesterday about another IBIS patent, I had it partially written up but thought it sounded dumb, so didn't publish. after I got the email, I went .. meh what the heck and published it but left the date post-dated so hardly anyone would see it ;)


In a way I am jealous of Keith of NL, because he just does a one-sentence summary and done :p

So while sure, a patent here or there maybe for no great reason, but an entire collection of patents, no, I don't think Canon would spend that kind of R&D, legal and actual costs if they weren't going to use it.
Yes, there are several patents. This one has the advantage that its very cheap and easy to make. However, they just say that the control electronics are widely known and don't include anything. I'd expect it to add $5 -15 to the manufacturing price with electronics. I'm sure Canon wants the lowest possible cost, they wring out every penny.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,152
1,712
Irving, Texas
I don't understand that comment.

The EF-M is an equivalent 18-35 F/4– 5.6, put the EF 16-35 f4IS on your 5D MkIII and you get over one stop of ISO performance at 18mm and over two stops at 35mm. Also your enlargement ratio is 50% less so you can use a slower shutter speed for the same visible shake.

The EF11-24 is not the EF-M 11-22 equivalent, the EF 16-35 f4 IS is, and that has IS!
This is something that confused and surprised me when I bought my first EF-s camera years ago. I naively assumed the focal length label on the EF-s lens accounted for the crop. Boy was I wrong. I'd bet a lot of people think this.
 

RayValdez360

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2012
431
187
As I understand it there are many detailed patents that never get produced so I think we have to wait and see.

I like IBIS and wish Canon had it. To have IBIS with a 1.2 or 1.4 lens is fun. However I wouldn't be shocked if it isn't a priority for Canon.

Canon tends to concentrate on two key markets. One in consumers and the other is professionals. IBIS is of little interest to either. Consumer lenses all have IS. And now with the upcoming RF holy trinity the key pro lenses will have IS.

Who does this leave? Advanced amateurs - probably the majority who post online. We make a lot of noise but are fairly small in number. Nonetheless we are a market that clearly Nikon and Sony has gone after but we simply aren't the priority for Canon and frankly I don't mind that - I think it's the reason Canon pays so much attention to things like ergonomics, build quality, menu systems, colour science, auto focus etc rather than obsessing over dynamic range at crazy ISO.

So for the serious amateur IBIS can be very nice. It can open up some creative opportunities, it can keep ISO low for landscapes without a tripod, it acts as a sort of safety buffer if shooting say a 135 or 85 and using shutter speeds of around 1/60 or 1/100.

The thing is most professionals won't take those risks anyway. They can't say to the new bride "I'm sorry the moment he gave you the ring has a blurry photo, you must understand I was trying to shoot it at 1/20 so I could use ISO 100 and brag online about it". And most f/1.2 lenses are being used for things like portraiture where professionals will control lighting anyway.

So while ever my first instinct is to say I want IBIS, I am pleased if it comes, it doesn't shock me one bit if Canon decides to continue with just in lens stabilisation and decide that f/1.2 lenses aren't being used in a way that benefits from IBIS. I suspect we will get an answer when we get some slower aperture primes for the RF mount. If we get more 1.8 primes like the 35mm with IS then IBIS would really only be for the 1.2 lenses and who knows if that's viable.
damn i guess videographers dont exist in the canonrumors universe.
 

RayValdez360

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2012
431
187
Yes that I can well understand. The new RF 24-70 2.8L will have IS. Also Nikon's F mount 24-70 has VR and Tamron's and Sigma's 24-70 for SLR mounts are stabilised.

I wonder if Canon will bring out an EF 24-70 2.8 L with IS? I would buy it but I suspect they would prefer people buy the RF lens and therefore a new camera so who knows.
why would they. they seemed to give EF users the shaft. seems like all the problem lenses or ones we waited for went straight to RF mount.
 

nchoh

EOS RP
Apr 3, 2018
208
113
Calgary
The patent does provide a lot of detail, but just describes the idea of using a Halbach Array as a motor. The detail is there to differentiate this invention from similar motors used by other camera manufacturers. They all use a Voice Coil Motor, but in order to preclude patent infringement, it has to be sufficiently different.

It looks to be very simple to make, magnets and stamped frames with a rectangular flat coil.

I'd guess that this will be the basis of any stabilizer, but none of the electronic sensors or controls are part of the patent, just the drivers to move the sensor.
It looks simple to make, but if you take into consideration the tolerances that need to be achieved, I don't think you can just rely on stamped frames.
 

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
272
18
Pulease! When you're #1 there isn't a reason to rush to market with a sub-standard rushed into production feature... unlike the stragglers.
The point was, that they don't really need IBIS, they have a perfectly workable solution as it is. The only thing that comes with IBIS that doesn't exist in their lens based solutions is the ability to undo rotation which the lens solutions cannot do. However, it seems to have become a feature you have to have whether you need it or not. Maybe they can somehow combine the two to get more performance, maybe not. It will be interesting to see how they market the feature if they actually do put it in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,152
1,712
Irving, Texas
The point was, that they don't really need IBIS, they have a perfectly workable solution as it is. The only thing that comes with IBIS that doesn't exist in their lens based solutions is the ability to undo rotation which the lens solutions cannot do. However, it seems to have become a feature you have to have whether you need it or not. Maybe they can somehow combine the two to get more performance, maybe not. It will be interesting to see how they market the feature if they actually do put it in.
Yes, but let us not forget that many Canon lenses do not have IS, especially at the high end (not counting the great whites). At the present RF mount high end, there is no IS. As long as shutter speed can be kept high enough, then no problem. Otherwise, one is SOL. On a high mega pixel RF mount camera of 80+, I would have to have IBIS before deciding to buy. I don't believe that camera will be EF mount. I think that is where we will see it on Canon (R series)... eventually. There are already manufacturers combining lens IS and IBIS. Tripods and mono pods are not an option in many cases.

Side note: Whether one believes he/she has to have a feature is personal and not for us to decide whether or not their need is valid or not. It may not be for ourselves, but that doesn't mean it is not for them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PeterT
Sep 14, 2019
1
0

Will be interesting to see how it fits into a EOS R body, or if they have to make it that much bigger.