To IBIS or Not To IBIS

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,778
25
#1
A lot of ML cameras incorporate IBIS. I can see the advantage to this - build IS into the body and you don't have to build it into the lens.

Overall, from the little I have read both in lens and in body IS work well - not sure if one has an advantage over the other. if there is an advantage, I don't think it will be large (at least based on my reading thus far).

Given the number of lens with IS I am not surprised that Canon opted not to have IBIS. And Nikon with VR in a wide variety of their lens, did opt to build IBIS into the Z6 and Z7.

Thoughts?
 
Sep 1, 2018
14
8
#2
I believe video is where the major difference is notable. IBIS is much smoother when walking with the camera vs Lense IS which can display a lot of jitter. The combination of IBIS+lense IS will be the holy grail. Olympus mastered this with their 300mm pro lens, I suspect Canon will eventually do this and own the market, but for now baby steps... use a DJI ronin s with video and it doesn't matter which camera you use.
 
Oct 26, 2013
1,016
175
#3
I think the general love of IBIS comes from the fact that Olympus has a great IBIS system. But Olympus - and other m4/3rds cameras - have a sensor that is 1/4 the size and that seems to make a difference. I have read a couple comments on how IBIS in full frame is not that successful. From Steve Huff's website:

I have always found the 5 Axis inside the Sony A7 series to be lackluster. At least for video. I have loads of shaky Sony video with 5 Axis active. I used to think it was defective in my A7RII as I never saw any benefit when shooting video. When it was the same in the A7rIII I realized that in full frame cameras it just will not be like it is in Micro 4/3 cameras.
If I remember correctly, the Canon engineers have said that they could not implement IBIS in the first R camera because they had heat issues. Since it seems that Canon's approach is always, if they can't get it to work really well, they won't include it.

I think Canon knows that most folks have lenses that have been bought in the last 10 years or so and those lenses that need it have IS. They are also not stupid in a business sense. If you don't have IS lenses, they want you to buy NEW lenses with IS.

Not including forum dwellers, the number of folks who need IBIS is probably very small. I plan on buying the R. I have two EF lenses I will be using - one has IS and one doesn't. The lack of IBIS is totally a non issue for me. I have been shooting without IBIS since 1979. It is totally a non-necessity.
 
Likes: Del Paso

BillB

EOS Rebel T7i
May 11, 2017
833
82
#4
I believe video is where the major difference is notable. IBIS is much smoother when walking with the camera vs Lense IS which can display a lot of jitter. The combination of IBIS+lense IS will be the holy grail. Olympus mastered this with their 300mm pro lens, I suspect Canon will eventually do this and own the market, but for now baby steps... use a DJI ronin s with video and it doesn't matter which camera you use.
The use case for IS or IBIS is hand held shooting, whether video or slow shutter speed stills. A ronin or a tripod is likely a better choice if practical as far as IS is concerned.
 

old-pr-pix

EOS Rebel T7
Dec 26, 2011
350
8
#5
IBIS in the latest m43 bodies is incredible. Handheld shots at fantastically slow shutter speeds are reasonable at wide to moderate focal lengths and tripods are rarely needed. Yet, as Canon has always stated, IBIS is not as effective for telephoto. There just isn't enough practical range of motion for the sensor to compensate. Olympus validated that statement when they elected to delay introduction of their 300mm (600mm FF eq.) while they added in-lens stabilization. Now both Olympus and Panasonic have coordinated IBIS and in-lens stabilization for a claimed 6.5 stops improvement. Moving a larger FF sensor takes a lot more power (heat) thus depleting batteries even faster - a trade-off Canon chose to not make with the current R.
 
Likes: Del Paso
Aug 1, 2017
125
56
#6
FujiFilm is incorporating IBIS into the design of their new 100MP medium format body which will be a significant technical achievement if they can pull it off. I don't think they'd be going to all that expense if there wasn't a benefit with larger sensors. Canon may not want to invest in IBIS but the market is increasingly demanding it. Honestly, that's the least of their problems with video but they are going to have to address it at some point.
 
#7
Some facts about IBIS: (proven empirically in several experiments and reported on forums and U-Tube)
(1) For long focal length lenses, IBIS is useless and lens IS is more effective.
(2) For low light shooting IBIS is useless and lens IS is more effective.
(3) For camera on tripod IBIS is useless and even may cause trouble. In cameras such as GH5, IBIS shuts itself down when natural movement goes below certain threshold level and when panning it wakes up with a sudden movement causing jagged or sway effects.
(4) For wide lenses, hand shake (exposure time of about 1/focal length) is more tolerable therefore, IBIS is not really needed.

Conclusion: IBIS is only efficient when "handheld shooting" with "lenses of short focal distance" and in "good light".
Possible usage scenarios of IBIS that fits this spec are street and casual photo/videography in day light. Unfortunately, almost all who whine and want IBIS in every camera belong to this group of photo/videographers. And their opnion is different from what the actual market for this technology is.
 
Last edited:
Likes: stevelee

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,778
25
#8
Some facts about IBIS: (proven empirically in several experiments and reported on forums and U-Tube)
(1) For long focal length lenses, IBIS is useless and lens IS is more effective.
(2) For low light shooting IBIS is useless and lens IS is more effective.
(3) For camera on tripod IBIS is useless and even may cause trouble. In cameras such as GH5, IBIS shuts itself down when natural movement goes below certain threshold level and when panning it wakes up with a sudden movement causing jagged or sway effects.
(4) For wide lenses, hand shake (exposure time of about 1/focal length) is more tolerable therefore, IBIS is not really needed.

Conclusion: IBIS is only efficient when "handheld shooting" with "lenses of short focal distance" and in "good light".
Possible usage scenarios of IBIS that fits this spec are street and casual photo/videography in day light. Unfortunately, almost all who whine and want IBIS in every camera belong to this group of photo/videographers. And their opnion is different from what the actual market for this technology is.

Thanks for your thoughts.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,778
25
#9
IBIS in the latest m43 bodies is incredible. Handheld shots at fantastically slow shutter speeds are reasonable at wide to moderate focal lengths and tripods are rarely needed. Yet, as Canon has always stated, IBIS is not as effective for telephoto. There just isn't enough practical range of motion for the sensor to compensate. Olympus validated that statement when they elected to delay introduction of their 300mm (600mm FF eq.) while they added in-lens stabilization. Now both Olympus and Panasonic have coordinated IBIS and in-lens stabilization for a claimed 6.5 stops improvement. Moving a larger FF sensor takes a lot more power (heat) thus depleting batteries even faster - a trade-off Canon chose to not make with the current R.
Interesting about the M43 bodies. Makes sense to me but I am not an engineer.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,778
25
#10
Wonder how Nikon manages their IBIS and long lenses. When lens VR is turned on, does IBIS turn it self off (especially for long lenses)?
 

old-pr-pix

EOS Rebel T7
Dec 26, 2011
350
8
#11
A few of your facts seem to run counter to my own experience. Perhaps you could provide some references to help me understand? My confusion is noted below.
Some facts ??? about IBIS: (proven empirically in several experiments and reported on forums and U-Tube)
(1) For long focal length lenses over about 300mm FF, IBIS is useless less effective and lens IS is more effective. Hence some manufacturers (Olympus, Panasonic) use both.
(2) For low light shooting IBIS is useless and lens IS is more effective. Not in my experience. Of course if low light = long exposures then neither system can compensate for subject movement.
(3) For camera on tripod IBIS is useless and even may cause trouble. In cameras such as GH5, IBIS shuts itself down when natural movement goes below certain threshold level and when panning it wakes up with a sudden movement causing jagged or sway effects. Actually, tripod use was originally a significant problem for in-lens systems, hence the ability to manually switch it off was included on the lens. Some newer systems detect the situation and automatically compensate; however many systems - in-lens or IBIS - still recommend turning stabilization off when using a tripod.
(4) For wide lenses, hand shake (exposure time of about 1/focal length) is more tolerable therefore, IBIS is not really needed. To a point... IBIS users routinely report taking sharp hand-held shots in the 1 - 5 second range. Great examples have been shown at significantly longer shutter times but technique must be impeccable. It's actually become a bit of a competition between IBIS body users to see who can take sharp shots with the longest shutter times. Many PJ shooters with IBIS have reported they no longer carry a tripod on assignment

Conclusion: IBIS is only can be highly efficient when "handheld shooting" with "lenses less than ~ 300mm of short focal length (FF eq.) distance" and in "good light".
.