• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

IBIS coming to fuji cameras


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 03 July 2017 - 08:08 PM

That should be quite a nice feature, especially versus mirrorless systems that are all offering it

http://www.fujirumor...trusted-source/

#2 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,403 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 04 July 2017 - 12:54 AM

That manager was a little stupid. Technically IBIS does introduce a little unevenness to vignetting but in practical terms that's irrelevant. ILIS does introduce resolution variations and, worse than that, inferior centering which nobody cared about either so far.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#3 you2

you2

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 999 posts

Posted 04 July 2017 - 10:16 AM

Mix; if the implementation is good then great (mk ii has reputation of being fantastic); if bad then not great. Also means I will skip x-t2/x-t20 (i have a t10). To be honest my photography has been quite limited in recent years which is also why I skipped x-t20 but i was tempted to get an x-t2 given the view finder is much better for manual focus. 

-

technology is changing too fast (not just camera but also tvs - been looking at all this stuff with regards t hdr10, dv, atmos, ... too many standards and too many frequent changes (but i suppose this is off topic :) ); and none of it seems to play reliably with hdmi drm.



#4 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 04 July 2017 - 10:59 AM

That manager was a little stupid. Technically IBIS does introduce a little unevenness to vignetting but in practical terms that's irrelevant. ILIS does introduce resolution variations and, worse than that, inferior centering which nobody cared about either so far.

 

Re: ILIS:

All things being equal, it increases design complexity and cost. Due to additional technology (gyros, etc.) reliability is reduced and size/weight is increased.

 

IBIS makes much more sense except for long focals.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#5 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,057 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 04 July 2017 - 04:13 PM

Hmm, I'm not sure about the cost and weight. The Nikkor AF-P 18-55 is available both with and without VR, the price difference is marginal (in absolute terms), as is the weight: 195 vs 205 grams.

 

Reliability might be a different topic, though. However, at least the gyros should have become a mass product by now (thanks to smartphones).

 

I still think that it's primarily a question of what type of viewfinder one primarily uses. For anything with an optical viewfinder, ILIS still has clear advantages in my eyes, while combined with an EVF, IBIS offers universal coverage... except for long lenses? Is that still an issue?

 

-- Markus


Editor
photozone.de

#6 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 04 July 2017 - 04:30 PM

Hmm, I'm not sure about the cost and weight. The Nikkor AF-P 18-55 is available both with and without VR, the price difference is marginal (in absolute terms), as is the weight: 195 vs 205 grams.

 

Reliability might be a different topic, though. However, at least the gyros should have become a mass product by now (thanks to smartphones).

 

I still think that it's primarily a question of what type of viewfinder one primarily uses. For anything with an optical viewfinder, ILIS still has clear advantages in my eyes, while combined with an EVF, IBIS offers universal coverage... except for long lenses? Is that still an issue?

 

-- Markus

 

From a pure theoretical point of view, adding things can only make a product more complex, bigger, heavier and costlier. However, it doesn't mean you'll necessarily see it in practice.

 

Manufacturers will obviously keep the consumer price and specs similar to non ILIS versions. From an IQ and weight perspective, they will design it from the ground up with ILIS in mind.

However, it's likely that if they were to going to design it from the ground up without ILIS, it could be made smaller, lighter and cheaper.

 

Now, about gyros. What is more likely to break : nothing or a gyro ? ;-)

 

As far as OVF go, IBIS won't obviously stabilize what you see in the VF... and in this specific case ILIS has a clear advantage.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#7 mst

mst

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 2,057 posts
  • LocationWesterwald, Germany

Posted 04 July 2017 - 05:08 PM

Now, about gyros. What is more likely to break : nothing or a gyro ? ;-)


Sure... however, thinking back over the last 10 to 15 years or so, I remember only one IS/VR failure on one of the lenses I owned or handled. Several AF failures during the same period, though.

In other words: yes, ILIS adds to the complexity of a lens, but from my experience it isn't particularly prone to failure.

The potential decentering issue Klaus mentioned earlier remains of course.

As far as OVF go, IBIS won't obviously stabilize what you see in the VF... and in this specific case ILIS has a clear advantage.


That's how I meant it. Plus, on a DSLR, ILIS will help the AF do its job, too, especially with long focal lengths.

-- Markus
Editor
photozone.de

#8 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,719 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 04 July 2017 - 07:51 PM

.
Now, about gyros. What is more likely to break : nothing or a gyro ? ;-)
.

That falls a bit short. Shoot without camera and lens. Nothing will ever break. I also could argue that you need constant energy to keep the sensor in place, even when switched "off", complexity of sensor mount increases and whatever.

No doubt it can imrove handheld shots without tripod. As it can make things worse depending on the design of the sensor motivators. I'm no fan of IBIS. If you say moving parts are likely to break, I don't see why this is not valid for moving big sensors as well. And all the cables attached to sensor can't break due to micromovements?

#9 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,160 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 04 July 2017 - 09:35 PM

....

 

As far as OVF go, IBIS won't obviously stabilize what you see in the VF... and in this specific case ILIS has a clear advantage.

 

 

.....

That's how I meant it. Plus, on a DSLR, ILIS will help the AF do its job, too, especially with long focal lengths.

-- Markus

 

It is a little funny, because IBIS DOES stabilize the image in the VF. Maybe not the first versions of it, but certainly with the current versions of Olympus OM-D bodies.

 

It also works with long lenses, f.e., with the Oly 300 Pro (a 600 mm lens effectively).

 

Kind regards, Wim



#10 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 04 July 2017 - 09:41 PM

That falls a bit short. Shoot without camera and lens. Nothing will ever break. I also could argue that you need constant energy to keep the sensor in place, even when switched "off", complexity of sensor mount increases and whatever.

No doubt it can imrove handheld shots without tripod. As it can make things worse depending on the design of the sensor motivators. I'm no fan of IBIS. If you say moving parts are likely to break, I don't see why this is not valid for moving big sensors as well. And all the cables attached to sensor can't break due to micromovements?

 

For shorter focal lengths, IBIS can be truly impressive and it seems to be superior to ILIS implementations. Indeed, when considering Olympus' latest technology in the E-M1 II, one can take shots at several seconds of exposure handheld. Very impressive.

 

As far as breaking parts, sure IBIS is theoretically more fragile than no IBIS.

However, it only affects the body. Now, the turnover of bodies is much higher than for lenses.

Generally, people don't keep bodies for very long, whereas lenses are here to stay. In this regards, changing body every 2 to 4 years seems reasonable. When you have accumulated 10 lenses, would you like to buy new versions again 2-4 years down the road?

For these reasons, I don't think IBIS' reliability is an issue. Plus, it has yet to be demonstrated that IBIS becomes faulty after a few years of usage, something I haven't seen reported anywhere.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#11 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 04 July 2017 - 09:50 PM

It is a little funny, because IBIS DOES stabilize the image in the VF. Maybe not the first versions of it, but certainly with the current versions of Olympus OM-D bodies.

 

It also works with long lenses, f.e., with the Oly 300 Pro (a 600 mm lens effectively).

 

Kind regards, Wim

 

Markus was talking about IBIS in DSLRs where it obviously cannot stabilize the OVF.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#12 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,684 posts

Posted 05 July 2017 - 10:42 AM

          In all the years of shooting Pentax I have "never ever" heard on the forums or other, of a breakdown of their SR system...not once!

 

   The Giros are in chip tuning fork type wafer ceramic crystals and produce a voltage by inertia, similar to crystal ceramic record player pick ups, there is nothing to go wrong there. The sensor moves between ball bearings and again reliability is extremely high.

 Of course there's no viewfinder VR with a DSLR, where there is with ML.

  

 Reliability will  be higher with IBIS compared with ILIS just because of better support of the sensor than for the floating elements in a lens...

       ..not to mention the clever tricks Pentax have done with the system like; astrotracer (star tracking) pixel shifting ( 4 stacked images to get RBG at every pixel) simulated LPF as well as image composition adjustment, all very powerful tools indeed!

  

  Bring on IBIS Nikon!


  • thxbb12 likes this

#13 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,525 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 05 July 2017 - 07:25 PM

Sure... however, thinking back over the last 10 to 15 years or so, I remember only one IS/VR failure on one of the lenses I owned or handled. Several AF failures during the same period, though.

In other words: yes, ILIS adds to the complexity of a lens, but from my experience it isn't particularly prone to failure.

The potential decentering issue Klaus mentioned earlier remains of course.


That's how I meant it. Plus, on a DSLR, ILIS will help the AF do its job, too, especially with long focal lengths.

-- Markus

I have witnessed a blatant IS failure among my gear, once. The stabilizer on my old Canon 17-55/2.8 lens went out after just 2 months of usage (I bought the lens brand new) and started acting erratically. The lens was repaired for this failure (and another unrelated one) free of charge under warranty. Just FYI. :)



#14 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,403 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 06 July 2017 - 10:55 AM

The difference between an AF failure and a IS failure is:

- the AF is either dead or alive

- the IS may be dead or alive or something in between and that something in between (decentering) is not rare

So the two don't really compare.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#15 dave's clichés

dave's clichés

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,684 posts

Posted 06 July 2017 - 11:16 AM

 I hark back to my AF-S 70-300mm VRII bought cheaply S/H (80 euros/fault known)

 

Strangely when turning on the camera the VR works while half pressing the shutter button, let go and the image in the viewfinder drops twice (clunk cluck and dropping way down) as the VR goes into standby, it will not restart again until either the camera has come out of  standby mode or the camera is re-switched on, then half pressing again brings it back to life.

 In order to use it I set the standby on the camera to 4 secs. either you have to keep half button focusing during shooting and or rewake the camera after it's 4 sec doze.

  I've puzzled as to if the lens had taken a tumble and broken the stops that prevent the VR lens elements from moving too much inside, however what causes the VR to not restart when focusing again without the camera also coming out of standby, I don't understand. I've been in and fixed the AF but have never looked at the VR system which Nikon want €300 to repair!

 

 

 I have responded to at least two other forums posters who have exactly the same fault!

 

 I am surprised however that VR is as reliable as it is.



#16 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,719 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 06 July 2017 - 11:18 AM

For me IBIS will be a reason not to buy the camera. And I know I might be wrong, but with two Pentax cameras I always had focus problems. Or expected more sharpness than they actually could deliver. I know, stabilisation can be a help when having no tripod at hand, but I also experienced failing of these techniques and have enough lenses without VR. Then I am sure nothing moves in a way I can not foresee.

#17 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 587 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 06 July 2017 - 01:36 PM

For me IBIS will be a reason not to buy the camera. And I know I might be wrong, but with two Pentax cameras I always had focus problems. Or expected more sharpness than they actually could deliver. I know, stabilisation can be a help when having no tripod at hand, but I also experienced failing of these techniques and have enough lenses without VR. Then I am sure nothing moves in a way I can not foresee.

 

Pentax is notorious for their slow unreliable AF, especially in older models (K10, K20, K5). I "vouch" for them. It has nothing to do with IBIS but everything to do with their AF module.

 

Olympus has IBIS in all their cameras and the sharpness is absolutely exemplary. The only thing than can potentially affect sharpness is shutter shock on certain models (the E-M1 is particularly bad in this respect).

 

Check Robin Wong's work if you have doubht about the sharpness you can get from Olympus gear:

 

https://robinwong.bl...ens-review.html


  • dave's clichés likes this

--Florent

Flickr Page


#18 jimeryhowits

jimeryhowits

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 08:41 AM

you have absolutely right




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de