[toni-a]

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


http://www.fujirumors.com/ibis-coming-fu...ed-source/

[Klaus]

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.

[Guest]

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.

[thxbb12]

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.

[mst]

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

[thxbb12]

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.

[mst]

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

[JJ_SO]

.

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?

[wim]

....

 

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

[thxbb12]

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.