Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: IS and focal length

  1. #1
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    IS and focal length

    Hi

    as far as I understand it, IS makes a bigger difference to wide angle than it does to telephoto. I guess that is true across "in body" equally to "lens based".

    so with none of the Panasonic wide angle lenses having IS (like the 7-14) I was wondering if any EP-x users out there might like to comment how well the IBIS works with these more wide angle lenses (7-14, 9-18)

  2. #2
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    Hi
    as far as I understand it, IS makes a bigger difference to wide angle than it does to telephoto. ...
    Hum, I don't agree with that. The longer the FL, the more crucial IS becomes because every little movement of the camera is magnified x number of times. When shooting wide angle, camera shake is a lot more controllable and IS does not play a big part.
    Tullio

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Tullio is right. IS does indeed help even with super WA, but it's much, much, much more useful above 20mm (M43 20mm, normal 40mm)

  4. #4
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Hi

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    Hum, I don't agree with that. The longer the FL, the more crucial IS becomes because every little movement of the camera is magnified x number of times. When shooting wide angle, camera shake is a lot more controllable and IS does not play a big part.
    I'm not clear what you don't agree with, but I feel the same, that as the lens becomes more telephoto I feel that IS is more needed. However I based my estimation on the data reported by dpreview. If you examine their tests of various IS lenses you will notice that the IS is less effective as the focal lenght increases.

    Since these are zooms, and not fixed tele lenses such as the Canon EF IS range perhaps that makes a difference (NB that a lens which is specifically designed for a focal length may have more room to move elements in the compensation of this). Canon also makes IS binoculars, and has done for over 10 years, this also may be a factor.

    Do you have information and experience you could share?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: IS and focal length

    The longer the focal length, the better IS works:

    http://wrotniak.net/photo/43/e510-is.html

  6. #6
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Hi

    Quote Originally Posted by clark666 View Post
    The longer the focal length, the better IS works:
    http://wrotniak.net/photo/43/e510-is.html

    thanks, interesting report. I have read his other stuff on 4/3 when researching a 4/3 camera for my father in law but didn't spot that.

    He mentions some uncertainty in his evidence with respect to the findings of other testers, but stands by his findings for his methods. I happen to like him as a tester and reviewer.

    He makes an interesting and informative point:
    as the process is based on frequency analysis of the detected camera shake (Olympus says from seven down to below one hertz), its effectiveness will depend on the nature of that shake
    which is helpful as the purpose of my wondering is to understand how well a E-P2 with a 300mm lens would do with its IS. The lens is heavy but the the telephoto significantly amplifies jitter, further I don't know how well the camera will be able to measure the jitter with its sensor being camera mounted.

    Perhaps there is a side benefit of IBIS and that is perhaps a benefit to the accuracy of AF (on CDAF systems).

    I guess that I will need to get an E-P2 to answer this question with my lens.

    Thanks

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: IS and focal length

    I have found that there is no significant difference between the in-body IS and lens based IS. I have the Olympus E-P1 and the Panasonic 45-200mm zoom.

    I find the in-body IS quite effective with the 14-42mm Olympus zoom too, as well as a collection of old manual lenses from Olympus (OM) and Schneider.

    The only lens that I have which is a bit patchy with the in-body IS is the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 which doesn't seem to gain a huge amount with the in-body IS. I cannot think of any logical reason for this.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterB666 View Post
    The only lens that I have which is a bit patchy with the in-body IS is the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 which doesn't seem to gain a huge amount with the in-body IS. I cannot think of any logical reason for this.
    Huh, I noticed the same thing. It seems as though it isn't much help at all with that lens, yet the 14-42mm at 20mm is indeed helped quite a bit with IS. I wonder if it's an evil Panasonic plot!!?!!??!



  9. #9
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Thanks guys

    as I mentioned above all this is about me determining if the G1 or the E-P2 is a better brick in my hands. I'm intending to do some sports work with the FD300f4 in a few months and wondering if IBIS of the EP is worth the switch (and I'm also wondering if I'd be happier with the E-Px design for a daytrip snapshot camera with the 17mm as the main lens and the EVF in the pack somewhere just incase its needed. Ohh ... and movies tossed in.

    Aside from handling differences I think there's little between any of these cameras except the IS strategy.

  10. #10
    Senior Member dhsimmonds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    20

    Re: IS and focal length

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    Thanks guys

    as I mentioned above all this is about me determining if the G1 or the E-P2 is a better brick in my hands. I'm intending to do some sports work with the FD300f4 in a few months and wondering if IBIS of the EP is worth the switch (and I'm also wondering if I'd be happier with the E-Px design for a daytrip snapshot camera with the 17mm as the main lens and the EVF in the pack somewhere just incase its needed. Ohh ... and movies tossed in.

    Aside from handling differences I think there's little between any of these cameras except the IS strategy.
    Well the Oly does also sport a very effective anti dust system!
    Cheers, Dave
    www.simmondsphotography.com

  11. #11
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    thought the Panasonic did too

    Quote Originally Posted by dhsimmonds View Post
    Well the Oly does also sport a very effective anti dust system!


    from this page:

    New 12.1 megapixel (effective) Four Thirds format CMOS sensor with SSWF dust reduction system

  12. #12
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    I'm not clear what you don't agree with, ...
    I don't agree that "IS makes a bigger difference to wide angle than it does to telephoto".
    Tullio

  13. #13
    compositor20
    Guest

    Re: IS and focal length

    try to see in your settings if the focal leght is 40mm and not 50mm as is the default in my camera with the 20mm f1.7 that setting in the image stabilizer options get better with the IS in e-p1

    you can get shar images of unmving subjects at 1/15 and morea reasonalby at 1/20

    1/13 its still possible but 1/10 no

  14. #14
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: IS and focal length

    Quote Originally Posted by compositor20 View Post
    try to see in your settings if the focal leght is 40mm and not 50mm ...
    I believe the FL setting for IS only applies to MF lenses since the camera can not determine the FL electronically, otherwise it will select the FL automatically. Now, if you completely turn off AF (by selecting MF), then the FL chosen for IS will play its role.
    Tullio

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •