Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Since I really get warmed up by the Nex7 I was wondering if anyone can enlighten me how IS works on these cameras.
    Stil have to be convinced of a gap in image quality with the GH2 but that camera sure looks nice.
    I remember from my E-3 you could dial in the focal lenght of the lens in use and it worked.
    Is this similar with the Nex or is any given lens automaticly stablised?

    Thanks, Michiel

  2. #2
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Nope, that's the big advantage Olympus has over Panasonic, Samsung and Sony. The NEX cameras use image stabilization in the lenses, not in the body.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Oh, that's a pity.
    It still remains a very attractive camera.

    Thanks Douglas

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,538
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Nope, that's the big advantage Olympus has over Panasonic, Samsung and Sony. The NEX cameras use image stabilization in the lenses, not in the body.
    Too bad. IBIS would be nice for those buying this camera to use with MF lenses.
    Carl
    Gallery

  5. #5
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Agreed. I miss the IS from my Sony Alpha cameras. Granted, without a mirror, I can handhold my NEX-5 a lot slower than with SLRs, and the new electronic shutter in the NEX-7 will be even better in this regard.

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by scho View Post
    Too bad. IBIS would be nice for those buying this camera to use with MF lenses.
    Yeah, I am interested in the body only to use with MF lenses but I will need a lot of tripod mount adapters for the longer lenses.
    Till now my only desired AF lens is the Zeiss 24 for this camera. Bit expensive though.

    Michiel

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Granted, without a mirror, I can handhold my NEX-5 a lot slower than with SLRs, and the new electronic shutter in the NEX-7 will be even better in this regard.
    True, the same counts for the GH2. Till 135mm no problems and with enough light even 200mm.

    Michiel

  8. #8
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Michiel Schierbeek View Post
    True, the same counts for the GH2. Till 135mm no problems and with enough light even 200mm.

    Michiel
    Gotcha. I don't shoot any lenses over 90-135mm, so I don't have an issue with the longer stuff.

  9. #9
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Gotcha. I don't shoot any lenses over 90-135mm, so I don't have an issue with the longer stuff.
    BTW, if I remember correctly, the GH2 only uses an electronic shutter for high speed burst mode. With the NEX-7, it uses an electronic shutter at the start of a regular exposure, and a physical shutter to end it, so you get half the physical shutter actuation, comparatively. It should be better than both the GH2 and NEX-5.

  10. #10
    Member LizaWitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    112
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Image Stabilization is very important to me because I'm shooting video and handholding and need the camera to constantly be stabilizing (not just for 1/30th of a second or less.)

    Sony's OSS Optical Stabilization, at least in the SEL18200 lens, is the best I've ever seen.

    The reason they put image stabilization in the lens is that you can stabilize over a much larger degree of movement with optical systems than you can with in body systems. Further, in body stabilization is moving the entire sensor, and thus the apparatus to do that adds weight, cost and bulk. This means that there is more weight that needs to be moved to compensate for the movement, and there's less room to move it, thus you cannot move as much, and subsequently cannot provide as much compensation. Further, I believe it is less reactive, and can only handle a more narrow range of vibration frequencies.

    Of course, the downside of having it in the lens is that you don't get stabilization when working with legacy lenses.

    Then there's the upside for the manufacturers- they get to sell it to you in each lens, and they are also focused on getting you to buy lenses for the system.

    ---

    Regarding image quality, if low light performance is important to you, I think you'll find a gap with the GH2 on the NEX-7, simply due to the higher megapixel count (comparing final images of the same resolution, you'll get noise reduction in the process of reducing the higher megapixel image for comparison.) I am a fan of Panasonic and I think they make great sensors, and the two companies are neck and neck in technology, but this is an area where higher megapixels always adds value. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to whether a 24MP GH3 would be better image quality than the NEX-7, but I'm pretty certain that the NEX-7 will produce better IQ at low light than the GH2 simply because it has %50 more pixels to work with.

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Both of the last contributions do sell the Nex7 ( to me at least but I am a sitting duck already). I am sure it will sell, and it does already, on its own and its specifications alone.

    Douglas; the less shake by pushing the button the better but I am not sure what physical shutter really means. But that is probably just me; I am not number one in technical details.
    BTW I hardly use the burst mode, because I didn't shoot many fast moving objects lately. I did a few years ago when I was shooting (photographicly) airplanes for a project of mine.

    Liza, you made me look into that 19-200 lens as well. I really like when people are enthousiastic about there set up for their purposes.
    A terrific reach in one lens for traveling. And I will do more traveling in the near future. Although I don't do much video, it does look like an ideal traveling base lens.
    And indeed I also like that special touch legacy lenses can have.
    Nex 7 must be ideal for that, with the bigger sensor with more MP.
    Better bokeh and I am a little addicted to beautiful blurred backgrounds lately.
    May be in combination with the new Zeiss 24 and the Minolta 58/1.2 and 85/2as lower light lenses. ( I don't mind to carry a small bag )
    Well I have enough MF lenses to choose from.
    Panasonic is an innovative company, from the start more specialized in video , I believe. And I have no complaints about there sensors.
    But this camera from Sony has all the bells and whistles for me as where technology stands for today concerning high quality (design) in a small package.

    Michiel
    Last edited by Michiel Schierbeek; 27th August 2011 at 15:10.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    383
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    What puzzles me is that Minolta invented sensor shift image stablisation first. Why did Sony drop this important technology in their NEX bodies?

  13. #13
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    My guess is that Sony sees this as their system of the future for stills/video convergence, and OSS works better for video, because of heat issues.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Breckerfeld, Germany
    Posts
    82
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark K View Post
    What puzzles me is that Minolta invented sensor shift image stablisation first. Why did Sony drop this important technology in their NEX bodies?
    Marketing asked technicans to build a camera of a given size - and this was too small to put stabilisation in it. As I understand (most?) new camera designs and features are defined by marketing - based on the possible needs of Asian markets. So those cameras not neccessarily fit to my needs

    Andreas

  15. #15
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    I'm not sure that it has much to do with size. Olympus managed to put IS in the new E-PM1 mini camera.

  16. #16
    Member LizaWitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    112
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    There are two factors that work against in-body stabilization:
    1- Limited Range of Stablization
    2- Limited size of camera bodies.

    Olympus's solution is a compromise, much like a laptop computer is a compromise. In a laptop you compromise performance for better size. Someone arguing for the superior capacity of desktop hard drives, might point out that you can get a 3TB hard drive for the desktop. When you say "I'm not sure its about size, Olympus has it", you're doing the equivalent of saying "Yes, but laptops have hard drives too." That's true, but they max out at (lately) 1TB.

    There is a dramatic size difference between the APS-C sensor in the NEX series, and the m4/3 sensor Olympus is using. This has two impacts that are significant regarding in body stabilization. The first is, a larger sensor has more mass, and that requires exponentially more force to move it, especially at high speed. Exponentially more force may likely require exponentially more size within the camera. Secondly, this larger size sensor, also means that the sensor has to move further (physically) to account for the same degree of performance (optically). That is to say, adjusting for 1 degree field of view's worth of shake requires moving an APC sensor a lot further (percentage wise) then moving a m4/3 sensor to account for 1 degree FOV's worth of shake. In over to move the sensor further, you also need more space to move the sensor, proportional to the increased size of the sensor. (and of course, that makes it harder as well, on the systems that move the sensor, possibly also increasing their size.

    Another factor is that there simply may be less size available, proportionally, for the NEX system than the Olympus cameras, due to a comparable body size (or even smaller with the NEX, not sure) and a larger sensor size inside the NEX meaning less room for the electronics and other things the camera needs to operate. Larger shutter, larger lens mount space taking up internal volume around the sensor, etc.

    Finally, even assuming all of these issues could be overcome on the NEX, delivering a comparable degree of movement to the Olympus IBIS system, this would still produce less shake mitigation than an optical system in the lens which can more easily accommodate larger amounts of system movement than any in body system.

    So, yes, Olympus was able to do it for their camera, and in doing so they made a choice of compromises based on their priorities. Sony made another choice, but it isn't that sony is being mean and just choosing to do it this way... to do it in the body would require compromises of several types.

  17. #17
    victoria11
    Guest

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Image stabilization is not necessary. You can use a tripod for steady shots, and always gives results that are equal or exceed the image stabilization. The stabilization is very useful when you do not have a lot of light for photos and do not have a tripod.

  18. #18
    Phenic
    Guest

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    I'm thinking of getting the Nex7 as a backup to my M stuff but I wished so much that it would have had built-in IS.

  19. #19
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Lisa, I am fully aware of the size differences between m4/3 and aps-c, but I still contend that Sony could have used SSS and fit it into their bodies if it was a design priority. I believe they chose otherwise primarily because of heat issues with video.

  20. #20
    Member LizaWitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    112
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Image stabilisation on NEX cameras

    Quote Originally Posted by victoria11 View Post
    Image stabilization is not necessary. You can use a tripod for steady shots, and always gives results that are equal or exceed the image stabilization. The stabilization is very useful when you do not have a lot of light for photos and do not have a tripod.
    Three posts and a "payday loans online" link in your signature?

    Anyway, believe it or not there are many locations where a tripod is not feasible or practical, and a fair number where they are simply banned-- like churches in europe.

    Plus a tripod that is light enough to carry round all the time is also light enough to let the camera move a bit in the wind. If you get a tripod heavy enough to keep the camera perfectly stable while shooting video, you're moving around 60-100 pounds of tripod and it simply not practical.

    I was shooting today on the steps on a bridge in venice. The bridge was very small, and if I'd had a tripod, people would have tripped over it and bumped into it.

    It sounds like a tripod meets your needs, and that's great. It certainly is an inexpensive and reliable solution in many situations. But that doesn't make image stabilization unnecessary.

    I think the photography and video scenes would be much improved if people can get rid of the "this works for my needs, therefore it must work for yours" attitude. "Viewfinders are an unneeded expense, the first 100 years of photography had no live view gizmo. Look at what Ansel Adams did. Are you better than Ansel Adams?"

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
  •