Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Here's a link to the article by Falk Lumo that I was thinking about. Turns out it referred the K-7, not the 20D. :-) http://falklumo.blogspot.com/2010/04/pentax-shake-reduction-revisited.html Jostein - Original Message - From: Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:15 PM Subject: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html I'll read the article a little later, but my personal experience with both systems says: - OIS is better for video and working with a DSLR using long lenses because it stabilizes the image you see in the viewfinder. It's downside is that, of course, you only get IS with lenses so equipped. - IBIS is convenient as all lenses can benefit from it. - Regards efficiency of performance, I haven't seen much in practical terms that shows a distinct superiority to either system in still camera use. BTW, none of my present cameras includes image stabilization of either type. I haven't seen any evidence this is proving a blocker to my photography. ;-) -- Godfrey godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
A guy called Falk Lumo has concluded that Pentax' system is only efficient up to about 200mm focal length. Iirc, he did his testing in the K20-D era. Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html I'll read the article a little later, but my personal experience with both systems says: - OIS is better for video and working with a DSLR using long lenses because it stabilizes the image you see in the viewfinder. It's downside is that, of course, you only get IS with lenses so equipped. - IBIS is convenient as all lenses can benefit from it. - Regards efficiency of performance, I haven't seen much in practical terms that shows a distinct superiority to either system in still camera use. BTW, none of my present cameras includes image stabilization of either type. I haven't seen any evidence this is proving a blocker to my photography. ;-) -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Well, interesting. I wonder if he knows that you can compare the difference between Optical and In camera stabilization by mounting a 4:3 Panasonic stabilized lens, (or m4:3 if you prefer to use them), on an Olympus 4:3 body? Hum, I guess not. I'm always amazed by experts who don't seem to know very much, how did they get to be experts is there a test? He does make pretty charts, maybe that's his area of expertise. This isn't earth shattering, in fact his results mirror the general perceived wisdom. Olympus by the way is supposed to have a much much improved in body stabilization in the OM-D. Maybe someone will test it vs a Panasonic stabilized lens. I expect that the K-3, or whatever the heck it will be called, will have much improved in body stabilization, because they'll have On 10/23/2012 5:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
I've kind of disregarded those findings. Maybe I'm fooling myself but I seem to get a better hit rate with the A*300 on the K20D than I ever got with it on any previous body film or digital. Ok for the record before digital I used the M*300 much more than the A*300, but they are for all intents and purposes identical on an LX. On 10/24/2012 12:06 PM, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: A guy called Falk Lumo has concluded that Pentax' system is only efficient up to about 200mm focal length. Iirc, he did his testing in the K20-D era. Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html I'll read the article a little later, but my personal experience with both systems says: - OIS is better for video and working with a DSLR using long lenses because it stabilizes the image you see in the viewfinder. It's downside is that, of course, you only get IS with lenses so equipped. - IBIS is convenient as all lenses can benefit from it. - Regards efficiency of performance, I haven't seen much in practical terms that shows a distinct superiority to either system in still camera use. BTW, none of my present cameras includes image stabilization of either type. I haven't seen any evidence this is proving a blocker to my photography. ;-) -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
I thought of that, having just recently used the OIS Lumix 45-200 on my IBIS E-PM1. (You can get the E-PM1 body now for under $200) As per urban legend, I turned off the IBIS and left the OIS on. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:48 PM, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: Well, interesting. I wonder if he knows that you can compare the difference between Optical and In camera stabilization by mounting a 4:3 Panasonic stabilized lens, (or m4:3 if you prefer to use them), on an Olympus 4:3 body? Hum, I guess not. I'm always amazed by experts who don't seem to know very much, how did they get to be experts is there a test? He does make pretty charts, maybe that's his area of expertise. This isn't earth shattering, in fact his results mirror the general perceived wisdom. Olympus by the way is supposed to have a much much improved in body stabilization in the OM-D. Maybe someone will test it vs a Panasonic stabilized lens. I expect that the K-3, or whatever the heck it will be called, will have much improved in body stabilization, because they'll have On 10/23/2012 5:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
I'm always amazed by experts who don't seem to know very much, how did they get to be experts is there a test? All they have to do is be more than 50 miles from home. Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation Well, interesting. I wonder if he knows that you can compare the difference between Optical and In camera stabilization by mounting a 4:3 Panasonic stabilized lens, (or m4:3 if you prefer to use them), on an Olympus 4:3 body? Hum, I guess not. I'm always amazed by experts who don't seem to know very much, how did they get to be experts is there a test? He does make pretty charts, maybe that's his area of expertise. This isn't earth shattering, in fact his results mirror the general perceived wisdom. Olympus by the way is supposed to have a much much improved in body stabilization in the OM-D. Maybe someone will test it vs a Panasonic stabilized lens. I expect that the K-3, or whatever the heck it will be called, will have much improved in body stabilization, because they'll have On 10/23/2012 5:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Gee, I wonder which one works better if I want to put a Takumar or other classic manual focus lens on the front? On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- The key to seeing the world's soul, and in the process wakening one's own, is to get over the confusion by which we think that fact is real and imagination an illusion. It is the other way around. -Thomas Moore, Original Self -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Great article. Thanks, Brian. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html -- Cheers Brian ++ Brian Walters Western Sydney Australia http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- -bmw -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
On Oct 23, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html Interesting. I assume that they tried it at 500mm, how about at 50mm? I remember seeing something recently about how there are only about four different basic types of lenses, and that the lens formula that works for zoom lenses is only good to about f/2.8. I suspect that it takes one of those lens formula in order to do optical stabilization. I also remember reading about how having a moving element in the optical path decreases the sharpness of the photo. I note that he doesn't perform MTF calculations on the images, so he's not actually quantifying levels of sharpness with the different methods. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
Well, we do have pseudo-quantitative mock three-dimensional colored histograms based on an ill-defined decision making process. ;-) Most of what I've read does indicate that lens-bsed IS has an advantage over body-based IS. However, both do work and IBIS is much more flexible, not to mention the only option with older lenses. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Oct 23, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html Interesting. I assume that they tried it at 500mm, how about at 50mm? I remember seeing something recently about how there are only about four different basic types of lenses, and that the lens formula that works for zoom lenses is only good to about f/2.8. I suspect that it takes one of those lens formula in order to do optical stabilization. I also remember reading about how having a moving element in the optical path decreases the sharpness of the photo. I note that he doesn't perform MTF calculations on the images, so he's not actually quantifying levels of sharpness with the different methods. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
There are more than 4 basic lens designs, and they are mixed and matched depending on the lens design. If you really want to know about lens design, read these articles: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/lens-geneology-part-1 http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/09/lens-genealogy-part-2 http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/01/cooking-with-glass https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/11/the-schott-heard-around-the-world http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/02/who-invented-the-telephoto-lens https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/10/from-petzvals-sum-to-abbes-number On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Oct 23, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html Interesting. I assume that they tried it at 500mm, how about at 50mm? I remember seeing something recently about how there are only about four different basic types of lenses, and that the lens formula that works for zoom lenses is only good to about f/2.8. I suspect that it takes one of those lens formula in order to do optical stabilization. I also remember reading about how having a moving element in the optical path decreases the sharpness of the photo. I note that he doesn't perform MTF calculations on the images, so he's not actually quantifying levels of sharpness with the different methods. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Comparing in-body and lens-based image stabilisation
thanks. awesome set of links On Oct 23, 2012, at 9:24 PM, David Parsons wrote: There are more than 4 basic lens designs, and they are mixed and matched depending on the lens design. If you really want to know about lens design, read these articles: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/lens-geneology-part-1 http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/09/lens-genealogy-part-2 http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/01/cooking-with-glass https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/11/the-schott-heard-around-the-world http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/02/who-invented-the-telephoto-lens https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/10/from-petzvals-sum-to-abbes-number On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Oct 23, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Brian Walters wrote: Interesting article that uses a K-5 and a Sigma 50-500 mm HSM lens. The article doesn't say what focal length was used in the tests but presumably it was the long end. http://www.digitalversus.com/digital-camera/image-stabilisers-optical-mechanical-a1608.html Interesting. I assume that they tried it at 500mm, how about at 50mm? I remember seeing something recently about how there are only about four different basic types of lenses, and that the lens formula that works for zoom lenses is only good to about f/2.8. I suspect that it takes one of those lens formula in order to do optical stabilization. I also remember reading about how having a moving element in the optical path decreases the sharpness of the photo. I note that he doesn't perform MTF calculations on the images, so he's not actually quantifying levels of sharpness with the different methods. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
