This is why Canon didn’t put IBIS in the EOS R mirrorless camera

Oct 1, 2018

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

This is why Canon didn’t put IBIS in the EOS R mirrorless camera

Oct 1, 2018

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Join the Discussion

Share on:

There have been a lot of complaints about the Canon EOS R mirrorless camera. It only has one card slot, it crops when shooting 4K video, and there’s no IBIS. “WTF Canon?” the collective Internet proclaimed. Well, Canon has now responded to at least one of those issues.

That issue is the lack of IBIS. Digital Camera World spoke to Canon UK’s product intelligence consultant, David Parry to find out the answer. And, essentially, having stabilisation in the body isn’t as good as having it in the lens.

David told DCW…

With an in-body IS system you are creating something that needs to work over lots of different types of lenses and different lens groups, so you don’t get a dedicated system for that particular lens.

All lenses move in different ways, and you get different types of shake depending on what kind of lens you’re using, so dedicating the IS system to the particular lens is, for us, the optimum way of doing it – but that’s not to say that we aren’t looking at in-body IS.

– David Parry, Product Intelligence Consultant, Canon UK

I’ve spoken to David before myself. I interviewed him earlier this year about the EOS M50 and Canon’s new concept cameras at The Photography Show. He’s a smart fella who generally knows what he’s talking about.

I tend to agree with what he says here. I heard the same arguments years ago when DSLRs started to get IBIS (hi, Minolta!). And it’s true, the sensor can only compensate so much. Although IBIS technology has come a long way since those early days, it’s still not perfect. Stabilisation in the lens is optimised for that specific lens. Stabilisation on the sensor really has no clue what lens you might want to use.

That being said, it still seems a little odd that it’s not included, though. Sony has it, the Nikon Z6 & Z7 have it, even Fuji’s new GFX 100S will have it. Surely, even if it is better to have it in the lens, having the option to stabilise at the sensor is better than having nothing for those lenses that don’t?

David does suggest that it might be coming in a future model. So, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. Hopefully, they’ll figure out how to shoot 4K UHD without having to crop by then, too.

[via Digital Camera World]

Filed Under:

Tagged With:

Find this interesting? Share it with your friends!

John Aldred

John Aldred

John Aldred is a photographer with over 20 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.

Join the Discussion

DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

19 responses to “This is why Canon didn’t put IBIS in the EOS R mirrorless camera”

  1. Jolyon Ralph Avatar
    Jolyon Ralph

    Sorry, even as a long-term Canon fan I have to say this is a cop-out.

    There are plenty of systems that combine IBIS with in-lens IS for optimum results. in-lens IS would be a great solution if every lens carried it, but neither of the two premier lenses for the new EOS R, the RF 50mm f/1.2 and the RF 28-70 f/2 have any form of in-lens IS.

    Canon didn’t add IBIS because either they can’t do it or they can’t do it in a way that doesn’t tread on other peoples patents, or they can’t afford to do it.

    1. zep_addict Avatar
      zep_addict

      … or they want to sell more expensive IS lenses

    2. Huge Dom Avatar
      Huge Dom

      Besides cameras, all their Pro Level Video Recorders which could mount different lens like an SLR camera as well have IS too…

  2. Rob Davies Avatar
    Rob Davies

    Your article ignores what Olympus has been doing with IBIS and IBIS working in parallel with lens IS.

    1. Kaouthia Avatar
      Kaouthia

      Well, I haven’t shot Olympus since the OM-1, and that didn’t have IBIS. :)

  3. Siewwah Woo Avatar
    Siewwah Woo

    Learn from Panasonic! Dual IS

  4. Lionel Huang Avatar
    Lionel Huang

    Why not incorporate profiles for different lenses in to the IBIS system to give optimised IS performance for a specific lens.

  5. Paul Monaghan Avatar
    Paul Monaghan

    Ibis can also compensate for rotation, give pixel shift multi shots, manual sensor shift (shift for all lens), star tracking combined with GPS data and works with all lens like the 105mm f1.4

    Adding ois to lens can increase the size or degrade IQ (the reasons it’s not in the 105Art) and ibis can work with ois so their is no reason not to add it unless your wanting to mount the sensor direct to the body for better cooling?

  6. pincherio Avatar
    pincherio

    How well does the R work the IS of adapted lenses?

  7. Richard Jackson Avatar
    Richard Jackson

    It’s an option that can be switched off if it doesn’t suit the situation. It’s not an option you can turn off if it’s not there in the first place.

    Heck Several companies now offer stabilisation that works in combo with in lens stabilisation too, taking the concept to the next level.

    the biggest requirement is around defining the focal length, as the movement required to compensate increases as the focal length does.

    Pentax has been doing this for years. They weren’t the first, but they’ve been at it a very long time. Now it’s present on Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, and now Nikon, and it’s abailable on most in both stills and video mode.

    The missing piece is more Canons utter failure to innovate in this space.

    1. David Flower Avatar
      David Flower

      Exactly. My Panasonic asks me the focal length of the lens if it can’t communicate with it just to try and get decent IBIS. To my surprise, IBIS on the Panasonic works well with my 400mm 4.5 Canon FD lens.

  8. A_n_S Avatar
    A_n_S

    That is complete marketing BS. The very fact that he says “that doesn’t mean we are not looking into IBIS” tells you that they were simplyt too late and made a (poor) decision because they wanted to get to market. The Z7 has *five” stops of IBIS stabilization, so this argument is complete crock.

  9. Youssef Hamidi Avatar
    Youssef Hamidi

    “We believe in body stabilization is not optimal or as effective” really means “we can’t screw customers over by charging more for IS lenses if we add IS to the camera”. Glad my Sony has it.

  10. Frank Sheeran Avatar
    Frank Sheeran

    > All lenses move in different ways, and you get different types of shake depending on what kind of lens you’re using

    Does he mean that due to their weight they physically move differently? But then sensors can measure how the camera is actually moving, and when it sees different movements with a pancake lens than a long zoom, it will apply different corrections, right?

    Or does he mean the image moves different ways? Sure, with a 14mm a panning jiggle makes the geometry of all the buildings completely shift, whereas with a 200mm a panning jiggle probably looks almost the same as a translation (raise/lower/left/right) jiggle. But the camera can clearly take the focal length and focus distance into consideration and know from what parts of the image that were autofocused what to keep in the same position.

    If his complaint were valid we’d see sites showing how OIS is definitively superior to IBIS–actual documentation of it– and I’ve seen no such thing. (And note I own 18 Canon lenses; I’d love for the Canon approach to prove superior!)

    I’ll offer a different possibility: I think the days of moving sensors are over. Instead of moving the image sensor, you just scan it 100 times or whatever during the exposure, and based on movement sensors, adjust those thin image “slices” as you “stack them up” to make the final image. For up/down/left/right, you align the things in the shot that AF reported as focused. For yaw/pitch, you do the trigonometry to figure out how the image would need to be stretched and compressed to match the first shot. Easiest would be roll, which will work literally exactly the same for all lenses…

    … and in fact the EOS R ****DOES**** have IBIS of this type for roll! (But I think it doesn’t have motion sensors, so requires a lens with the motion sensors.) I haven’t seen anyone has actually figured that out, but think about it: there’s no way OIS can adjust for roll. You can’t “twist” an image using lenses. Yet the R absolutely does 5-axis IS, as any brochure for it will tell you.

  11. GSXRMVDUCRD Avatar
    GSXRMVDUCRD

    Agreed. Marketing BS. My Olympus micro 4/3 IBIS works equally well with the 9mm or 300mm lenses. The camera knows the focal length of the lens and thus the IBIS can be optimized for each lens.

    Also note that Panasonic had no IBIS in the GH4, but added it to the GH5 in a similar-sized package.

  12. Full Name Avatar
    Full Name

    Well, no Canon until they get that…

  13. Jason E Avatar
    Jason E

    Hindsight offers 20/20 BS recognition.

  14. Don Chandler Avatar
    Don Chandler

    But they have IBIS in their more advanced R6 and R7 cameras. BS!

    “That issue is the lack of IBIS. Digital Camera World spoke to Canon UK’s product intelligence consultant, David Parry to find out the answer. And, essentially, having stabilisation in the body isn’t as good as having it in the lens.”

  15. jjsjjsva Avatar
    jjsjjsva

    “And, essentially, having stabilization in the body isn’t as good as having it in the lens.”

    Yet their top of the line new mirrorless cameras EOS R6 and R5 have IBIS? Maybe more like they would have to redesign the chassis and internals which would put the pricing too close to the premium cameras.