Canon feeling the pressure of image stabilizer on camera bodies?

[kiwi2]

Konica-Minolta has it, and now the latest Sony DSLR has it too... Is Canon feeling the pressure already that their bodies all don't come with IS but rather it's on their more expensive lenses?

Cos I read yesterday's advert on the 400D in the papers and it's quite hilarious the way they advertise it. They mentioned something like IS needs to be on lenses cos it is sort of custom-made individually for optimal results. Can't remember the actual wording but something to that effect. I find it really funny cos I didn't get what they are trying to say or see the logic in that, and also, I don't see how this explanation related to an advertisement for the new 400D! Ha... They must be feeling the pressure and afraid people will choose the Sony A100 instead.

Also, the example of noise reduction comparison they did with a typical competitor's camera... Is it fair? As in are other camera manufacturers' noise really bad? Quite doubtful on that one too.

[sehsuan]

Canon CPS Europe has stated on their site before that IS will be on the lenses so the photographer can see the effects of Image Stabilization right away with the view IS'ed, instead of moving and shaking and not knowing how capable an in-camera IS system will negate the shakes.

[An drew]

Originally Posted by kiwi2 Konica-Minolta has it, and now the latest Sony DSLR has it too... Is Canon feeling the pressure already that their bodies all don't come with IS but rather it's on their more expensive lenses? Cos I read yesterday's advert on the 400D in the papers and it's quite hilarious the way they advertise it. They mentioned something like IS needs to be on lenses cos it is sort of custom-made individually for optimal results. Can't remember the actual wording but something to that effect. I find it really funny cos I didn't get what they are trying to say or see the logic in that, and also, I don't see how this explanation related to an advertisement for the new 400D! Ha... They must be feeling the pressure and afraid people will choose the Sony A100 instead. Also, the example of noise reduction comparison they did with a typical competitor's camera... Is it fair? As in are other camera manufacturers' noise really bad? Quite doubtful on that one too.

Is there really any difference with IS being on the lens or with the body? IS gyroscopes should be able to detect any movement from anywhere and compensate accordingly. It would be better for photographers if the IS can be built onto the body.

[vince123123]

I don't really need to see the effects of Image Stablisation right away actually - and besides, it isn't very much of a preview as what our eyes see (motion video) and what is captured (still freeze frame) are quite different.

caveat: This is my experience with the NIkon VR system

Originally Posted by sehsuan Canon CPS Europe has stated on their site before that IS will be on the lenses so the photographer can see the effects of Image Stabilization right away with the view IS'ed, instead of moving and shaking and not knowing how capable an in-camera IS system will negate the shakes.

[CYRN]

the real question would be....

Would you pay 1K more for having IS on the body that would be here today, gone tomorrow or would you pay for the lens that you can use for long time.

[vince123123]

The other way to look at it is,

If I have x lenses, and if I want IS for all of them, that will last me x generations of bodies.

Originally Posted by CYRN the real question would be.... Would you pay 1K more for having IS on the body that would be here today, gone tomorrow or would you pay for the lens that you can use for long time.

[Nerd]

If you're hand holding telephoto lens of 300mm and above, and you do not have proper support for your hands or elbows or that you've nothing to lean against to steady yourself, IS in the lens is rather useful for when you're composing your shots... Or that if you're for any reason, running around with a 400mm lens and your heart is pumping like crazy, IS in the lens stabalizes your view and aids in composition.

[Stoned]

Well, I mean, like I always say, if you think the other brands are doing a great job and Canon isn't, switch. It's the whole reason why people jump ship. Canon has things to offer, and things which it doesn't offer. Pick the best package of features for your needs.

[goering]

Originally Posted by Stoned Well, I mean, like I always say, if you think the other brands are doing a great job and Canon isn't, switch. .

It isn't as simple as that ..

In this case, however, I feel that Canon's arguments do have merits. In body stabilisation does have its limitations.

The most compelling reason is that having the stabilisation on lens is somewhat more effective when the focal length gets long .. like 300mm and above, and that's where you need the satbilisation the most

[vince123123]

Ah...maybe they'll have a system that has IS both on the body and lens :P

[jdredd]

theyve already stated their reasons quite clearly why no inbody IS. and thats because, IS is more appropriate for longer lenses than shorter ones, and for longer lenses, lens IS is more effective than in body IS, dueto the distances the IS mechanisms have to move tocompensate in really long focal lengths.

as to whether people accept this... or whether its just a reason to earn money for their IS lenses, well,thats up to the individual i think.

[USM]

Why should Canon follows what others are doing?

Konica-Minolta may come with "AS" system that shocks the market. But what happended to it now? It has sold the entire camera division to Sony. And Sony can just simply make use of existing technology from KM to incorporate it into the "Alpha" system.

Is so called "AS" system in the body a proven technology? Only time will tell.

Like what Stoned has mentioned - if you think that Canon system can't deliver that kind of photos that you wanted, by all means, switch.

Why are we so concern about all these kind of comparsion? We should be concentrating on how to take good photographs. Cameras are just tools

[zcf]

Originally Posted by USM Is so called "AS" system in the body a proven technology? Only time will tell.

I think almost all KM and Sony Alpha system with users vouch it work, so far hasn't heard anyone complain that it doesn't work.

Occassionally/rarely we do hear about about as breakdown, I only see it on the internet a few times only, guess the frequency is not too far from IS lens break down???

Originally Posted by CYRN the real question would be.... Would you pay 1K more for having IS on the body that would be here today, gone tomorrow or would you pay for the lens that you can use for long time.

Wow, I didn't know AS cost $1K or more, didn't know my KM 5D without AS only worth $200-300 only (well, that's probably true if my AS break down now and it's on 2nd hand value), think Pentax K100D may be also the same .

Hopefully $ony can develop even better SSS on next few release, so we only need to change the camera for better Anti-Shake technology.

[tomshen]

Of course I want IS on camera, why not? I still could choose on/off. Canon should do something in this regard and I belive in the long run both Canon/Nikon will join the game.

[CYRN]

Originally Posted by vince123123 Ah...maybe they'll have a system that has IS both on the body and lens :P

I'll love this combi.

[CYRN]

Originally Posted by zcf Wow, I didn't know AS cost $1K or more, didn't know my KM 5D without AS only worth $200-300 only (well, that's probably true if my AS break down now and it's on 2nd hand value), think Pentax K100D may be also the same . Hopefully $ony can develop even better SSS on next few release, so we only need to change the camera for better Anti-Shake technology.

Case to point... 70-200f4 IS.

Depends on the version of IS canon use... the latest version or the earliest version.

[CYRN]

Originally Posted by USM Why should Canon follows what others are doing? Konica-Minolta may come with "AS" system that shocks the market. But what happended to it now? It has sold the entire camera division to Sony. And Sony can just simply make use of existing technology from KM to incorporate it into the "Alpha" system. Is so called "AS" system in the body a proven technology? Only time will tell. Like what Stoned has mentioned - if you think that Canon system can't deliver that kind of photos that you wanted, by all means, switch. Why are we so concern about all these kind of comparsion? We should be concentrating on how to take good photographs. Cameras are just tools

Canon would bow to market pressure.... more from Sony's Alpha system which grabbed a lion's share in the first month of it's launch in Japan. Why do you think 400D hav 10MP instead of 8MP. The EF-S and dust buster on 400D is also a way of showing Canon will have to produce what the market wants if they want to retain market share.

KM D7D is an excellent system... but it takes more than that to compete...

[taker]

Originally Posted by sehsuan Canon CPS Europe has stated on their site before that IS will be on the lenses so the photographer can see the effects of Image Stabilization right away with the view IS'ed, instead of moving and shaking and not knowing how capable an in-camera IS system will negate the shakes.

That's true. Besides, for longer lens, IS/VR mechanism has to be on the lens as the circular motion is on the far end of the long lens, and the camera body cannot detect that movement.

[zcf]

Originally Posted by CYRN Case to point... 70-200f4 IS. Depends on the version of IS canon use... the latest version or the earliest version.

Actually I don't think IS in lens or AS in body are costing that high, it's all the company marketing decide it to be a high pricing. Usually repair of either will only cost a few hundreds only.

[dRebelXT]

If only Canon gives IS discount to pririor IS lens owner will I get IS-equipped body.