need help with IS project


Status
Not open for further replies.

Garrison

New Member
Feb 23, 2006
21
0
0
#1
Hi, everyone. I'm new here. I am currently doing a report on different IS technologies in consumer cameras. The three main type I'm doing about is lens shifting (canon's IS, Nikon's VR, Panasonic's MEGA O.I.S.), Konica Minolta's CCD shifting and Casio's Antishake DSP. My problems are this:

What are the pros and cons of each technology? Anyone feel that one is better than the other?

I already know how lens shifting and CCD shifting works, but I can't find much on Casio's DSP. Is casio the only one that uses this? Basically it reduces shutter speed and increases ISO, and reduces noise by image processing, right? is there anything I shd know?

I am doing a simple experiment to test the picture quality each method produces under similar conditions. HOwever, as I've mentioned, I am looking at consumer cameras. But I've been told that Konica Minolta does not have CCD shift in their consumer level cameras? Is that true? If so I might have to go to their prosumer level Z series. Also, is there a Konica Minolta showroom that I can go to to try out the cameras? I know that Konic Minolta recently pulled out of the camera bussines, but their current products shd still be avaliable, right?

I need to know more about the history of the technology. Lens shifting is the oldest, while CCD shift and DSP is relative new, right? the tech is orginally made for video camera, telephoto cameras, bino, etc. So which company is the first to incoperate it in SLRs or consumer cameras? If possible, can you provide a model no. and year? Also, what are the first model from each company that incoperates their IS technology? Or any links as to where I can find the info?

Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
 

zcf

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2005
6,741
0
0
270 degree of Singapore
#2
KM show room is at the service centre, can give them a call and see can try on the model or not, but they may be closed from april onward.
KMSC
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#3
Google has lots of wonderful anti-shake software with all the info in it.. try it.. i got the below info from it

The electro-digital(software)solution uses algorithms to analyze the motion in a video stream and moves the center of the picture to make the picture appear more stable. It does this by locking on to features in the picture. A feature is an area in the picture that is clearly defined.
The difference in positions of this feature between two following frames is called a motion vector.
taken from http://www.it.lth.se/Masterswork/MastersHomepage.asp?ExjobbCode=mf050221

needing a live video feed, you will soon deduce why DSLRs do not implement this type of anti-shake.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#4
I'm typing all these from my memory and history is not my forte. You might need this to authenticate it.

The concept of image stablising was first implemented in the 70s (or 60s or even before) by the military to obtain usuable shake free images taken from planes or rocky rides. The first contraption was a spinning gyroscope fixture with a camera or video cam(i forgot which one was first attached) on it. Gyroscopes keep straight regardless of the direction the platform it is resting on tilts.

With the invention of mercury level sensors and servos, the contraption could be miniturised
later on, the video industry took it up and was followed closely by R/C plane enthusiasts, who wanted nicely videos without all the camera shake.

Still camera lenses were the last in the line to take it up with Canon being first to introduce IS in xxx (forgot which lens) then xx years later (dunno how many years) Nikon introduced their VR.

EDIT: I just found that the concept was dated even way before 1960s
in 1743, a special sextant (a sea navigation device where you point to the stars and looked thru it and aligned it with the horizon) was tested in sea and it worked well even on rough waters. It employed the spinning gyroscope theory.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#5
yanyewkay said:
I'm typing all these from my memory and history is not my forte. You might need this to authenticate it.

The concept of image stablising was first implemented in the 70s (or 60s or even before) by the military to obtain usuable shake free images taken from planes or rocky rides. The first contraption was a spinning gyroscope fixture with a camera or video cam(i forgot which one was first attached) on it. Gyroscopes keep straight regardless of the direction the platform it is resting on tilts.

With the invention of mercury level sensors and servos, the contraption could be miniturised
later on, the video industry took it up and was followed closely by R/C plane enthusiasts, who wanted nicely videos without all the camera shake.

Still camera lenses were the last in the line to take it up with Canon being first to introduce IS in xxx (forgot which lens) then xx years later (dunno how many years) Nikon introduced their VR.

EDIT: I just found that the concept was dated even way before 1960s
in 1743, a special sextant (a sea navigation device where you point to the stars and looked thru it and aligned it with the horizon) was tested in sea and it worked well even on rough waters. It employed the spinning gyroscope theory.
Now IS can be implemented in lenses thanks to MEMS technology. Silicon-based accelerometers (like those used as sensors for airbag deployment in automobiles) and gyros are the enabling technology for this. Previously, an electronic implementation was by optical feedback but could not track fast enough.

http://www.analog.com/en/subCat/0,2879,764%255F801%255F0%255F%255F0%255F,00.html
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#6
gyros are expensive and overkill (and doesn't really fit the bill) you need acclerometers better.

a single 3 channel accelerometer is more than sufficient. Not to mention it costs way less than a gyro sensor.

Threadstarter lost? :dunno:

funny that he actually registered a new nick to post this question and disappear after that.
 

lsisaxon

Senior Member
Nov 29, 2004
11,941
0
0
#7
yanyewkay said:
gyros are expensive and overkill (and doesn't really fit the bill) you need acclerometers better.

a single 3 channel accelerometer is more than sufficient. Not to mention it costs way less than a gyro sensor.

Threadstarter lost? :dunno:

funny that he actually registered a new nick to post this question and disappear after that.
MEMS gyros and accelerometers are about the same price and relatively inexpensive. :)
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#8
USD30 for a piece of gyro.. way bulkier than accelerometers also.
USD18 for accelerometer, not from AD though (AD is branded stuff :bsmilie: )

:think: you deal with gyros and accelerometers also? if so drop me a PM.. :D
 

Garrison

New Member
Feb 23, 2006
21
0
0
#9
hey, I'm still here. Just really busy with other projects and test recently.

I really appreciate all the help, but I don't need to go too in-depth technically. I still need to know about casio's anit-shake DSP. The concept of reducing shutter speed and increasing ISO is not unique to Casio, is it? It can also be found in SLRs. So what makes's Casio's Anti-shake DSP so special? Is it the only brand to incoperate image processing capabilities in the camera?

Also, is there any websites or books I can lok for? Cause I'm writing a report, and i'll need to cite sources and referances.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom