VR/IS/OIS Vs ISO


Status
Not open for further replies.

binbeto

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
2,312
0
0
43
Behind a lens
www.pbase.com
#1
Just a thought..

Will it come to a day where high ISO like 3200 or 6400 or 128000 is so good that VR/IS/OIS is not longer required?
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#4
binbeto said:
Just a thought..

Will it come to a day where high ISO like 3200 or 6400 or 128000 is so good that VR/IS/OIS is not longer required?
Hmmmm........ good food for thought.

High ISO ==> enables faster shutter speed to be used and yet have good enough exposure in dim light conditons ===> no image blur due camera shake
VR/IS/OIS ===> movement of sensor or lens to prevent image blur due to camera shake.

But sometimes, we still want to use slow shutter speed and a certain aperture size to achieve the effects (e.g. subjects' movement blur/light trails etc. but no camera shake blur + a certain DOF) we want in the image captured and so we would not use high ISO even if it's as noise free as low ISO.

So VR/IS/OIS still has its place even if high ISO becomes almost as noise free as low ISO.
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#5
+evenstar said:
Higher ISO = require more memory space = less photos compared to lower ISO
The higher memory space required to save an image shot with higher ISO is due to noise pixels adversely affecting the compression of the image.

If high ISO is almost as noise free as low ISO, then the image compression will be almost as well as one shot with a low ISO. So the increase memory space required will be marginal. This coupled with the expected continuous drop in memory prices, the increase in memory space won't be a conern.

On top of that, if it's saved in RAW, I think the file size difference between high ISO and low ISO is not significant since there is little compression and noise mainly affects the compression.
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#6
binbeto said:
How much more?

VR also consume power. Require more power=less photos too.. :bigeyes:
I guess it depends on the noise level, the no. of pixels and the compression used .

I read that for jpeg compression, the compressed file of an image shot with ISO 1600 could be as much as 4 times larger than one shot with ISO 200 because of the high noise level. But then, it didn't specifically mention the camera used and what kind of light conditions.

Out of curiosity, after I've posted, I did an experiment on my camera (Nikon Coolpix 5700) 2 minutes ago using ISO 100 (lowest for my camera) and ISO 800 (highest for my camera). Update now with the results :
1) When shot in jpeg fine quality
a) ISO 100 = 1.8MB
b) ISO 800 = 2MB (an increase of 11%)

The increase is much lesser than I expect. And of course, the file size also depends on the scene.

2) when shot in RAW
File size remains the same at 7.65MB for both ISO 100 and ISO 800. ==> No surprise.
 

idor

Senior Member
Nov 11, 2004
666
0
0
42
Northern California
#7
binbeto said:
How much more?

VR also consume power. Require more power=less photos too.. :bigeyes:
wahhh bindapro come prepared to argue har..... :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

anyways, I keep hoping for noiseless iso 3200... but until today... its still a dream... :bsmilie:
 

yyD70S

Senior Member
Dec 25, 2005
2,454
0
0
Singapore
#8
In the world of digital (technology), anything is possible... it's an old cliche, but never say never:nono:

Just we are entitled to dream on.;)
 

idor

Senior Member
Nov 11, 2004
666
0
0
42
Northern California
#9
yyD70S said:
In the world of digital (technology), anything is possible... it's an old cliche, but never say never:nono:

Just we are entitled to dream on.;)
bindapro... what you think leh.... next time dun say impossible okie?:angel:
 

binbeto

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
2,312
0
0
43
Behind a lens
www.pbase.com
#10
Idor, not come prepared to argue lah.. Just dicussion mah.

Think clockunder have more ammo than me.. hee hee

Most of the time, VR(will represent all VR/IS/OIS etc, too tiring to type all haa haa) is quote to make handheld possible at shutter speed 2 stop slower.
If we can just increase iso by 2 stop and get the same noiseless pic, VR will be quite useless..

Maybe high iso still can't recuse those that jab when pressing the button.. Can VR save them?

Open discussion, not putting any camera/lens down
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#11
binbeto said:
Idor, not come prepared to argue lah.. Just dicussion mah.

Think clockunder have more ammo than me.. hee hee

Most of the time, VR(will represent all VR/IS/OIS etc, too tiring to type all haa haa) is quote to make handheld possible at shutter speed 2 stop slower.
If we can just increase iso by 2 stop and get the same noiseless pic, VR will be quite useless..

Maybe high iso still can't recuse those that jab when pressing the button.. Can VR save them?

Open discussion, not putting any camera/lens down
Now imagine this situation :
You want to capture the motion blur of a dancer as well as a sharp nice background.
So you use manual mode :

Shutter speed = 1/15 (just nice to capture the kind of motion blur of the dancer in the way you want)

Aperture = F/8 (the smallest aperture your camera can have to get exactly the appropriate Depth of Field to capture a nice sharp background).

Focal length = 60mm (to have just the right composition you want).

At those settings above and the light condition prevailing, a correct exposure is at ISO 100.

However the problem is that at shutter speed of 1/15, your picture background will not be nice and sharp because 1/15 is 2 stops below the minimum shutter speed of 1/focal length = 1/60 and your picture suffers from handshake blur. Unfortunately, you also don't have a tripod with you.

In this situation, which of the following 2 would you prefer your camera to have :
a) ISO up to 6400 which is as noise-free as your ISO 100.
or
2) VR/IS/OIS which prevents handshake blur up to 2 stops.

???
 

binbeto

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
2,312
0
0
43
Behind a lens
www.pbase.com
#12
Hmm You got a point..

So VR is useful when motion blur is intentional for shutter speed too unstable to hand held.

Never ownded a VR lens b4. Will VR still work while the dancer is in motion? I am assuming VR needs to work with AF.
 

#14
Clockunder said:
I guess it depends on the noise level, the no. of pixels and the compression used .

I read that for jpeg compression, the compressed file of an image shot with ISO 1600 could be as much as 4 times larger than one shot with ISO 200 because of the high noise level. But then, it didn't specifically mention the camera used and what kind of light conditions.

Out of curiosity, after I've posted, I did an experiment on my camera (Nikon Coolpix 5700) 2 minutes ago using ISO 100 (lowest for my camera) and ISO 800 (highest for my camera). Update now with the results :
1) When shot in jpeg fine quality
a) ISO 100 = 1.8MB
b) ISO 800 = 2MB (an increase of 11%)

The increase is much lesser than I expect. And of course, the file size also depends on the scene.

2) when shot in RAW
File size remains the same at 7.65MB for both ISO 100 and ISO 800. ==> No surprise.

i have d70s and just did the same test but with a greater difference in iso, here are the results

ISO 200= 2.24MB (large and fine)
ISO 1600= 2.77MB (large and fine)

precentage difference is around 19.14% if my maths is correct

and in RAW

ISO 200=5.0MB
ISO 1600=5.67MB

precentage difference of 11.9%

Hope this helps!
 

Wai

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
5,270
0
36
39
South Pole with Penguin
singastro.org
#15
Clockunder said:
Now imagine this situation :
You want to capture the motion blur of a dancer as well as a sharp nice background.
So you use manual mode :

Shutter speed = 1/15 (just nice to capture the kind of motion blur of the dancer in the way you want)
yah..the only few situation when u need VR/IS/OS, but how often u want to capture such motion blur? For me, 99.9% of the time I will rather have higher shutter speed, when u are already shooting at wide open, the only way u can achieve this is to push the ISO higher.

i will rather pay extra $$ for higher ISO, than to have VR/IS/OS
 

poh6702

New Member
May 8, 2004
999
1
0
#17
wildstallion said:
i have d70s and just did the same test but with a greater difference in iso, here are the results

ISO 200= 2.24MB (large and fine)
ISO 1600= 2.77MB (large and fine)

precentage difference is around 19.14% if my maths is correct

and in RAW

ISO 200=5.0MB
ISO 1600=5.67MB

precentage difference of 11.9%

Hope this helps!
JPEG employs some form of algorithm to compress a picture, if there are very little information, the end result file size is smaller than a picture with alots of informations. For example, if you compare a full white picture vs scenery, the white picture has very little picture variations (information) thus file size is much smaller.

When you compare same picture with difference noise level, during compression, the compression algorithm was fooled to think that there are more picture variations in the noisy picture thus produces a bigger file size.
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#18
binbeto said:
Hmm You got a point..

So VR is useful when motion blur is intentional for shutter speed too unstable to hand held.

Never ownded a VR lens b4. Will VR still work while the dancer is in motion? I am assuming VR needs to work with AF.
From what I understand and put simply, Image Stabiliser works by detecting camera movement at the point when the sensor is about to be exposed and then shift its own lens elements or image sensor to counter the camera movement. (For exactly how it's done technically, can google search for Image Stabiliser).

So IS shouldn't be used for panning because it detects the camera panning movement and counters the movement, thus causing the accuracy of panning to go harewire.

However, since subject's motion blur is not caused by camera movement, Image Stabiliser has no effect on blur caused by subject's movement. If there is motion blur as well as camera movement blur, IS only tries to counter the camera's movement and so the motion blur remains.

The above is just my deduction as I don't own any camera or lens with image stabiliser.
 

Apr 12, 2005
1,767
0
0
#19
niki said:
up to 2 stops meaning the shutter speed?:dunno:
I don't quite understand your question.

The shutter speed used remains unaffected by the Image Stabiliser but any camera shake is countered by slight movement in the lens elements or CCD/CMOS sensor, causing the shot's susceptibility to camera shake blur to be lower as if it's taken at 2 stops faster in shutter speed. Any subject's motion blur is not affected.

In other words, if the shutter speed is 1/15 and the focal length is 60mm and the Image Stabiliser is turned on, the motion blur should be about the same as taking without IS with rock solid hands but the susceptibility to hand shake blur is about the same as taking at shutter speed 1/60 (i.e. 2 stops faster than 1/15) at focal length 60mm.
 

Wai

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
5,270
0
36
39
South Pole with Penguin
singastro.org
#20
Clockunder said:
From what I understand and put simply, Image Stabiliser works by detecting camera movement at the point when the sensor is about to be exposed and then shift its own lens elements or image sensor to counter the camera movement. (For exactly how it's done technically, can google search for Image Stabiliser).

So IS shouldn't be used for panning because it detects the camera panning movement and counters the movement, thus causing the accuracy of panning to go harewire.

However, since subject's motion blur is not caused by camera movement, Image Stabiliser has no effect on blur caused by subject's movement. If there is motion blur as well as camera movement blur, IS only tries to counter the camera's movement and so the motion blur remains.

The above is just my deduction as I don't own any camera or lens with image stabiliser.
since u have never use IS before, go read up before you make your own assumption and stop confuse others with wrong info :sweat:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom