Image Stabilizer

ben_mtl · 05-06-2010, 07:26 PM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Hi
I’m about to buy a Sigma 17-70 to put on K-x... that lense is available in two versions; with and without the stabilizer (about 150$ difference in price).
As you know, the K-x has a in body image stabilizer...
So i wondering how the Image Stabilizer of Sigma lenses comprate to the in body version of the K-x.
Thanks for your advice
Ben

hcc · 05-06-2010, 09:02 PM

Photozone.de reviewed positively the Sigma 17-70mm (no stabiliser):
Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC (Pentax K) - Review / Test Report (Pentax Mount)
Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro - Review / Test Report (Canon mount)

Since the K-x has image stabilisation (IS), you do not need a lens with optical stabilisation (OS).

You may be interested however by a couple of recent relevant threads:
(a) https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/100430-best-zo...portraits.html on Tamron 28-75 mm vs Sigma 17-70mm

(b) Image Stabilization Test: Olympus E-520 SLR Body - SLRgear.com! on in-boy IS versus lens OS

Hope that the comments will help...

SpecialK · 05-06-2010, 09:07 PM

Where are you finding the non-stabilized version, if it is new (meaning not a used lens)? Everywhere seems to be "temporarily" out of stock while Sigma is apparently discontinuing the non-OS versions of their lenses.

Parallax · 05-07-2010, 07:43 AM

One advantage of lens based IS, is that the image in the viewfinder is stabilized.

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-07-2010, 07:56 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Parallax

One advantage of lens based IS, is that the image in the viewfinder is stabilized.

You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS

If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following.

You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this.

ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at.

They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well.

IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving

Entropy · 05-07-2010, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS

If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following.

You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this.

ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at.

They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well.

IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving

Yup, the in-lens IS of my Sigma 18-250 helps a LOT with focusing at the long end.

Matters less with a 17-70 though as camera shake is much less of a problem for AF. Shorter FL + wider aperture = the 17-70 almost never has focus trouble even at the long end. (However, the OS version also adds HSM which I wish I had.)

Parallax · 05-07-2010, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS

If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following.

You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this.

ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at.

They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well.

IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving

Thank you. I hadn't thought about the focusing. I have the Sigma 18-250 OS HSM and I really like it.

glanglois · 05-07-2010, 12:15 PM

Thanks, team. My Sigma 18-250 is on the local truck for delivery in about three hours. Biggest problem with Tamron 18-250? Focus - too often it hunts or gives up, even in daylight.

You're calming my buyer's remorse only 36 hours after it set in. Thanks!

PS: I have the older Sigma non-OS 17-70. The Pentax SR appears to have significant value with that lens and I occasionally use the macro. I've no plans to replace it with the new version.

Parallax · 05-07-2010, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by glanglois

You're calming my buyer's remorse only 36 hours after it set in. Thanks!

I've had mine for a few months now. It and my FA31 Ltd are the only two lenses I've used since getting the Sigma. I haven't found anything that I don't like about it.

Marc Sabatella · 05-07-2010, 01:37 PM

It's worth noting that these are*not* simply stablized and non-stabilized versions of the same lens. They are actually different optical designs as well (notice the change in max aperture), and the new version also features HSM. I think the jury is still out on which lens will perform better in practice, although I gather some have already their own conclusions.

In any case, this question is about lenses, not cameras, so I'm moving it to the proper forum.

Fl_Gulfer · 05-07-2010, 01:53 PM

Is this a good price for the Sig 18-250 OS HSM??
SIGMA 18-250mm 18-250 OS LENS F Pentax K20D K200 K20 - eBay (item 200443003652 end time May-24-10 11:47:44 PDT)

Parallax · 05-07-2010, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

Is this a good price for the Sig 18-250 OS HSM??
SIGMA 18-250mm 18-250 OS LENS F Pentax K20D K200 K20 - eBay (item 200443003652 end time May-24-10 11:47:44 PDT)

B&H has them for $479.00

glanglois · 05-07-2010, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

It's worth noting that these are*not* simply stablized and non-stabilized versions of the same lens. They are actually different optical designs as well (notice the change in max aperture), and the new version also features HSM. I think the jury is still out on which lens will perform better in practice, although I gather some have already their own conclusions.

In any case, this question is about lenses, not cameras, so I'm moving it to the proper forum.

Good point, Marc. "Perform better" means different things to different people, of course. Hence my reference to the semi-macro capability - older lens has, IIRC, closer focus and 1:2.2 vs. 1:2.7 (or so).

hangu · 05-07-2010, 06:55 PM

Pardon my ignorance, I did not know you could have both lens stabilization along with sensor stabilization. Wouldn't they impede one another? Or is the effect cumulative, as in, if you were to get 1 extra stop out of the sensor IS and 1 extra stop out of the lens IS, you would get 2 extra stops with the combination? That would be amazing with the K-x's high ISO capabilities.

sterretje · 05-07-2010, 09:48 PM

I think that they will counteract each other (like SR on on a tripod), but might be mistaken. You can always switch the SR off to use the OS (and probably vice versa)

05-06-2010, 07:26 PM	#1
ben_mtl Inactive Account Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 3	Image Stabilizer Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Hi I’m about to buy a Sigma 17-70 to put on K-x... that lense is available in two versions; with and without the stabilizer (about 150$ difference in price). As you know, the K-x has a in body image stabilizer... So i wondering how the Image Stabilizer of Sigma lenses comprate to the in body version of the K-x. Thanks for your advice Ben

05-07-2010, 06:50 PM	#13
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	17-70mm - variations upon a theme Originally posted by Marc Sabatella It's worth noting that these arenot simply stablized and non-stabilized versions of the same lens. They are actually different optical designs as well (notice the change in max aperture), and the new version also features HSM. I think the jury is still out on which lens will perform better in practice, although I gather some have already their own conclusions. In any case, this question is about lenses, not cameras, so I'm moving it to the proper forum. Good point, Marc. "Perform better" means different things to different people, of course. Hence my reference to the semi-macro capability - older lens has, IIRC, closer focus and 1:2.2 vs. 1:2.7 (or so).

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Agonic Stedi-Stock stabilizer mount	Thumper473	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	15	06-04-2012 02:22 PM
Sigma's OS (Optical Stabilizer) + teleconverter = good?	nater	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	10-03-2009 10:44 PM
Make Your Own Image Stabilizer for $1	drexvil	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	4	02-08-2008 05:03 PM
image comparison using 'neat image' noise reduction programme.	distorted_vision	Post Your Photos!	18	12-28-2007 04:44 AM
String stabilizer "monopod"	ve2vfd	General Talk	3	10-16-2007 07:20 PM

05-06-2010, 09:02 PM	#2
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,004	Photozone.de reviewed positively the Sigma 17-70mm (no stabiliser): Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC (Pentax K) - Review / Test Report (Pentax Mount) Sigma AF 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC macro - Review / Test Report (Canon mount) Since the K-x has image stabilisation (IS), you do not need a lens with optical stabilisation (OS). You may be interested however by a couple of recent relevant threads: (a) https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/100430-best-zo...portraits.html on Tamron 28-75 mm vs Sigma 17-70mm (b) Image Stabilization Test: Olympus E-520 SLR Body - SLRgear.com! on in-boy IS versus lens OS Hope that the comments will help...

05-06-2010, 09:07 PM	#3
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Where are you finding the non-stabilized version, if it is new (meaning not a used lens)? Everywhere seems to be "temporarily" out of stock while Sigma is apparently discontinuing the non-OS versions of their lenses.

05-07-2010, 07:43 AM	#4
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	One advantage of lens based IS, is that the image in the viewfinder is stabilized.

05-07-2010, 07:56 AM - 2 Likes	#5
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	Originally posted by Parallax One advantage of lens based IS, is that the image in the viewfinder is stabilized. You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following. You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this. ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at. They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well. IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving

05-07-2010, 08:00 AM	#6
Entropy Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Owego, NY Posts: 976	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following. You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this. ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at. They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well. IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving Yup, the in-lens IS of my Sigma 18-250 helps a LOT with focusing at the long end. Matters less with a 17-70 though as camera shake is much less of a problem for AF. Shorter FL + wider aperture = the 17-70 almost never has focus trouble even at the long end. (However, the OS version also adds HSM which I wish I had.)

05-07-2010, 08:15 AM	#7
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge You need to develop this concept a little further, because you are only touching the benefit of lens based OS over the sensor based IS If the viewfinder image is stabalized, then you also get a stabalized image at the AF sensor. while this might seem trivial, but consider the following. You are taking a shot of a fox at a distance in a field. vertical motion in you holding the lens may cause you to focus incorrectly on the grass in front of the fox. WHile the image may be stabalized and sharp it is focused on the wrong point. Optical stabilization may help this. ALso consider metering, specifically spot metering. Optical stabilization keeps the image in the view finder stable, therefore it keeps the metering points looking at what you are looking at. They may opr may not help you but OS will perform better in these areas as well. IS only resolves camera shake because it is the sensor moving Thank you. I hadn't thought about the focusing. I have the Sigma 18-250 OS HSM and I really like it.

05-07-2010, 12:15 PM	#8
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	Thanks, team. My Sigma 18-250 is on the local truck for delivery in about three hours. Biggest problem with Tamron 18-250? Focus - too often it hunts or gives up, even in daylight. You're calming my buyer's remorse only 36 hours after it set in. Thanks! PS: I have the older Sigma non-OS 17-70. The Pentax SR appears to have significant value with that lens and I occasionally use the macro. I've no plans to replace it with the new version.

05-07-2010, 01:24 PM	#9
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by glanglois You're calming my buyer's remorse only 36 hours after it set in. Thanks! I've had mine for a few months now. It and my FA31 Ltd are the only two lenses I've used since getting the Sigma. I haven't found anything that I don't like about it.

05-07-2010, 01:37 PM	#10
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	It's worth noting that these arenot simply stablized and non-stabilized versions of the same lens. They are actually different optical designs as well (notice the change in max aperture), and the new version also features HSM. I think the jury is still out on which lens will perform better in practice, although I gather some have already their own conclusions. In any case, this question is about lenses, not cameras, so I'm moving it to the proper forum.

05-07-2010, 01:53 PM	#11
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	Is this a good price for the Sig 18-250 OS HSM?? SIGMA 18-250mm 18-250 OS LENS F Pentax K20D K200 K20 - eBay (item 200443003652 end time May-24-10 11:47:44 PDT)

05-07-2010, 02:20 PM	#12
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer Is this a good price for the Sig 18-250 OS HSM?? SIGMA 18-250mm 18-250 OS LENS F Pentax K20D K200 K20 - eBay (item 200443003652 end time May-24-10 11:47:44 PDT) B&H has them for $479.00

05-07-2010, 06:55 PM	#14
hangu Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: NYC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,071	Pardon my ignorance, I did not know you could have both lens stabilization along with sensor stabilization. Wouldn't they impede one another? Or is the effect cumulative, as in, if you were to get 1 extra stop out of the sensor IS and 1 extra stop out of the lens IS, you would get 2 extra stops with the combination? That would be amazing with the K-x's high ISO capabilities.

05-07-2010, 09:48 PM	#15
sterretje Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Roodepoort, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,561	I think that they will counteract each other (like SR on on a tripod), but might be mistaken. You can always switch the SR off to use the OS (and probably vice versa)