Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-21-2010, 05:21 AM   #16
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533 did an excellent study with details results on the in-body SR versus lens image stabilisation:

Image Stabilization Test: Olympus E-520 SLR Body -!

It is a worthwhile reading!

Using a Olympus E520, they repeated identical tests with in-body IS and lens IS. The executive summaryis:
"The bottom line on the Olympus E-520's IS system is that it turned in a superb performance, very much on par with the best lens-based IS systems we've looked at. "

"Our test results of the Olympus E-520 showed pretty conclusively, though, that it delivered stabilization performance in the final images very much on par with the best lens-based systems we've tested. [...] One notable difference between sensor-based and lens-based IS systems is the impact both have on the viewfinder image: A lens-based IS system will stabilize the image in an optical viewfinder."

09-21-2010, 05:29 AM   #17
Veteran Member

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
And how does not having correction mechanism for rotation harm the effectiveness of stabilization on both K-x and K-r compared to K-7 and K-5 (with correction mechanism for rotation).
- They can't me equally good and the K-5/K-7 better at the same time...

Remark: Very nice read but for a comparison you need to look at two things, in the link they only analyzed in-body at different situations, no in-lens reference with same method to compare with.

Last edited by JoepLX3; 09-21-2010 at 05:42 AM. Reason: Added remark
09-21-2010, 08:24 AM   #18
Site Supporter
Ahab's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oracle, Az
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 739
Believe what you will. I'm convinced in camera SR is superior to the other kind. The farther away from the sensor the more error that can be introduced, period.
09-21-2010, 02:00 PM   #19
Veteran Member
mysticcowboy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: port townsend, wa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 968
I've tried the Sigma 150-500 with built in optical stabilization and it is better at the long end than the in camera vibration reduction in my K20D. At 150mm I can't tell the difference. Since Pentax doesn't currently make anything longer than 300mm, for Pentax lenses the in camera VR does just fine. For the longer focal lengths, Sigma builds in their own very good in-lens OS.

09-21-2010, 02:17 PM   #20
Veteran Member
hcarvalhoalves's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 836
Pertinent question:

Can't in-body IS and lens IS be used both at the same time? If so, to always have Penta'x SR is a win-win.
09-21-2010, 02:35 PM   #21
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
QuoteOriginally posted by Ahab Quote
Believe what you will. I'm convinced in camera SR is superior to the other kind. The farther away from the sensor the more error that can be introduced, period.
Sensor can only physically move so far and so fast. Closer you are to the focal point, less you have to move.

In addition, you stay closer to the center of the image circle, where there are less abberations and more sharpness.

Last edited by Eruditass; 09-23-2010 at 09:34 PM.
09-21-2010, 05:09 PM   #22
Veteran Member

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by hcarvalhoalves Quote
Pertinent question:

Can't in-body IS and lens IS be used both at the same time? If so, to always have Penta'x SR is a win-win.
If they would know about each other working then this would indeed a win-win!!
- Did you already file patents?
09-21-2010, 06:02 PM   #23
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
There is one obvious pro for the in-body SR : it improves each time you buy a new camera...
Looking back to the K10, we just gained the rotational correction (impossible to correct in-lens!) with the last flagships.
We can always expect something better in the next models (ever heard about the True focus APL feature of the last Hassy?).

Another thing to consider: with the coming advent of high-quality EVF, the stabilized viewfinder argument will soon become moot...

And in-lens OS can do some strange things to the OOF part of the pic, as it modifies the lens' optical formula...

09-21-2010, 06:05 PM   #24
Site Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
I really think that the in lens stabilization gives Nikon and Canon a pass to charge phenomenal prices for image stabilized lenses, making it hard for people to decide if the "really need it" or not. Stabilization increases the size of lenses and adds to the complexity of their design.

I think that with very long lenses, there may be some benefit to in lens versus in body stabilization, but otherwise not. I generally get three to four stops of benefit -- as much as I need.

As to in lens being used with in body IS, it doesn't work, at least at this point. They try to compensate for each other and end up creating havock. Maybe someday it will be an option (albeit an expensive one).

Video does seem to do better with in body IS versus in lens stabilization. Not sure why. However, it does add an electronic sound to the recording if not using an external microphone.
09-22-2010, 07:57 AM   #25
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
QuoteOriginally posted by hcarvalhoalves Quote
Pertinent question:
Can't in-body IS and lens IS be used both at the same time? If so, to always have Penta'x SR is a win-win.
At present, the lens IS and in-camera IS do not work together.

You must switch off/disconnect one IS.
09-23-2010, 07:34 PM   #26
Veteran Member
soppy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Gainesville
Posts: 348
The main selling point with in-body for me is the simple fact that now all of my legacy lenses have VR or OS or whatever its called in each of the lenses. My $60 50mm has shake reduction, which is really nice to be able to have.
09-23-2010, 07:52 PM   #27
Veteran Member
Reportage's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 739
my main issue is that for Pentax SR, have to half press the shutter and WAIT for the SR icon to turn on and cannot see the effect in the VF. For IS have to WAIT till the image is stabilised in the VF.

isnt there any where the anti shake is on all the time?
09-23-2010, 08:52 PM   #28
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
I'm with the other IBIS (in-body IS) heads. IBIS aka SR means stabilization for shorter and older and less expensive lenses. An enlarger lens on a cheap bellows; my 12mm Vemar fisheye; ALL my nearly 100 manual glass (mostly old primes) -- they're stabilized, at no extra cost of cash or weight. Such a deal!
09-23-2010, 09:13 PM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,107
QuoteOriginally posted by hcarvalhoalves Quote
Pertinent question:

Can't in-body IS and lens IS be used both at the same time? If so, to always have Penta'x SR is a win-win.
I am sorry but it does NOT work that way. When both lens based stabilization AND in body stabilization are used together, they cancel each other out rather than be cumulative. Here is why....
  • As the light passes through the lens, accelerometers senses physical motion in the axis and make micro adjustments on an optical element in order to stabilize the image as its projected on the sensor (within the body).
  • In body stabilization has another set of accelerometers that again sense the same physical movement, and again make micro adjustments in the position of the sensor in the X and Y plane (up and down) to mitigate the motion.
  • However when used together in series - light passes through the lens and is stabilized, and projected on to the sensor, which is then being moved to again stabilize the image - this actually just serves to un-stabilizes the image by essentially injecting motion back into the image.
So, in practice - it is one OR the other, BUT NOT both.

Lens based stabilization technology is claimed to be better, and some actual tests shows that it is by a margin (the amount of which is a function of focal length). However, in body stabilization at the sensor, is there and can be applied to all lenses that are mounted. Lens based technology is usually applied to general and telescopic lenses, but usually not wide angle because it is thought to not be needed as much to shorter focal length lenses. Wide angle or short focal length lenses, can benefit from it too - especially at dusk and evening conditions or interior low light conditions. So in practice in body may be slightly less effective of the two, but can be applied to all situations, thus its affects can be applied across the board in all situations.

... hope that helps...
09-23-2010, 09:32 PM   #30
Senior Member
str8talk83's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Naples, FL
Photos: Albums
Posts: 198
I'll chime in from the perspective of a Canon shooter. I believe that IS is better in the lens for some of the reasons mentioned above (it is specialized to that particular lens, you have the stabilized viewfinder etc.). If you can afford it, a system with the lens based IS will deliver better results IMO, especially at longer focal lengths.

Now here's my beef. I shoot with a Canon 17-55 IS lens. Excellent lens optically and has 3 stops of IS, but the build is only "ok" and it's definitely not weather sealed. Used, this lens goes for around $850. For a little over $600 I can get the Pentax DA 16-50mm f/2.8 lens which is better built and weather sealed. Win for pentax in this category.

Canon's 70-200mm f/2.8 IS I lens goes for around 1500 used. It has a 3 stop stabilizer and is a very well rounded lens with slight softness wide open near the longer focal lengths. This lens is weather sealed and built like a tank. The older 70-200 f/2.8 non IS goes for about 900 used and is (slightly) sharper at f/2.8 and built just as well but isn't actually weather sealed. It would be nice to use this lens (or my Sigma 70-200) with the option of the in-body stabilization. While it may not be quite as good, you are getting stabilization of some sort.

canon 400mm f/5.6L. Excellent autofocus, light weight, built very well, no weather sealing (unfortunately). There are currently no options for IS on this lens. If an IS lens is every released I bet that it will be twice as expensive (AKA unafordable) I could go with the Canon 100-400 for the IS, but would be compromising in IQ and it is around $400 more expensive. It doesn't come close in autofocus to the prime either. Having in-body IS would give me at least a stop or two of stabilization for my current lens.

The bottom line (from my perspective) is that stabilization is better in the lens, but the price premium causes people like me to have to settle for the non-stabilized lenses because that is what they can afford. With the in body stabilization, you can have stabilization with any lens you want, so you can shoot much cheaper and older lenses with some benefit. I'm not even going into the benefits of being able to shoot short primes with on board SR....This is a huge benefit.

  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, jump, lenses, pentax, pentax help, photography, sr, system, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pros n Cons of the Leaf Shutter Lenses ? knumbnutz Pentax Medium Format 12 11-19-2009 03:15 PM
Limited edition prints - pros and cons? Wombat Photographic Industry and Professionals 5 07-30-2009 04:09 PM
Epson R1800... Pros/Cons Buddha Jones Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 13 05-12-2009 07:14 PM
Pros and cons of the Pentax KM/2000 lesmore49 Pentax DSLR Discussion 109 05-01-2009 11:51 PM
Sigma 28-70 F/2.8 (Pros & Cons) GLThorne Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 03-24-2007 07:10 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:21 PM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]