Pentax Shake Reduction Question

screwdriver222 · 06-18-2016, 08:04 AM

Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths.

Jeff

**Skodadriver** · 06-18-2016, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by screwdriver222

Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths.

Jeff

Not a direct answer to your question I'm afraid, just wanted to point out that there is a tutorial on SR in Pentax forums. No idea how to insert a link here but you can find it under articles then articles/tutorials.
Though you may have already seen the video......

**UncleVanya** · 06-18-2016, 08:38 AM

Opinions seem to suggest it is less effective than optical stabilization as lenses get longer. I have not noticed much difference between effectiveness at short and long focal lengths. The number of stops I'm comfortable using is around 3 with my k-3, but I'm not a critical telephoto user. I've had shots at 1/125 or lower come out fine with my fa* 300 handheld.

Na Horuk · 06-18-2016, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by screwdriver222

Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths.

SR now has some type of standard, rating. You can read up on that for details.
Pentax' in-body SR has the advantage that it works with all your lenses, from manual lenses from 1950 all the way to most modern lenses, from fisheye to telephoto, zoom or prime. Most third party in-lens stabilization is only.. well, in some lenses. Most primes and normal to wide angle lenses simply do not have that feature. Another issue, though not a big problem, is that in-lens stabilization increases the cost of the lens and also adds complexity, adding another feature that might break some day. In-camera SR is safer that regard, because you will be upgrading your DSLR after some years anyway. We haven't had really any problems with SR breaking in Pentax cameras. And once you get the next generation of DSLR, with new SR system - now all your lenses suddenly have that new SR system. Not so with in-lens stabilization, where you will have to buy a whole new lens if you want the next generation stabilization down the line.

From similar discussions on these forums in the past, I think it was found that in-body SR is better for wide angle and normal. But in-lens is better for super telephoto and macro (not macro lenses in general, but for when you focus a lens to 1:1 or such extreme magnifications). The differences were not very big in most cases. Obviously if you have a lens with its own stabilization, its own stabilization should be perfectly suited for that lens and all its specifics, quirks. But it is only in that one lens. In-body SR works on all your lenses.

One other difference is that in-lens stabilization is seen in the viewfinder and can even cause motion sickness ("sea sickness"), while the other is not seen, because it only activates when you take the photo. One drawback of in-body SR is that it can generate some heat, but that is not really noticeable on modern cameras. It could be an issue with some older models on very hot summer days, if you are using SR for a long long time (like in live view). Another interesting weakness is for old manual zoom lenses that do not communicate the focal length to the camera, so you have to set the focal length manually, to just one value. Usually it is best to choose the widest focal length or simply the one you will be using the most. But hey, you still get SR for old manual zoom lenses - only come other brands offer this, and Pentax has been doing it for a long time now.

Rupert · 06-18-2016, 11:18 AM - **2 Likes**

My personal findings are that SR beats OS at long ranges. That is with my Bigma 50-500 HSM OS lens, and may vary with some other lens, of course.
SR is also faster to lock focus.
On my K1 it is even better than with my previous K5IIs, which was already very good at SR.

1/40 handheld f6.3 ISO 500 @ 500mm ........In the same light, I'd say this was a typical result.

We should be very glad that Pentax gives us great SR...unlike some of the others that don't!

Regards!

**UncleVanya** · 06-18-2016, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

My personal findings are that SR beats OS at long ranges. That is with my Bigma 50-500 HSM OS lens, and may vary with some other lens, of course.
SR is also faster to lock focus.
On my K1 it is even better than with my previous K5IIs, which was already very good at SR.

1/40 handheld f6.3 ISO 500 @ 500mm ........In the same light, I'd say this was a typical result.

We should be very glad that Pentax gives us great SR...unlike some of the others that don't!

Regards!

Awesome info. Nice to hear from someone with direct experience.

Rupert · 06-18-2016, 12:43 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Awesome info. Nice to hear from someone with direct experience.

You will be very pleased with the new SR in the K1. It was great in my previous Pentax cameras but is even better now. Combined with the low light abilities plus jackrabbit fast and accurate AF it will get you many shots you would otherwise miss.

1/80 handheld ISO 12800 @ 240mm with the Bigma.

Regards!

**UncleVanya** · 06-18-2016, 01:12 PM

Rupert I'm a long way from being in the market.

Ontarian50 · 06-18-2016, 01:44 PM - **1 Like**

One other fun fact about Pentax's SR system....

We can debate the effectiveness of a 500mm lens stabilized on a Pentax body, compared to a Canon 500mm IS lens, or a Nikon 500mm VR.

But we can't compare the effectiveness of a 50mm f1.4 stabilized on a Pentax to a Canon or Nikon.

There's no comparison. It's only possible on the Pentax.

planteater · 06-18-2016, 04:12 PM

I have extensively (but not scientifically) tested my K30 SR against the Sigma 150-500 OS and found them a pretty even match. I suspect that the SR in a more recent camera would win conclusively.

Rupert · 06-18-2016, 05:23 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Rupert I'm a long way from being in the market.

Well....you just never know the future. I only have the K1 due to my K5IIs falling off a shelf and being severely damaged.

Thanks to Mrs Rupert she remedied my misfortune with the K1.

I can loan her to you for a few days if you want to break your current camera...but she is a handful and can have quite expensive shopping splurges that will leave you better off with the camera you already own!

We just got back from a 5400 mile trip to the Oregon coast.....and as I spent money all along the way she reminded me...."but I bought you a K1 and that new lens!"

Regards!

**BigDave** · 06-18-2016, 07:25 PM - **1 Like**

"but I bought you a K1 and that new lens!"

I have a feeling that you're going to be paying for that lens for a while yet!

Regards,
BD

Rupert · 06-18-2016, 07:34 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by BigDave

I have a feeling that you're going to be partying for that lens for a while yet!

...and I have the feeling you are right.

I have to be on my best behavior and notice I have new duties around the house......they get you coming and going......you can't ever beat them.

biz-engineer · 06-18-2016, 10:14 PM

The answer to the question is Pentax SR effective at all focal length... yes. Although it is very effective within a certain range of shutter speed, due to the natural kinetic momentum of the sensor block. For example, fixing shutter speed between 1/30th and 1/125th sec., regardless of the lens focal length, provides excellent image stabilization.. (you can test this claim by trying). There is not systematic difference of performance between optical and sensor stabilization since they use a single point of measure. If the lens only is stabilized but the camera sensor isn't, stabilization of the light path axis is inaccurate which limit effectiveness, because there is very little leverage to tilt correction. The same holds true if the camera sensor is stabilized but the lens isn't. The best stabilization is the one with both sensor and lens stabilization. However, optical and sensor stab have their pros and cons. With sensor stab , you can mount any lens and benefit from stabilization with virtually any focal length below 600mm, but the view finder and autofocus arn't stabilized, that means sometimes failure to lock accurate autofocus with long lenses since the af module may see unstable target. Regarding optical stab, it's only available with lenses having that feature (usually latest models for Canon/Nikon have that feature but those are more expensive), the advantage is that viewfinder is stabilized and this also ease the task of the auto-focus, especially with long lenses.

screwdriver222 · 06-19-2016, 07:22 AM

The K-1 has up to 5 stops SR and K-3 up to 3,5 stops. I was just wondering in the case of the K-1 whether it would be possible to shoot with a 15mm lens at slow speeds such as 1 or 2 seconds 4 or 5 stops.

I have a K-3 and have found lying down on a large rock with the camera braced and using a sigma 10-20 set at 10mm I could only get 1/8 sec which is one stop.

It may be that SR is better for longer FL lenses say 50mm upwards.

Whats your experience.

06-18-2016, 08:04 AM	#1
screwdriver222 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Plymouth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 139	Pentax Shake Reduction Question Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths. Jeff

06-18-2016, 07:25 PM - 1 Like	#12
BigDave Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Hudson Valley, NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,626	"but I bought you a K1 and that new lens!" I have a feeling that you're going to be paying for that lens for a while yet! Regards, BD Last edited by BigDave; 06-19-2016 at 06:13 PM.

06-18-2016, 10:14 PM	#14
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	The answer to the question is Pentax SR effective at all focal length... yes. Although it is very effective within a certain range of shutter speed, due to the natural kinetic momentum of the sensor block. For example, fixing shutter speed between 1/30th and 1/125th sec., regardless of the lens focal length, provides excellent image stabilization.. (you can test this claim by trying). There is not systematic difference of performance between optical and sensor stabilization since they use a single point of measure. If the lens only is stabilized but the camera sensor isn't, stabilization of the light path axis is inaccurate which limit effectiveness, because there is very little leverage to tilt correction. The same holds true if the camera sensor is stabilized but the lens isn't. The best stabilization is the one with both sensor and lens stabilization. However, optical and sensor stab have their pros and cons. With sensor stab , you can mount any lens and benefit from stabilization with virtually any focal length below 600mm, but the view finder and autofocus arn't stabilized, that means sometimes failure to lock accurate autofocus with long lenses since the af module may see unstable target. Regarding optical stab, it's only available with lenses having that feature (usually latest models for Canon/Nikon have that feature but those are more expensive), the advantage is that viewfinder is stabilized and this also ease the task of the auto-focus, especially with long lenses. Last edited by biz-engineer; 06-18-2016 at 10:19 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Shake Reduction Question	sibyrnes	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	06-02-2016 01:40 PM
Shake Reduction question	beginnerbee	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	06-26-2013 06:40 PM
Shake reduction question	PentaxKX-2011	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	01-23-2011 12:09 PM
K-x shake reduction question	Coby	Video Recording and Processing	2	01-06-2010 09:21 AM
Shake Reduction Question	Workingdog	Pentax DSLR Discussion	25	01-03-2008 11:31 AM

06-18-2016, 08:25 AM	#2
Skodadriver Site Supporter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Hampshire Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 892	Originally posted by screwdriver222 Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths. Jeff Not a direct answer to your question I'm afraid, just wanted to point out that there is a tutorial on SR in Pentax forums. No idea how to insert a link here but you can find it under articles then articles/tutorials. Though you may have already seen the video......

06-18-2016, 08:38 AM	#3
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Opinions seem to suggest it is less effective than optical stabilization as lenses get longer. I have not noticed much difference between effectiveness at short and long focal lengths. The number of stops I'm comfortable using is around 3 with my k-3, but I'm not a critical telephoto user. I've had shots at 1/125 or lower come out fine with my fa* 300 handheld.

06-18-2016, 10:48 AM	#4
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by screwdriver222 Just wondering, is SR most effective at any particular focal lengths or is it just as effective at all focal lengths. SR now has some type of standard, rating. You can read up on that for details. Pentax' in-body SR has the advantage that it works with all your lenses, from manual lenses from 1950 all the way to most modern lenses, from fisheye to telephoto, zoom or prime. Most third party in-lens stabilization is only.. well, in some lenses. Most primes and normal to wide angle lenses simply do not have that feature. Another issue, though not a big problem, is that in-lens stabilization increases the cost of the lens and also adds complexity, adding another feature that might break some day. In-camera SR is safer that regard, because you will be upgrading your DSLR after some years anyway. We haven't had really any problems with SR breaking in Pentax cameras. And once you get the next generation of DSLR, with new SR system - now all your lenses suddenly have that new SR system. Not so with in-lens stabilization, where you will have to buy a whole new lens if you want the next generation stabilization down the line. From similar discussions on these forums in the past, I think it was found that in-body SR is better for wide angle and normal. But in-lens is better for super telephoto and macro (not macro lenses in general, but for when you focus a lens to 1:1 or such extreme magnifications). The differences were not very big in most cases. Obviously if you have a lens with its own stabilization, its own stabilization should be perfectly suited for that lens and all its specifics, quirks. But it is only in that one lens. In-body SR works on all your lenses. One other difference is that in-lens stabilization is seen in the viewfinder and can even cause motion sickness ("sea sickness"), while the other is not seen, because it only activates when you take the photo. One drawback of in-body SR is that it can generate some heat, but that is not really noticeable on modern cameras. It could be an issue with some older models on very hot summer days, if you are using SR for a long long time (like in live view). Another interesting weakness is for old manual zoom lenses that do not communicate the focal length to the camera, so you have to set the focal length manually, to just one value. Usually it is best to choose the widest focal length or simply the one you will be using the most. But hey, you still get SR for old manual zoom lenses - only come other brands offer this, and Pentax has been doing it for a long time now.

06-18-2016, 11:18 AM - 2 Likes	#5
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	My personal findings are that SR beats OS at long ranges. That is with my Bigma 50-500 HSM OS lens, and may vary with some other lens, of course. SR is also faster to lock focus. On my K1 it is even better than with my previous K5IIs, which was already very good at SR. 1/40 handheld f6.3 ISO 500 @ 500mm ........In the same light, I'd say this was a typical result. We should be very glad that Pentax gives us great SR...unlike some of the others that don't! Regards!

06-18-2016, 12:23 PM	#6
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by Rupert My personal findings are that SR beats OS at long ranges. That is with my Bigma 50-500 HSM OS lens, and may vary with some other lens, of course. SR is also faster to lock focus. On my K1 it is even better than with my previous K5IIs, which was already very good at SR. 1/40 handheld f6.3 ISO 500 @ 500mm ........In the same light, I'd say this was a typical result. We should be very glad that Pentax gives us great SR...unlike some of the others that don't! Regards! Awesome info. Nice to hear from someone with direct experience.

06-18-2016, 12:43 PM - 1 Like	#7
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Originally posted by UncleVanya Awesome info. Nice to hear from someone with direct experience. You will be very pleased with the new SR in the K1. It was great in my previous Pentax cameras but is even better now. Combined with the low light abilities plus jackrabbit fast and accurate AF it will get you many shots you would otherwise miss. 1/80 handheld ISO 12800 @ 240mm with the Bigma. Regards!

06-18-2016, 01:12 PM	#8
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Rupert I'm a long way from being in the market.

06-18-2016, 01:44 PM - 1 Like	#9
Ontarian50 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 530	One other fun fact about Pentax's SR system.... We can debate the effectiveness of a 500mm lens stabilized on a Pentax body, compared to a Canon 500mm IS lens, or a Nikon 500mm VR. But we can't compare the effectiveness of a 50mm f1.4 stabilized on a Pentax to a Canon or Nikon. There's no comparison. It's only possible on the Pentax.

06-18-2016, 04:12 PM	#10
planteater Forum Member Join Date: May 2016 Location: Hastings UK Posts: 58	I have extensively (but not scientifically) tested my K30 SR against the Sigma 150-500 OS and found them a pretty even match. I suspect that the SR in a more recent camera would win conclusively.

06-18-2016, 05:23 PM - 2 Likes	#11
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Originally posted by UncleVanya Rupert I'm a long way from being in the market. Well....you just never know the future. I only have the K1 due to my K5IIs falling off a shelf and being severely damaged. Thanks to Mrs Rupert she remedied my misfortune with the K1. I can loan her to you for a few days if you want to break your current camera...but she is a handful and can have quite expensive shopping splurges that will leave you better off with the camera you already own! We just got back from a 5400 mile trip to the Oregon coast.....and as I spent money all along the way she reminded me...."but I bought you a K1 and that new lens!" Regards!

06-18-2016, 07:34 PM - 1 Like	#13
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Originally posted by BigDave I have a feeling that you're going to be partying for that lens for a while yet! ...and I have the feeling you are right. I have to be on my best behavior and notice I have new duties around the house......they get you coming and going......you can't ever beat them.

06-19-2016, 07:22 AM	#15
screwdriver222 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Plymouth Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 139 Original Poster	The K-1 has up to 5 stops SR and K-3 up to 3,5 stops. I was just wondering in the case of the K-1 whether it would be possible to shoot with a 15mm lens at slow speeds such as 1 or 2 seconds 4 or 5 stops. I have a K-3 and have found lying down on a large rock with the camera braced and using a sigma 10-20 set at 10mm I could only get 1/8 sec which is one stop. It may be that SR is better for longer FL lenses say 50mm upwards. Whats your experience.