[rrwilliams64]

..If not mistaken, I believe the K-5, K-5 II, K-30 and K-50 all provide approx 3-3.5 stops of stabilization? (at least I think that to be correct)

With later releases, was the SR "enhanced"
K-3
K-3 II
K-S2
K-70

Really, I'm looking for the benefit gained (if any) moving from a K-50 to the K-S2 or K-70. And to that end, do those two latter cameras have same SR effectiveness?

thnx in advance ✔

[Adam]

I haven't really been able to tell a difference, to be honest. I compared the K-3 to the K-3 II extensively and couldn't tell them apart.

That said, I think new technology was developed to facilitate effective SR on the full-frame K-1, and I think that was a pretty big success.

[Winder]

K-7 has a delay in the SR. You had to wait a second or two for it to come on and work. It was pretty average.

Its hard to really test SR. I found the K-3 to be good for about 5 or 6 beers. After that it starts to get a little blurry. K-1 is definitely better. It's not just in how many beers it can compensate for, but its fast and you can shoot quick. Previous generations had lag where the camera would focus and you were ready to shoot, but the SR was not ready. The new SR is quick and does a great job. I would expect the K-70 has the same level of performance as the K-1. The smaller sensor is ligher and easier to move.

[npc]

..If not mistaken, I believe the K-5, K-5 II, K-30 and K-50 all provide approx 3-3.5 stops of stabilization? (at least I think that to be correct)

With later releases, was the SR "enhanced"
K-3
K-3 II
K-S2
K-70

Really, I'm looking for the benefit gained (if any) moving from a K-50 to the K-S2 or K-70. And to that end, do those two latter cameras have same SR effectiveness?

thnx in advance ✔

Of those 2 - K-S2 is rated at 3.5 stops and K-70 is rated at 4.5 (with a 135mm lens)
K-3II is rated also at 4.5 but with 85mm lens ... earlier models ratings I think were not done according to the CIPA standard so they are not directly comparable.
K-1 is supposed to be 5 stops at 105mm and is 5 axis stabilization - this tech is still unique to K-1.

[UncleVanya]

Of those 2 - K-S2 is rated at 3.5 stops and K-70 is rated at 4.5 (with a 135mm lens)
K-3II is rated also at 4.5 but with 85mm lens ... earlier models ratings I think were not done according to the CIPA standard so they are not directly comparable.
K-1 is supposed to be 5 stops at 105mm and is 5 axis stabilization - this tech is still unique to K-1.

The testing method changed as indicated and most cross testing done seemed to fit Adam's results. No difference k-3 to k-3ii. The k-70 stated result seems better in that it claims a longer lens.

[Gimbal]

K-7 has a delay in the SR. You had to wait a second or two for it to come on and work. It was pretty average.

Its hard to really test SR. I found the K-3 to be good for about 5 or 6 beers. After that it starts to get a little blurry. K-1 is definitely better. It's not just in how many beers it can compensate for, but its fast and you can shoot quick. Previous generations had lag where the camera would focus and you were ready to shoot, but the SR was not ready. The new SR is quick and does a great job. I would expect the K-70 has the same level of performance as the K-1. The smaller sensor is ligher and easier to move.

The delay is still there, they just mask it better. But you still have to hold steady for a fraction of a second before shooting, otherwise the SR have no idea of which direction you really want it to stabilize in. SR is not for action photo, as in wielding-the-camera-around-while-shooting type of action.

[Lowell Goudge]

Considering I shot this with a K7 at 1/40th of a second with a 510mm lens (K300/4 + 1.7x AF converter how much better does SR need to get?



And a 100%crop at the head



It is all about technique.

I was free standing for this shot, not leaning either the lens or , for that matter any part of my body on anything.

Grant I cannot achieve this every time, every shot, but what it shows is that the better your technique, the more you get rewarded. With poor technique, you will still get a relative improvement with SR than without it, but in absolute terms ( which is what really matters) you cannot achieve the reduction in the rule of thumb 1 / ( focal length X Crop Factor) that you are hoping for

[zapp]

I haven't really been able to tell a difference, to be honest. I compared the K-3 to the K-3 II extensively and couldn't tell them apart.

That said, I think new technology was developed to facilitate effective SR on the full-frame K-1, and I think that was a pretty big success.

K1 has much larger pixels than K3. If we look at blurr per pixel, K1 may perform the same as K3.
And K7 has larger pixels than K3, so it is easier to be happy with K7.

[rrwilliams64]

thnx, all... I was looking to purchase a K-70 this fall (during the "fingers crossed" Black Friday deal days) and was curious as to that camera's SR improvement over the K-50. From the above posts, I can gather there will be some improvement in that regard (naturally, in addition to the other feature-set upgrades)

[Winder]

The delay is still there, they just mask it better. But you still have to hold steady for a fraction of a second before shooting, otherwise the SR have no idea of which direction you really want it to stabilize in. SR is not for action photo, as in wielding-the-camera-around-while-shooting type of action.

The delay is nothing like it was on the K-7. SR was slower than the AF on the K-7, and that was pretty slow. With Sony the SR comes on when you raise the camera to your eye (eye sensor) so the SR would start working even before you started to focus. With the K-7 the SR didn't turn on until the shutter button was pressed half way. Olympus also has IBIS that activates very quickly. It has been a year or more since I played with the EM1, but I never noticed any delay in the IBIS.

With the K-1 the SR is definitely faster than the AF which is all that matters.

[Lowell Goudge]

K1 has much larger pixels than K3. If we look at blurr per pixel, K1 may perform the same as K3.
And K7 has larger pixels than K3, so it is easier to be happy with K7.

pixel size, pixel pitch and pixel density have nothing at all to do with shake reduction and shutter speed.

lets go back to the basis of the rule of thumb, which was for 35mm film cameras shutter speed should be 1/focal length, to get a full frame image when enlarged to 8 x 10, where there is no "acceptable blur"

acceptable blur was defined as a point of light remaining smaller than 0.01 inch in diameter, or what was considered when viewed from arms length as indistinguishable from a true point. (note this is the same criteria used for acceptably sharp when discussing depth of field)

when you consider an APS-C camera, you need to add the crop factor, because the enlargement of the basic image is 50% higher, to get back to an 8 x 10 inch print.

if you are viewing at the pixel level, you are enlarging at much higher magnifications and it is not how you should measure shake reduction efficiency. in this case, you need to add, in the shutter speed calculation (basic rule of thumb) the linear magnification ratio compared to the base 8 x 10 reference used for acceptable sharpness.


you also need to consider that for the K1, being a full frame camera, for example, that the shake reduction may appear to be more effective because the final magnification of the sensor image to the print is less than for a cropped sensor

[THoog]

I was looking to purchase a K-70 this fall (during the "fingers crossed" Black Friday deal days)

I really don't think you are going to see any Black Friday deals on the K-70 - it's too new. K-S2, probably, and maybe some really good deals on K-50s or K-S1s if someone still has them in stock. Unless the K-70 is a major flop (which does not appear to be the case), I think all you will see this year is a slight reduction from MSRP as the "early adopter tax" passes.

[reeftool]

Its hard to really test SR. I found the K-3 to be good for about 5 or 6 beers. After that it starts to get a little blurry.

The best SR comment I've heard yet!

[planteater]

K-70 SR is definitely an improvement over my K-30. Hard to say how much but I now get better results using SR with a Sigma150-500 than the lens OS. With the K-30 I couldn't really tell any difference.

[Adam]

K1 has much larger pixels than K3. If we look at blurr per pixel, K1 may perform the same as K3.
And K7 has larger pixels than K3, so it is easier to be happy with K7.

Except the K-7's sensor isn't that hot at higher ISOs, so the newer bodies will win at the end of the day