Oly Image stabelization vs Sony A7 II claim

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by zulfur666, Dec 12, 2014.

  1. zulfur666

    zulfur666 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jan 30, 2014
    The claim from "Review" Sites: "The Olympus version has a mechanical spring which “loses its elasticity with age”. Sony’s solution uses coils and magnets which also have the advantage that it uses less energy and is also very quite than the Olympus version (note that Olympus E-M1 stabilization is quite noisy)."

    Here is the Olympus technology explained from Olympus themselves: :smile:

    http://www.olympus-global.com/en/technology/technology/omd/vol02/

    Floating image sensor

    Turning on the OM-D camera energizes a coil and magnet arrangement that causes the image sensor to float in magnetic suspension. This allows the image sensor to move freely, so it can be rotated or moved vertically or horizontally depending on the movement of the camera. It can also be used to compensate for the gentle vibration that occurs when the user is walking, such as when recording video.

    technology_omd_vol02_ph_03.
     
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    So Sony just miraculously developed this tech simultaneous from Olympus? I don't buy it. Either Olympus contributed to the design, Sony poached it or they just straight up backwards engineered the Olympus design and gave the bird to Olympus since Sony owns 10% stake in the company and is a major sensor contributor. :rolleyes:
     
  3. tosvus

    tosvus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    632
    Jan 4, 2014
    Video tests so far show the sony to be inferior - with a jittery image, so they may indeed be different.
     
  4. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    Some people must have the hearing of Superman if they want me to believe that the OBIS in the Oly bodies is "noisy". I've yet to hear it activate in either the EM5 or EM1 I own.

    You want noisy, use the Nikon in lens stabilization on the 55-200/4-5.6 or the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. TNcasual

    TNcasual Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 2, 2014
    Knoxville, TN
    I only have experience with my new E-M10, but the stabilization is definitely audible. It sounds like faint radio static when the shutter is pressed halfway.
     
  6. ex machina

    ex machina Mu-43 Top Veteran

    806
    Jan 3, 2014
    Northern Virgnia
    Or a tiny fan running, which was my first thought when turning on my friend's spanky new E-M10! It's really quite noticeable and surprised me when I first heard it. Haven't been in a quiet enough environment to hear my other friend's E-M5 but I'd expect the same, pretty sure I've read other comments on this from members asking if everything was cool.
     
  7. Growltiger

    Growltiger Mu-43 Top Veteran

    649
    Mar 26, 2014
    UK
    The original post doesn't give a link to the article that makes this very dubious claim. Just a reference to an unnamed review site.
    The bit about the springs is just funny.
    Is this a hoax?
     
  8. Growltiger

    Growltiger Mu-43 Top Veteran

    649
    Mar 26, 2014
    UK
  9. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Audible is one thing noisy is another.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. zulfur666

    zulfur666 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jan 30, 2014
    not a hoax, here is where they claimed it http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/anti-seismic-japanese-buildings-to-make-the-a7ii-5-axis-system/
    Lesnumerqiues ripped the Sony 5 axis system in many pieces and confirmed the technique is very different from the one used by Olympus. Olympus uses a mechanical spring while the Sony version has magnets and a rotary ball system.
    http://www.43rumors.com/sony-a7ii-5...nveils-it-has-nothing-in-common-with-olympus/

    nonsense of course! I found the statement "Olympus version has a mechanical spring which “loses its elasticity with age”." quite laughable
    as it turns out Olympus's is exactly the same as what Sony now claims they invented if you look at Olympus's tech site I referenced in my first post.
    "....camera energizes a coil and magnet arrangement that causes the image sensor to float in magnetic suspension. This allows the image sensor to move freely,..."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. zulfur666

    zulfur666 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jan 30, 2014
    if you translate the following from http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appare...lisateur-5-axes-explique-en-video-n37409.html

    it translates the portion: Contrary to initial rumors, 5-axis stabilization retained by Sony has nothing to do with that equipping the Olympus OM-D E-M5 OM-D E-M1. This prejudice comes from many technological partnerships signed between Sony and Olympus, but only valid in the medical field. The stabilization of the Alpha 7 It is therefore entirely new. Sony's engineers have started to analyze what they were already doing and suggested that Olympus: systems where travel is managed by springs and magnets. Problem: a sensor 24 x 36 mm, the springs were too cumbersome or not powerful enough, and steering was not specific enough. In addition, a mechanical spring loses its elasticity theory with age. Decision was taken to go to another track.

    Contrairement aux rumeurs initiales, la stabilisation 5 axes retenue par Sony n'a strictement rien à voir avec celle équipant les Olympus OM-D E-M5 et OM-D E-M1. Ce préjugé vient des nombreux partenariats technologiques signés entre Sony et Olympus, mais uniquement valables dans le domaine médical. La stabilisation de l'Alpha 7 II est donc entièrement nouvelle. Les ingénieurs de Sony ont commencé à analyser ce qu'ils faisaient déjà et ce qu'Olympus proposait : des systèmes où les déplacements sont gérés par des ressorts et des aimants. Problème : sur un capteur 24 x 36 mm, les ressorts auraient été trop encombrants, ou pas assez puissants, et leur pilotage n'aurait pas été assez précis. De plus, un ressort mécanique perd en théorie son élasticité en vieillissant. Décision a donc été prise de partir sur une autre piste.


    Again nowhere on Olympus tech site does it talk about springs.... in fact it talks about "energizes a coil and magnet arrangement that causes the image sensor to float in magnetic suspension. "
    http://www.olympus-global.com/en/technology/technology/omd/vol02/

    Now isn't that what Sony just said they did :confused:
    "Instead of springs, Sony opted for a torque coil / magnet, eliminating mechanical aging and allows precise control of the amplitude of the displacement."
    translated from http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appare...lisateur-5-axes-explique-en-video-n37409.html
    Pour faciliter le travail des actionneurs, le capteur est monté sur un berceau mobile, ultra-léger, en alliage de magnésium. Enfin, et c'est le plus surprenant, la fluidité du déplacement est assuré par un système de roulement à billes, directement inspiré des protections antisismiques équipant de nombreux bâtiments au Japon, pays très sujet aux colères de la Terre.
     
  12. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I'm not seeing where this 'springs' story is coming from - the translation's terrible.

    The correct French translation (I'm fairly fluent) would be:

    "Contrary to initial rumours, the 5-axis stabilisation developed by Sony has nothing in common with the technology in the Olympus OM-D E-M5 and OM-D E-M1. This assumption was made due to the numerous technological partnerships between Sony and Olympus, which only apply to their medical imaging departments. The stabilisation system in the Alpha 7 II is entirely novel; Sony's engineers started by analysing what they were already using [in their other cameras] and what Olympus uses: systems where sensor movements are handled by coils and magnets. The problem: on a 24 x 36 mm sensor, the coils required would be too cumbersome or insufficiently powerful to allow accurate control. Furthermore, in theory, mechanical coils lose their elasticity as they age. Therefore, the decision was made to approach things differently. To make things easier for the control units, the sensor is mounted to an ultralight mobile platform made of magneisum alloy. Finally, and most surprisingly, the smooth motion is ensured by a system of ball bearings directly inspired by the anti-earthquake systems used in many Japanese buildings."

    The only weird stentence - which I think is the authors not understanding/incorrectly translating 'coil' (as in electromagnetic coil) from French to English) as 'spring' - is the bit about 'losing elasticity as they age'.

    Short version: The Sony system runs on actual hardware (not floating), while the Oly system floats, like a maglev train.

    That how I interpret this anyway.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
  14. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Given the tolerances required I would have thought mechanical bearing surfaces far too imprecise when the sensor needs to move compared to suspending it in a magnetic field, however thinking about it from a math point of view it makes some sense to me.

    Given the sensor is larger by a factor of 4 (roughly) it's going to weigh a few times as much(it's basically volume of the sensor and the density of the materials used, I have no idea what the real difference would be). Due to the size difference it also needs to move further, faster. The force required to make it move is going to be far larger due to the weight and time requirements thus the coils may become too large to be practical(once you accelerate the sensor in one direction, you also need to stop it and hold it when the required movement is achieved). Given the increase in the force required to move the sensor the increase in force to smooth motion and suspend it may be too high for magnetic damping(levitation) without greatly increasing the force it exerts.

    Thus I suspect the reason they made the move to physical bearing surfaces is a battery life requirement that is only apparent if you increase the scale rather than an actual failure of the technology. It reminds me a bit of the A4 Skyhawk in reverse, if you keep everything light you don't need a larger more powerful engine (which weighs more) to push it, thus you don't need heavier, stronger frames to hold the engine... thus the weight comes down more and more. It really is vicious circle.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    I think you've made a valid point Jonathan. And the IBIS on my E-P5 is barely audible (faint whisper) and then only if you put the camera near your ear. I bet the Sony IBIS is going to be much more audible than the Olympus. 4 times larger sensor will probably be 4 times more audible.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. zulfur666

    zulfur666 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jan 30, 2014
    Thanks for a better translation. You can thank Google :rant:for the terrible translation I posted :smile:
     
  17. DigitalD

    DigitalD Mu-43 Top Veteran

    505
    Jan 10, 2014
    Miami
    David
    This is a very interesting thread. Thanks to all for all the research. Fyi, I received my A7II on pre-order on Thursday and it's silent. If there is a hum it's too soft for me to hear it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. DigitalD

    DigitalD Mu-43 Top Veteran

    505
    Jan 10, 2014
    Miami
    David
    • Like Like x 1
  19. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Could you be persuaded to say, pull the sensor apart...?



    ...I didn't think so, thanks for thoughts in the thread, It seems to work well with legacy glass.
     
  20. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    How would you compare the sound to the E-M1?