1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Open letter to Panasonic and Olympus about Dual IS

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Andym72, Jan 6, 2016.

  1. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    Dear Panasonic and Olympus,

    The Micro Four Thirds owners community is getting sick and tired of the two of you adding proprietary extensions to your M43 products, that only work if all components involved come from your brand.

    While all these extensions could be added to the Micro Four Thirds standard and would strengthen the standard, by making them proprietary you are in fact weakening the standard!

    These actions, by both companies, has hit a new level of ridiculousness this week. You now each have a Dual Image Stabilisation system (optical + sensor shift), that is independent and totally incompatible with the others!

    THIS HAS GOT TO STOP!

    Please, pool your resources, work together and add just one method of Dual IS to the Micro Four Thirds standard, so that this important innovation is interoperable between camera bodies and lenses from both your companies.

    Regards, Andy
     
    • Agree Agree x 18
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. atarijedi

    atarijedi Mu-43 Regular

    64
    Dec 13, 2015
    I'm fine with it. IBIS is great, but it's not as good as OS when it comes to telephoto, and the same vice versa. When the 2 are combined, you get even better image stabilization.

    Obviously, it would be great with both companies had IBIS, and OS lenses.
     
  3. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    As of today, both companies DO have IBIS and OIS lenses. And both have Dual IS systems now too. What's infuriating is they are incompatible!
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  4. atarijedi

    atarijedi Mu-43 Regular

    64
    Dec 13, 2015
    What do you mean they are incompatible? If I put a Panasonic OIS lens on an Olympus EM1, the EM1 will use both OIS and IBIS to stabilize the image, you can even turn one off, or have priority for one of them.
     
  5. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 Top Veteran

    765
    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    What he means is that if you take, for example, the new Oly 300mm lens and put it on the E-M1, BOTH stabilization systems will work together giving you even more IS than either system by itself. Same if you put the Panny lens on a Panny body. BUT, if you mix an Oly body with a Pany lens or a Pany lens on an Oly body, then you only get ONE IS, not dual working together.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    No, you dont. With a Panasonic OIS lens, the EM1 will use EITHER OIS, OR IBIS. Never both. That's what the Lens IS Priority setting does - if you have both types of IS, do you prioritise the Lens IS (OIS on, IBIS off), or the Camera IS (IBIS on, OIS off).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. atarijedi

    atarijedi Mu-43 Regular

    64
    Dec 13, 2015
    Are you sure about that? I have a Sigma lens, and its OS works with the EM1, even through the metabones adapter. I mean, the EM1 even has modes specifically to handle this situation (lens IS priority). I believe the EM5mk2 and the EM10mk2 also have it.
     
  8. atarijedi

    atarijedi Mu-43 Regular

    64
    Dec 13, 2015
    From my tests, the Lens IS priority isn't turning anything off. It is giving priority, so if the lens makes the image stable, than IBIS won't kick in, but if the lens doesn't make it stable enough, than IBIS does kick in.

    I'm going to email Olympus to find out exactly what is going on.
     
  9. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    If you are using a non-native lens through a third party adapter, then frankly all bets are off regarding how various combinations of IS settings will work!
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2016
  10. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    I'm quite sure both do not work together. You cannot simply enable both: both detect a movement, through gyroscopes, both fully compensate for it and you'd end up with twice the compensation.

    About the original topic: defining a standard takes money and, more important, time. This also means to test much more lens/bodies combinations for example. So I get why they did not do it (yet). Pana IBIS is also a recent addition available only on a few models with GH4 being one notable exception.

    Finally you usually define standards when things are mature enough, not before when you still do not really know what works and what not. Dual IS, in the consumer camera world, is a really new thing (less then 1 year old?).

    I agree that it would be great to have a shared standard.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. drocco

    drocco Mu-43 Regular

    Sorry, but you are wrong. Historically, if you had IS in lens and body with both IS systemas active, they work against each other. So you may get more shake than without IS. You had to turn off either the camera or lens IS.

    Last year Panasonic introduced the GX8 with what they call Dual IS. So if you have a Dual IS capable camera by Panasonic, you can activate the IS in the body and in the lens. The IS systems will recognize each other and improve image stabilization. This only works with Panasonic lenses. With the 300/4 Olympus introduced their own version of Dual IS which only works if the body and lens are from Olympus (well, there is only one lens by Olympus with IS anyway).

    So Dual IS in Panasonic variety only works between certain Panasonic bodies and lenses. Dual IS of the Olympus variety only works between certain Olympus bodies and lenses. When you mix body and lens from both manufacturers you can only use in-body IS or lens-IS.



    Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Robstar1963

    Robstar1963 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    895
    Jun 10, 2011
    Isle of Wight England UK
    Robert (Rob)
    I think it inappropriate to state at the beginning of your thread that " the micro four thirds community is getting sick ...."
    You do not speak for the community and no one has made you or voted you as a spokesman
    I do not get the feeling that this is a widespread feeling and some of the responses you are getting would also suggest that this is not the case
    By all means vent your feelings but I for one have no such feeling
    Yes it would be very nice for the systems on Olympus and Panasonic camera bodies to be fully compatible but these are (despite the joint M4/3 project) competing companies with two very different systems developed independently of each other as a result of two very different approaches which both have their own inherent advantages and disadvantages born out of the bias each has placed on their target consumers ( Panasonic having erred towards video features and Olympus having erred towards still priorities)
    Perhaps they can develop mutually compatible standards in the longer run but I think that it may have only just dawned on both companies that this might be possible having developed different dual stability systems
    I have read elsewhere that there may be compatibility between the Olympus Sync IS and the New Panasonic 100 - 300mm - but this is apparently only "gossip" at this time
    If true then perhaps this is the first step towards what you are seeking from them but if not I will not be hugely disappointed and certainly would not be angry
    Regards
    Rob
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
    • Sad Sad x 1
  13. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    Good God, have you not heard of exaggeration for comic effect?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 Top Veteran

    765
    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    I think you mean accelerometers. I am fairly certain our cameras and lenses do not have gyroscope in them. ;)
     
  15. atarijedi

    atarijedi Mu-43 Regular

    64
    Dec 13, 2015
    They are gyroscopes, aka angular momentum sensors. Typically MEMS based.
     
  16. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Well, I agree with the OP. And while I'm at it, I'll add lens aperture rings that won't work on Oly bodies. Please get your act together!
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. gr6825

    gr6825 Mu-43 Veteran

    277
    Oct 10, 2012
    I think you nailed the comedy angle with this thread!
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. b_rubenstein

    b_rubenstein Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 20, 2012
    Melbourne, FL
    Since these are publicly held, for profit companies, I see no reason why they would give away proprietary technology. You want the technology, you buy the brand that has it. This whole entitlement attitude is naive, bordering on childish.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Sad Sad x 1
  19. Andym72

    Andym72 Mu-43 Veteran

    330
    Mar 4, 2013
    Reading, UK
    It's not giving away, it's called cross licensing. Companies do it all the time.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. Nathanael

    Nathanael Mu-43 Veteran

    382
    Oct 12, 2015
    They won't make the aperture rings work on olympus bodies and that's 10x simpler than making dual IS system work. There's much more incentive to lock users into their brand than to cross-develop, at least in the short term. You could argue that benefitting the u43 ecosystem as a whole they strengthen their own brand in the long term, but they'd rather go for the sure return now than bank on some idealistic vision of a united u43 utopia where everyone wins and CaNikon is finally defeated.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Wow Wow x 1