PDA

View Full Version : GH2 Will the GH3 built-in body 5axis image stabilization?



WielkiCzarnyAfgan
05-23-2012, 07:12 AM
I really hope that GH3 will have built in body stabilization- the Olympus OMD-E-M5 has revolutionary 5axis image stabilization, I really hope that panasonic GH3 will inherit the same I.S. as the Olympus flagship model. On the other hand I am affraid that guys from panasonic have no business to install I.S. built in body, because their best lenses ( including 12-35 f.2.8 ) allready have MEGA O.I.S...
What do you think?

deltoidjohn
05-23-2012, 07:32 AM
There is no way they would do that because then people would buy other lenses. Currently if people want to get IS on their Panasonic m4/3rds camera, they have to buy Panasonic lenses. Putting IS in body would free people up to buy other brand's lenses, particularly for video. This is not a feature they would add just for the sake of matching our competing with Olympus - it is a very deliberate decision not to include it, and to backflip on that decision would a large feature of their other products would be become obsolete.

Gary Huff
05-23-2012, 08:32 AM
A tripod is the best image stabilizer hands down.

mpgxsvcd
05-23-2012, 08:38 AM
There is no way they would do that because then people would buy other lenses. Currently if people want to get IS on their Panasonic m4/3rds camera, they have to buy Panasonic lenses. Putting IS in body would free people up to buy other brand's lenses, particularly for video. This is not a feature they would add just for the sake of matching our competing with Olympus - it is a very deliberate decision not to include it, and to backflip on that decision would a large feature of their other products would be become obsolete.

+1 If you need that feature in body then you need to buy an Olympus camera.

joesiv
05-23-2012, 09:49 AM
Another thing to consider is that Panasonic and Olympus don't "share" technology, Olympus purchases sensors, and in some other cases they may have shared designs (like mirror box/assembly for dslrs, and even flash units), but it seems in all cases the best technology was always kept to ones self, as they are indeed competitors over the same customers. Take for example fast AF, the Pen1/2 could have used the fast AF that the GH1/G1/GF1 had in it's day, Olympus also has better backwards compatibility to their fourthirds lens', there are a lot of examples, wireless flash protocols despite using the same flash units...

Olympus' 5axis stabalization is one of the best things Olympus has to sway customers their way, even if Panasonic offered to pay for it, I doubt Olympus would give it up. Panasonic has their own patents for in body IS, if they were to ever go that route they'd design it themselves. And it would likely not be the same (better or worse) than the Olympus version. Pentax and Sony also have in body IS and they all behave different (for better or worse), it seems that Olympus' new system is the best of the bunch so far.

stefancolson
05-23-2012, 11:07 AM
A tripod is the best image stabilizer hands down.

Until you want to move the camera, at which point it becomes quite possibly the worst image stabilizer hands down.

Gary Huff
05-23-2012, 11:09 AM
Nope, really smooth as a matter of fact.

Oh, you don't mean panning/tilting, do you?

stefancolson
05-23-2012, 11:16 AM
Nope, really smooth as a matter of fact.

Oh, you don't mean panning/tilting, do you?

Noting that panning and/or tilting leave the camera in the same physical location, no that's not what I mean. Sticks are essential for sure, but aren't going to help at all when the camera has to move (like as in to the left, right, forwards, backwards, up, or down). There might even be situations in which you would want to *gasp* either hand-hold the camera or put it on something like a shoulder rig, which would benefit greatly from in-body image stabilization. Isn't that what the thread was about to begin with?

fde101
05-23-2012, 11:27 AM
Sticks are essential for sure, but aren't going to help at all when the camera has to move (like as in to the left, right, forwards, backwards, up, or down).

Stick the sticks on wheels... then you get some of that anyway.

Gary Huff
05-23-2012, 11:30 AM
There might even be situations in which you would want to *gasp* either hand-hold the camera or put it on something like a shoulder rig, which would benefit greatly from in-body image stabilization. Isn't that what the thread was about to begin with?

I think you are overestimating what in-body image stabilization can do, and underestimating what a properly weighted and balanced shoulder mount can do.

stoneinapond
05-23-2012, 11:41 AM
I like sticks on wheels. And a few more years and it'll be meals on wheels.

But yeah, most people misunderstand the issue of in-body or in-lens stabalization.

:bath:

stefancolson
05-23-2012, 11:50 AM
I think you are overestimating what in-body image stabilization can do, and underestimating what a properly weighted and balanced shoulder mount can do.

I know exactly what both are capable of. 35mm is about the limit of what can be reliably operated from the shoulder with the GH2 without OIS. I can hand-hold (no rig) 200mm on a 7D with a stabilized lens and achieve consistently useable footage. There are times where I want to be able to shoot longer lenses from the shoulder, and that's just not possible without some sort of in-camera or in-lens stabilization. It also would save a trip through post-stabilization when shooting handheld (bare camera) with shorter lenses. With in-body stabilization, I could leave the steadicam rig at home about a third of the time and shoot with just the camera and a wide lens.

A lot of times when I go with a camera other than the GH2 it's precisely because of this issue. I can be a lot more nimble with a 5D or 7D a lot of times solely because of IS on Canon lenses. Stabilization in camera would be immensely useful in a variety of different situations.


Stick the sticks on wheels... then you get some of that anyway.

A dolly is not just a tripod though, and has nothing to do with the practical uses of optical stabilization.

m43user
05-23-2012, 11:57 AM
I can be a lot more nimble with a 5D or 7D a lot of times solely because of IS on Canon lenses. Stabilization in camera would be immensely useful in a variety of different situations.



The 5-axis stabilization can stabilize stuff that in-lens can't. To me that makes it even better. Th 5-axis IS is always there too. There may be times when you don't have all the other equipment handy.

stefancolson
05-23-2012, 02:07 PM
The 5-axis stabilization can stabilize stuff that in-lens can't. To me that makes it even better. Th 5-axis IS is always there too. There may be times when you don't have all the other equipment handy.

Exactly! That one addition would turn the GH3 into my go to event, BTS, B-Roll camera, and would make me feel much better about fully investing in the m4/3 ecosystem. It would also breathe new life into all the glass I already have. In-camera stabilization isn't a magic bullet, but it would be very, very welcomed. That being said I don't think it's going to happen...

awelgraven
05-23-2012, 08:44 PM
If you think about it... Panasonic can sell you a stabilization system in camera just once. They can sell multiple lenses with stabilization built in. So it makes sense from a business standpoint. Judging by the OIS 12-35 lens they just announced, they aren't going to put that in the GH3. I would love it, but I doubt it would happen.

That being said... I love working with my shoulder rig.

wgzn
05-23-2012, 10:25 PM
what happens when you WANT subtle moves in camera position? screw all this IS crap. if my camera moves, i know why. if it doesnt, it didnt.

Kevin Lee
05-23-2012, 11:22 PM
I remember when the Ginsu knife was using the word REVOLUTIONARY... great marketing, but truth is, my standard knife set that I keep mechanically sharp will slice better than any Ginsu..... Boy that dates me.

OIS in camera, in lens, sure has its uses, but a mechanical stabilizer... tripods, dollys, sliders, cranes, stedicams... etc... will always outdo OIS/hand held. Simply put, a new in-camera stabilizer will not steer me to or away from any other camera. If they want to put that in the GH3... I won't argue, I'll just turn it off like I do any other OIS.

Heck even when I run and gun on the shoulder, I'll keep my monopod in hand so I can shut off the OIS as much as possible.

daihard
05-24-2012, 02:11 AM
Tripod/Mono Pod/Shoulder Rig/Glide Cam.
Unless your filming your vacations and backyard BBQs... there really isnt much need for in-body stabilization for a few 3rd party lenses.
Anyhow, doing some light reading on in-body IS... The general consensus around the net, is that its no where near as effective as Lens IS. So if ya need, just buy the native lenses support IS.
Some "slick" gear will probably give you more millage then any kinda IS can, and cost half the price.

Shenan
05-24-2012, 10:18 AM
I don't think Panasonic will do this for the GH3 either, given the 12-35 lens with IS and all that, and also because Olympus will have the patent on that particular implementation, however, Panasonic has filed their own patent for an in-body stabilization system, according to this: http://www.43rumors.com/surprise-panasonic-patent-discloses-a-new-in-body-stabilization-system-and-a-rangefinder-styled-camera-too/

John Caballero
05-24-2012, 10:38 AM
zzzzzzzzzzz..........

stefancolson
05-24-2012, 10:40 AM
Tripod/Mono Pod/Shoulder Rig/Glide Cam.
Unless your filming your vacations and backyard BBQs... there really isnt much need for in-body stabilization for a few 3rd party lenses.
Anyhow, doing some light reading on in-body IS... The general consensus around the net, is that its no where near as effective as Lens IS. So if ya need, just buy the native lenses support IS.
Some "slick" gear will probably give you more millage then any kinda IS can, and cost half the price.

The idea isn't that IS replaces the need for traditional support equipment, it's that it allows you to utilize said equipment in a way that wouldn't really work without it. Think longer lenses on shoulder rigs and steadicams, running over rough terrain with a steadicam (at the extreme end this is susceptible to slight vibrations with the lower to mid-end rigs), going handheld with wider lenses, etc. Even with a monopod I want to be able to shoot at 200mm on the GH2, and that's something that gets pretty iffy without IS.

We wouldn't need it if we weren't shooting with CMOS cams that fall apart under any sort of vibration or small sudden movements, but until we get a global shutter in these things IS would go a long way towards making things better.