Why is Sony IBIS so bad?

[newfoundmass]

My buddy is staying with me for a couple days because he's been dealing with some personal issues and didn't want to be alone. I asked him to bring his new a6600 because I've been wanting to play with it. 

It's probably because I'm used to the GH5 but I was really taken back by how bad the IBIS is. I broke out my old GH3, which doesn't have IBIS, and we compared the two. The a6600 was only marginally better. It handled the micro jitters better, but it was still really rough overall. 

Is this solely a body size issue? Or is there a different reason why their IBIS is so much worse? Is it software related some how? And is there different implementations of IBIS, meaning is Sony's implementation done differently than say Panasonic or Fuji?

[IronFilm]

I reckon a factor in the poor performance for the a7 series is they're trying to squeeze a FF sensor into an APS-C mount. Which doesn't leave much room to "wiggle" about. 

As for the a6x00 series? Perhaps because Sony just sucks now 
 

[noone]

I don't think it is that bad....sure it isn't as good as in the GH5 but the worst camera i have had for stabilization was maybe the GX7 (and it was ok).

I had a couple of Pentax cameras that i loved but two of them probably died way too early due to the stabilization breaking and stopping the cameras from turning on.     I have an old Fuji superzoom and it seems to be ok for IBIS but again, it has a tiny P&S sensor.

 

 

I use one of the first version A7s cameras with NO stabilization and I find it does not NEED it (not for my uses anyway) and it just seems some cameras that have better IBIS are ones that seem to NEED it more.     I used to have a really nice little Sony stabilized 50mm lens years ago ...does ANYONE have something similar yet?     If you NEED the best IBIS, do not pick Sony but there are plenty of other reasons to use them (EG being able to use fast primes as zooms for video and Jpeg stills).

[scotchtape]

My vote is that it is "bad" for video, but I still use mine for most of my work.

Frequently I'll get the IBIS jolting the frame around, even when doing slow pans, trucks or circles.  Stabilization in post works 90% of the time, but sometimes nothing can save you.

I'm almost convinced my camera is defective but I see it in other people's footage too.

It really is bad compared to Panasonic.  That being said, the nightmare that is the Panasonic 35-100mm OIS is still somehow even worse (again, for video).

[Mark Romero 2]

IBIS on the sony is pretty decent for shooting stills. It is pretty mediocre for shooting video, IMHO, and the IBIS on my a6500 doesn't compare well at all to the IBIS on my Panasonic S1.

I think a compounding factor might be the really bad rolling shutter on sony bodies also makes it appear worse.

I wonder if shooting at a faster shutter speed than the 1/180th rule would make the IBIS appear better (at the expense of more staccato movement, of course). Something to try out for the next sunny day.

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, noone said:

but the worst camera i have had for stabilization was maybe the GX7 (and it was ok).

Yeah, but wasn't the GX7 an old camera which was the first first ever Panasonic with IBIS? Not fair to judge Panasonic based on that one. 

[Snowfun]

I hope Sony leave out IBIS on the A7S3. I know they won’t because it is such a consumer selling point. I personally don’t need/want it. In an ideal world they would offer two versions but as we all know this isn’t an ideal world...

Thee are so many options for “proper” video stabilisation out there (from tripods to Steadicams to electronic gimbals etc.) that IBIS isn’t “necessary” although I see why it is desirable for so many people in so many situations (particularly photographic).

[Amazeballs]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah, but wasn't the GX7 an old camera which was the first first ever Panasonic with IBIS? Not fair to judge Panasonic based on that one. 

It had IBIS working only in stills mode, not video.

[Mako Sports]

1 hour ago, Snowfun said:

I hope Sony leave out IBIS on the A7S3. I know they won’t because it is such a consumer selling point. I personally don’t need/want it. In an ideal world they would offer two versions but as we all know this isn’t an ideal world...

Thee are so many options for “proper” video stabilisation out there (from tripods to Steadicams to electronic gimbals etc.) that IBIS isn’t “necessary” although I see why it is desirable for so many people in so many situations (particularly photographic).

Id rather have built in NDs than IBIS and a Mechanical shutter. 

[Inazuma]

You guys are gonna kill me for this but I actually loved the IBIS in my a7 iii. The reason is that it didn't have that locked-down look from better stabilisers. It still looked handheld but without the microjitters from my shaky hands. Cameras with better IBIS also had a lot of drag when you panned or worse, warpy corners. 

[currensheldon]

Sony's IBIS was always OK for shooting stills and only OK for video where you didn't move - at all. But ANY movement (panning, moving around, walking, etc) was worse with Sony IBIS than just not having IBIS at all. It wasn't until I used the GH5 (and then the S1 and S1H) that I realized how amazing and useful IBIS could be. 

Not sure why it is so bad. As of now, Panasonic is the only manufacturer I would use IBIS with in a professional environment. But I am guessing Canon's will be on par. 

[Gregormannschaft]

4 hours ago, Inazuma said:

You guys are gonna kill me for this but I actually loved the IBIS in my a7 iii. The reason is that it didn't have that locked-down look from better stabilisers. It still looked handheld but without the microjitters from my shaky hands. Cameras with better IBIS also had a lot of drag when you panned or worse, warpy corners. 

Totally agreed. I could get a nice handheld feeling without the jitters with Sony's IBIS, exactly what I wanted. I'm not so keen on the movement you tend to get from gimbals and wouldn't want that ultra smooth quality all the time.

[noone]

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah, but wasn't the GX7 an old camera which was the first first ever Panasonic with IBIS? Not fair to judge Panasonic based on that one. 

Sure but why are people judging Sony on THEIR older cameras in many cases (people who have not USED the newer ones in many cases).     The GX7 was the same age as the first (unstabilized) A7 cameras and I could hand hold an A7 better than i could the GX7 due to ISO (I got them on the same day)....since added an A7s (also not stabilzed and to ME it is better than the others).

Another thing i forgot to say.....People should not really compare  how well they can hold a camera they are familiar with of their own against one they just use for a few minutes (or even days).      At least I know that I do better with a camera the more I use it regardless of how well its IBIS or in lens works or even if no stabilization.

[newfoundmass]

38 minutes ago, noone said:

Sure but why are people judging Sony on THEIR older cameras in many cases (people who have not USED the newer ones in many cases).     The GX7 was the same age as the first (unstabilized) A7 cameras and I could hand hold an A7 better than i could the GX7 due to ISO (I got them on the same day)....since added an A7s (also not stabilzed and to ME it is better than the others).

Another thing i forgot to say.....People should not really compare  how well they can hold a camera they are familiar with of their own against one they just use for a few minutes (or even days).      At least I know that I do better with a camera the more I use it regardless of how well its IBIS or in lens works or even if no stabilization.

I'm comparing a late 2019 Sony to a late 2013 GH3... 

All I asked was, why is IBIS on Sony cameras so much worse than everyone else's? Is there different implementations going on? Why does it do almost nothing in video? 

I watched a Potato Jet video this morning. Canon's digital stabilization blows Sony's IBIS away. 

 

What makes everyone else's IBIS so much better? It's just really, really weird. 

[Mokara]

12 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

IBIS on the sony is pretty decent for shooting stills. It is pretty mediocre for shooting video, IMHO, and the IBIS on my a6500 doesn't compare well at all to the IBIS on my Panasonic S1.

I think a compounding factor might be the really bad rolling shutter on sony bodies also makes it appear worse.

I wonder if shooting at a faster shutter speed than the 1/180th rule would make the IBIS appear better (at the expense of more staccato movement, of course). Something to try out for the next sunny day.

Things like IBIS are really intended for stills. You are always going to have issues with rolling shutter if it is not good and use stabilization for video. IMO the best way to do stabilization for video is electronically off an oversampled sensor, provided the processor can cope of course.

[noone]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

I'm comparing a late 2019 Sony to a late 2013 GH3... 

 

 

What makes everyone else's IBIS so much better? It's just really, really weird. 

How long did you use the Sony for?    How long have you used the GH3?     Look, Sony IBIS is NOT as good as IBIS from other brands but it is still not that bad (and for stills ok) but .....never mind, maybe I should start a thread about why is the GH5 so shit at even moderate ISOs...or the GH5s at higher ISOs and that does not have IBIS ....after handling my nephews GH5 for 5 minutes maybe I should do that?? (I do not actually believe that but it is nowhere near as good as even some older cameras).      Or why camera X is rubbish at widget Z.     I would not rely on IBIS (or in lens) with any camera really though it can be very nice to have.

 

[fuzzynormal]

22 hours ago, noone said:

the worst camera i have had for stabilization was maybe the GX7

I had this camera.  Shot a few docs on it.  GREAT camera.  Man, the image was just so pretty.  I'd say better than the GH5 in some regards.  Never messed around with the IBIS though.  No need.  Still, if anyone wants to buy a cheap and awesome 1080 mirrorless cam, I'd recommend giving the GX7 some consideration.  

[Video Hummus]

My theory is that the horrible rolling shutter is a contributing factor in Sony’s perceived IBIS performance.

But then again the S1H does really well....

After using a EM1X briefly in a photo store I’m still blown away at its ability with the correct EIS setting.

[noone]

1 hour ago, fuzzynormal said:

I had this camera.  Shot a few docs on it.  GREAT camera.  Man, the image was just so pretty.  I'd say better than the GH5 in some regards.  Never messed around with the IBIS though.  No need.  Still, if anyone wants to buy a cheap and awesome 1080 mirrorless cam, I'd recommend giving the GX7 some consideration.  

Agreed.    I loved using the GX7.     I regret selling it but I needed the money and it was pretty much a third camera for me so it (and the M43 lenses) had to go.     Stabilization was not its strong point and neither was high ISO but I had other cameras for that.    The tilting EVF was brilliant as a daytime street camera.

 

[JurijTurnsek]

11 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I'm comparing a late 2019 Sony to a late 2013 GH3... 

All I asked was, why is IBIS on Sony cameras so much worse than everyone else's? Is there different implementations going on? Why does it do almost nothing in video? 

I watched a Potato Jet video this morning. Canon's digital stabilization blows Sony's IBIS away. 

 

What makes everyone else's IBIS so much better? It's just really, really weird. 

EIS and IBIS are to different things and should not be compared. I wonder why Sony hasn't implemented EIS in their cams yet, since they should have plenty of know-how from their mobile division (although it is known their two departments were not communicating much).