gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion Thread | |
jturn00 wrote:
bwcolor wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
Greg7579 wrote:
I keep wanting to bow out of this IBIS discussion because I get accused of repeating myself. Honestly, there is little if anything I can learn from any of you about IBIS or IBIS in combination with OIS
After years of using cameras with no stabilization, stabilized lenses, and IBIS…
In virtually all cases IBIS is a plus with no significant minuses. (You can always turn it off.)
While many of us can sometimes get pretty sharp handheld images at pretty low shutter speeds when we are very careful, not all photographs get to be made with that kind of care, especially when things happen quickly and/or the light is very low. IBIS offers significantly improved stability — and a higher success irate — even when shooting at those shutter speeds that might work sometimes with no stabilization.
Whatever your lowest acceptable shutter speeds is with no stabilization, it becomes lower with IBIS (or OIS with long lenses). When shooting street I try not to go lower than 30 seconds with a non-stabilized moderate wide lens. I’m usually OK at that speed, but I still get some shots that have a bit too much motion blur. With IBIS I can easily push that down to 1/4 seconds or so with the same careful shooting.
You certainly can do photography without stabilized gear — we did it that way for decades. But stabilization has improved things a lot. It is a really useful addition to cameras and is becoming virtually a standard feature of most modern cameras.
No, it can’t help with subject motion, so if you are only subject motion limited, it is still about keeping the exposure short in most cases. But most of also photograph subjects where that isn’t an issue and/or may be open to a bit of subject motion if it works for the image.
On another subject that your post seems to have raised, I’m surprised — though I probably shouldn’t be — at the number of people who disagree and then go on to basically tell you to shut up and go away… rather than attempting to engage your points with objective facts.
Short reminder to all of us. Low resolution allows for longer shutter speeds. 100Mpix can be pretty brutal at low shutter speeds and low might be faster than you think. An easy, occasional fix, if like me you don’t want to carry a tripod, or monopod ,is to toss a clamp in your bag.
I'd like to ask a question to the folks here as someone who currently owns a x-pro2. (ie. no IBIS). My last trip I used the x-pro2 with 35mm f/2 and 23mm f/2. in low light. given the x-pro2's sensor age but no IBIS on that setup, would there be a difference of an x-pro2 sensor shake at the same shutter speed as we think from the GFX. I understand that the GFX is only f4 but given the latest sensor technologies and size, it might be better noise wise at high ISOs. To summarize, is there a difference between sensors and hand holding shake?
I think people have it backwards when they say that a lower resolution sensor allows for shutter speeds. The reason may be subtle, but it is relevant to some of the questions that come up in this regard. (Here I’m speaking of issues related to the photographers ability to hold the camera “steady enough.”)
Let’s say that you have two cameras that are identical, except that one has a higher resolution sensor. Let’s use your XPro2 as one of them and an imaginary XPro Max (yes, I made that up) with a 50MP sensor for the other one. Let’s make two exposures at the same aperture and shutter speed, with the same lens — and let’s hand hold the camera in both cases.
There will be exactly the same amplitude of blur caused by camera motion in both cases. In the latter case the blur will be imaged more accurately, if that makes sense. If you made, say 16” x 24” prints from both images, and then measured the extent of the blur, it would be exactly teh same. Increasing the photo site density does not make the camera more or less stable.
So, if the blur is the same, what is the potential advantage of the higher MP system?
The advantage comes in situations in which blur can be so well controlled that it isn’t the limiting factor. If, instead of hand holding the two cameras, both were made perfectly stable then the higher resolution sensor would have the objective advantage of being able to resolve a bit more detail. (Whether or not you would notice the difference in those 16” x 24” prints is a diffferent — and surprisingly complicated — question.)
A mistake that I think some people make is assuming that if the magnitude of the motion blur is smaller than the distance between photo sites that it won’t matter. But digital sampling ones not work that way.
Bottom line: higher photo sites density sensors do not make a camera more sensitive to motion/vibration/blur. However, if you can further control camera instability (tripod, IBIS, OIS, etc.) then the higher resolution sensor camera may register a bit more detail.
|
