Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 3, 2006, 7:18 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
jbarrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 963
Default

Why can't Canon put an Image Stabilizer in a DSLR like Pentax K100D or a P&S like S2IS? Instead of paying hundreds more to have it in your lens? Do they have a good reason or are they only concerned with the bottom line. I am considering getting the K100D over the 400D for this reason, not to mention my budget. Any thoughts on this subject??
__________________
Thanks
Jeff

Canon S2IS & Sony VCL-DH1758 Tele Lens
jbarrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 3, 2006, 7:44 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 185
Default

i was curious also when they came out with the latest update of the rebel xt. they put in other updates so why not IS . it would add a little cost to the camera but thats a lot better then paying more each time you buy a lens .my best guess is it helps canons bottom line to put IS into the lenses.
camerageak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 8:05 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

I'm not sure about pentax, but the sony alpha also has in-body IS. Here's the catch, the sony's PRO 70-200 f/2.8G is priced similiar to the the canon's pro 70-200 f/2.8L IS.

I don't think you should consider the possibility of "saving hundreds if there's in-body IS" . Rather, you should think along the lines of, " All my lenses will have IS".

The advantage of in-lens IS is that it's more effective, especially for telephoto lenses. I think another advantage is having a stable viewfinder when IS is on. I think there are a few more reasons, but I would also like if canon had in-body IS
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 8:45 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

BoYFrMSpChas it.

There is still a question of how well in-body IS works with a long telephoto lens - the type of lens you really need it on. So a search here and on other forums and you'll see it discussed extensively.

People also like to ignore the point about the cost of lenses - as was pointed out you still pay the same for the non-IS lens in the Sony lineup.

But, you also have to understand that lenses with IS have been a competitive advantage for Canon for a while now. If they were to put IS in the body then that advantage goes away. All the money they spent on lens IS is now wasted and suddenly lenses like the 70-200 2.8 IS are no longer necessary - the non-IS takes it's place. And, more importantly EVERY third party lens has IS. Today there's only a couple third party lenses with IS. So, Canon loses that advantage. So, take a moment and look at it from Canon's perspective. Until Sony and Pentax start to threaten Canon's market share why would Canon hurt their own lens sales?

If Sony and Pentax start to hurt the market share then Canon will do something. Otherwise, what benefit would Canon gain by hurting their own lens sales to put IS in the body?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 8:55 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
Until Sony and Pentax start to threaten Canon's market share why would Canon hurt their own lens sales?
Sony Digital SLR is Third Best Seller, Takes Share from Canon

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :-)

Yes, it was only for one month and only for Japan. It was also a new model (which tend to do well anyway). But, it looks like it was well received in Japan. We'll have to wait and see if Sony has some more "tricks up it's sleeve (since we have a new model from Canon and Nikon now, too).

I wouldn't underestimate them though. Marketing is a big part of the game, and they've already got a huge distribution network in place with lots of shelf space.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 10:02 PM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
Sony Digital SLR is Third Best Seller, Takes Share from Canon

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :-)
I wouldn't underestimate them though. Marketing is a big part of the game, and they've already got a huge distribution network in place with lots of shelf space.
Not underestimating them. In fact, I hope they do well. Competition spurs innovation. But, Jim, play Canon for a second. Look how many people shell out the extra $500 for the 70-200 2.8 IS. Look how many people shell out more money for the 17-85 IS or 24-105 IS than competition lenses that are every bit as sharp and a lot less $$$. Because people want IS. How is Canon going to sell all those pretty IS lenses they invested millions of R&D and manufacturing dollars in when the IS in the lens is no longer necessary?

So, give me a good solid argument why they would do it. We're not talking the sensor cleaning or 10mp thing here. We're talking about technology that is going to severely impact the sale of their entire lens line. New 70-200 f4 IS. Hmm - guess they planned on junking that after 6 months and moving the IS to the body.

I'd love to have IS in all my lenses but I'd love a million dollars too and Canon isn't going to give me that either.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 11:43 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

The benefit of built-in IS is hard to ignore when one combine this feature with 3rd party lenses:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...0+500&qf=m
-> Check the 1/125s f/6.3 at 500.0mm telephoto image with the Bigma
But imagine what one can do with a standard 50mm f1.4/1.8 with IS in the body :idea:
Or a Macro (None in Canon - Nikon just came out with one VR macro), but Sony/Pentax have it on every lenses!!!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2006, 11:58 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Default

The IS system canon uses in slr lenses is entirely different to that used in P&S cameras. In the former a group of lens elements move, in the latter it's the sensor that moves.
At long focal length (300mm +) the distance the image moves at the sensor is quite huge - measured in mm which is massive next to the size of the pixels. It's just not practical to have a sensor that moves that far in the camera as it would have to accelerate incredibly fast to keep up with camera shake. The in-lens elements only have to rotate so they don't have to move anywhere near as far. Because of this, in-camera stabilisation in slr sized cameras is not very effective at long focal length (where it is most needed).
In P&S sized cameras this is not an issue as everything is so much smaller. That 300mm lens is actually only around 50mm and the movement of the image on the sensor is orders of magnitude smaller.
I think canon will introduce in-camera anti-shake soon, but it will be compatible with and in no way remove the need for IS lenses, at least telephoto ones. If they don't, they will lose sales.
jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2006, 12:11 AM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

You guys forgot one thing:
The longer telephotos in Canon line required a tripod because they are too heavy to handhold!
-> would the camera shake be minimized anyway if it's already on sturdy platform? :O
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2006, 12:26 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

NHL,
I can answer that definitively.
IS helps with big lenses on a tripod. I notice how you don't say how big. But with the 600mm it absolutely helps. And even more because with the 600mm f4, you're really paying the big bucks for its ability to take a teleconverter at almost no loss. So you are often at even more extreme focal lengths.

Can you use big lenses well without IS? Absolutely, look at every Nikon photographer. They have no choice, and they do quite well. But I definitely think I do better because of IS. At 1200mm, even the wind shakes the camera and degrades quality. IS helps with that very nicely.

I'm with johng on this one.
Canon will do it when they are good and ready to. And market share and the IS lens premium will factor into this.... probably dominate the conversation at Canon headquarters.

If I were them I would absolutely develop a system for it, and perfect it... then put it on the shelf. Then they would be ready to combat that threat quickly if they ever needed too.

jacks,
Interesting idea. What you say makes sense to me, but then again I'm not really qualified to know if you're right or not.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:54 AM.