Canon IS Modes?.....

[johnf3f]

John, I'm pretty intrigued with the thought that you can get sharp shots with your 800mm at the speeds you mention, but I do acknowledge in certain situations (i.e. puffins in flight) then there is benefit to turning IS off. Unfortunately I'm not able to get down to your neck of the woods anytime soon - is there any way you could describe your technique or maybe show us some of the images you've made?

Obviously, your views go against conventional wisdom, but if I could learn another useful technique then I'm all ears as I generally hand hold my 500mm f4, so any assistance I can get is greatly appreciated

Mike

Bit late for detailed posts tonight - had a couple of drinkies and time for bed!
For birds in flight shutter speeds are normally quite fast so IS does not help - therefore AF improvements are the main priority. As far as Puffins are concerned I freely admit that I am a failure! I have been to Skomer a couple of times but I simply cannot nail the wee beasties. A fellow local tog nails them most of the time with her 400 F5.6 (so no IS option) so it can be done! I have mainly been successful on slightly larger species.

Technique? There is no magic! I do not profess to know all the answers, I just turned IS off (on all my lenses) and images got better due to the improved AF performance. Naturally I had IS in reserve for when I thought it would help - still waiting for it to be handy but it has only been 4 1/2 years so nothing conclusive yet.

Whilst I am quite happy to take flak, it is getting a bit silly on this thread so I would prefer to correspond via PM (conversation?) so that we do not get distracted. If I can help then I am glad to.

P.S. If you like Kingfishers there is a cracking spot not too far from me (7/8 meters range) if you fancy a visit in the winter. Lots of lovely scenery too.

All the best, John.

 

[User.82148]

Please don't keep useful advice to PM, I for one would be interested. Do you guys ever sleep?

 

[johnf3f]

I am a bit of a night owl!

Unfortunately when I put useful advice here the some feel obliged to criticise whether the have any experience or not. Constructive criticism/queries are more than welcome but I have got a bit tired of the negativity from people who obviously don't know what they are talking about - hence my suggestion of PM contact if that is OK with you.

 

[User.82148]

Please add me to your PM messages. I may not have your skill for holding a camera but I am interested in your advice if it improves my hit rate.

 

[Bollygum]

I am a bit of a night owl!

Unfortunately when I put useful advice here the some feel obliged to criticise whether the have any experience or not. Constructive criticism/queries are more than welcome but I have got a bit tired of the negativity from people who obviously don't know what they are talking about - hence my suggestion of PM contact if that is OK with you.

I found your comments fascinating and I will try non IS out for moving targets. I know that I have switched auto focus off at times in the past, as it has been to slow with birds in flight. It never occurred to me that IS may have played a role. I'll be in India shortly, in a region with lots of wildlife, so I may get a chance to test it. I'll only have a 70-200 f2.8 IS, with a 2x and my camera is a Sony A7R3, so there may be differences. My reason for the trip is macro, but I like to dabble in all types of photography

 

[johnf3f]

I found your comments fascinating and I will try non IS out for moving targets. I know that I have switched auto focus off at times in the past, as it has been to slow with birds in flight. It never occurred to me that IS may have played a role. I'll be in India shortly, in a region with lots of wildlife, so I may get a chance to test it. I'll only have a 70-200 f2.8 IS, with a 2x and my camera is a Sony A7R3, so there may be differences. My reason for the trip is macro, but I like to dabble in all types of photography

Try it before you go, I have not used the A7R3 so I couldn't comment on it's AF performance with or without IS.

Whichever you decide - have a great trip!

 

[HoppyUK]

I found your comments fascinating and I will try non IS out for moving targets. I know that I have switched auto focus off at times in the past, as it has been to slow with birds in flight. It never occurred to me that IS may have played a role. I'll be in India shortly, in a region with lots of wildlife, so I may get a chance to test it. I'll only have a 70-200 f2.8 IS, with a 2x and my camera is a Sony A7R3, so there may be differences. My reason for the trip is macro, but I like to dabble in all types of photography

Image stabilisation often has a problem when tracking moving subjects and can work against you, hence the provision of a panning Mode 2 that cuts out stabilisation in any persistent direction of travel. With erratic movement, eg birds in flight, IS off may well be better.

Phase-detect AF acquistion time is minsiscule - with a DSLR it all happens in the milleseconds after pressing the shutter release and the mirror rising. A stabilised image assists in accurate and consistent AF performance, and is particularly helpful with long lenses in positioning the AF point accurately.

 

[Bollygum]

Try it before you go, I have not used the A7R3 so I couldn't comment on it's AF performance with or without IS.

Whichever you decide - have a great trip!

The A7R3 has good autofocus, much better than the R2, and reputedly as good as the Canon and Nikon (but I don't know for sure). This lens does have 2 modes for IS, but I have never used mode 2, as, like you, I forget and life is complicated enough without having to remember yet another thing. The Sony IS is meant to be better than Canon or Nikon as it combines camera IS with lens IS. I don't know for sure as I have never tested it myself. I find that I can get good results at 200mm and 1/20 sec, in fact I do better with IS at 1/20 than I do without at 1/200 sec, so I would expect that non-IS would only be better in good light at 1/200sec or faster.
We'll be photographing fungi most of the time, but we'll be there for a full month and I'm sure that other things will come up. It's a place where leopards are quite common and tigers are active in some areas, not that either of these are known to fly. There are lots of birds too.

 

[Bollygum]

Image stabilisation often has a problem when tracking moving subjects and can work against you, hence the provision of a panning Mode 2 that cuts out stabilisation in any persistent direction of travel. With erratic movement, eg birds in flight, IS off may well be better.

Phase-detect AF acquistion time is minsiscule - with a DSLR it all happens in the milleseconds after pressing the shutter release and the mirror rising. A stabilised image assists in accurate and consistent AF performance, and is particularly helpful with long lenses in positioning the AF point accurately.

How does panning mode 2 work with birds that are taking off and maybe flying up at (say) 45 degrees? Or coming in to land? I don't think that I can use a long lens without IS at less than 1/length, but there seems to be several options. ie IS or non-IS with autofocus or manual focus, so 4 options.

 

[Mr Pid]

How does panning mode 2 work with birds that are taking off and maybe flying up at (say) 45 degrees? Or coming in to land? I don't think that I can use a long lens without IS at less than 1/length, but there seems to be several options. ie IS or non-IS with autofocus or manual focus, so 4 options.

Its a good point - this is my big question also, as with aviation photography planes do not do a perfectly level pass, they are sometimes following a curve, or sweeping round, or barrel rolling, and pulling up (whilst moving of course).

I have emailed CPS to get their input on this point as well.

 

[HoppyUK]

How does panning mode 2 work with birds that are taking off and maybe flying up at (say) 45 degrees? Or coming in to land? I don't think that I can use a long lens without IS at less than 1/length, but there seems to be several options. ie IS or non-IS with autofocus or manual focus, so 4 options.

Canon IS mode 2 detects movement in any persistent direction and will change that direction automatically. The problem comes when direction of travel is constantly changing quickly and IS may not settle in time for every shot so switching it off may be better. A monopod is a good alternative, or tripod/gimbal.

I'm not sure how adapted lenses, eg Canon lenses on Sony bodies, will behave.

Edit: stabilization systems vary, eg Tamron VC uses a three-point mechanism that claims improved performance with diagonal panning.

 

[StewartR]

How does panning mode 2 work with birds that are taking off and maybe flying up at (say) 45 degrees?

The short answer is: unpredictably. Here's the late Chuck Westfall explaining it:

Every Canon SLR lens that has an Image Stabilizer built in has two so-called "gyro sensors" oriented at right angles to each other. With this design, the level of IS functionality is the same whether the camera is in landscape or portrait orientation. When the camera is in portrait orientation, the level of IS functionality is the same whether the hand grip of the camera is on the top or the bottom.

In all of these cases, IS lenses that have a Mode 2 setting operate as follows when Mode 2 is selected: Both gyro sensors sample the direction and amplitude of lens shake simultaneously and continuously whenever the IS system is activated. The resulting data is analyzed by a dedicated microcomputer in the lens, and that microcomputer in turn controls the behavior of the electromagnets surrounding the movable optical components of the IS lens. These electromagnets are also oriented at right angles to each other. If the lens is set to Mode 2 *and* the microcomputer determines that intentional panning is taking place, it shuts off stabilization in the panning direction regardless of camera orientation. If, on the other hand, the microcomputer does not detect intentional panning, then horizontal and vertical stabilization is executed simultaneously, just as it is in Mode 1.

Canon anticipates that in most cases, the camera and lens will be held either horizontally or vertically, in order to keep horizon lines straight in the resulting picture. In such cases, the typical behavior of the IS system is covered by the explanation above. If, on the other hand, the panning direction is diagonal with respect to the orientation of the gyro sensors, and Mode 2 is selected, there is a possibility that the level of panning detected by each gyro sensor will be sufficient to cause the microcomputer in the lens to shut off stabilization in both directions at once. Since the decision to shut off stabilization in Mode 2 is made by the microcomputer, there is no overt way for the photographer to control it.

[Source here]

 

[Mr Pid]

So looking at that explanation, if Mode 2 has the opportunity to switch itself off if it gets it wrong then Mode 1 would be more reliable?...

 

[Bollygum]

I would interpret that as, if in doubt switch it all off. That could be best.

 

[HoppyUK]

So looking at that explanation, if Mode 2 has the opportunity to switch itself off if it gets it wrong then Mode 1 would be more reliable?...

I'm not sure that follows - for panning use mode 2, bearing in mind Stewart's quote above that warns when panning at exactly 45 degrees both IS axes may be switched out and ineffective. For subjects changing direction rapidly, off may be better.

In mode 2, you're basically telling the system to look out for movement in any persistent direction and to not try and correct it, but it takes a moment to do that and when the direction changes quickly IS might make things worse while it makes up its mind.

Bear in mind that stabilisation systems vary, and they're getting better, faster and smarter all the time. But they're not infallible and panning is a known situation where problems can occur - suck it and see

 

[Bollygum]

I suspect that it will depend on what lens combination you use, on your subjects, and on you. Your own expectations may be the most important thing here. Some people will persist with a low hit rate, some won't, and some subjects will.make that worthwhile, some won't.

 

[StewartR]

So looking at that explanation, if Mode 2 has the opportunity to switch itself off if it gets it wrong then Mode 1 would be more reliable?...

I'm not sure that follows - for panning use mode 2, bearing in mind Stewart's quote above that warns when panning at exactly 45 degrees both IS axes may be switched out and ineffective.

I don't think it's quite as straightforward as that.

If the lens detects what it thinks is consistent horizontal movement, it will switch off the horizontal stabilization. If it detects what it thinks is consistent vertical movement, it will switch off the vertical stabilization. If you're panning in a direction which is neither horizontal nor vertical, it might switch neither or one or both off, depending on how the size of the horizontal and vertical components of the motion. At an angle of exactly 45° it seems reasonable to suppose that it will either switch both off or switch neither off, but in the real world where angles aren't exactly 45° it's going to be less predictable.

For subjects changing direction rapidly, off may be better.

Agreed. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Canon 400mm f/5.6, which is designed to be a specialised birds-in-flight lens, doesn't have IS.

 

[HoppyUK]

I don't think it's quite as straightforward as that.

If the lens detects what it thinks is consistent horizontal movement, it will switch off the horizontal stabilization. If it detects what it thinks is consistent vertical movement, it will switch off the vertical stabilization. If you're panning in a direction which is neither horizontal nor vertical, it might switch neither or one or both off, depending on how the size of the horizontal and vertical components of the motion. At an angle of exactly 45° it seems reasonable to suppose that it will either switch both off or switch neither off, but in the real world where angles aren't exactly 45° it's going to be less predictable.

Agreed. I don't think it's a coincidence that the , which is Canon 400mm f/5.6designed to be a specialised birds-in-flight lens, doesn't have IS.

Canon 400/5.6 L doesn't have IS because it was launched in 1993, which is a couple of years before IS came into use.

 

[Mr Pid]

Also - If im shooting birds in flight i tend to crank the shutter speed up, therefore the need to rely on IS isn't really present.

At F5.6 the 400mm is geared towards shooting in good light, which again, implies the ability to use fast shutter speeds.

 

[StewartR]

I don't think it's a coincidence that the Canon 400mm f/5.6, which is designed to be a specialised birds-in-flight lens, doesn't have IS.

Canon 400/5.6 L doesn't have IS because it was launched in 1993, which is a couple of years before IS came into use.

Ooops! You got me there.

But I don't think it's a coincidence that Canon haven't felt the need to update the lens and put IS in it.

 

[User.82148]

Ooops! You got me there.

But I don't think it's a coincidence that Canon haven't felt the need to update the lens and put IS in it.

Well back peddled!

I had the chance to buy a good quality used one from a Guernsey camera shop 3 years ago. Tried it in the morning, said I would think about it and would call. By the time I got a mobile signal from the other side if the island, it had been sold. Even with any added VAT it was a good price. Indecision!

 

[johnf3f]

As I tried to explain, try IS off. Reading articles/discussing how many Angels can fit on the head of a pin etc tell you nothing. Experience of what actually works under field/real conditions is all that matters - hence my dislike if IS.

Just flick the switch and see what happens. To those who are not willing to try and just want to quote articles then I am sorry I cannot help you. To those who are more open minded then just give it a go - I would be very surprised if you are not happy with the results.

To Bollygum - I am sorry but, as I said, I have no experience of your particular camera so it would be unfair of me to comment - but give it a go and see if IS off works for you.

 

[Bollygum]

Birds in flight covers a huge variety of challenges. If I think about it, most of my photos would be either birds taking off or landing, or in (more or less) level flight. I have tried the (nearly) impossible with catching a swallow in flight, but even if I did succeed the swallow would be too small in frame to make a good photo. Big birds, like Eagles or Pelicans are relatively easy as they are big and can't change direction easily and you can shoot them from some distance, so less camera movement required. A major factor is predictability. If you can guess where a bird is likely to be and what direction/speed it is likely to have, then you have a good chance of getting a good photo. I suspect that the IS/no IS argument is very much second to having your camera in the right spot at the right time. I'm sure that many of us remember the diving kingfisher shots, first with a submerged fishtank, and then the guy who spent two years of his life waiting in the same spot for the elusive dive. I doubt that he used IS. Most likely a tripod and high shutter speed.

 

[Mr Pid]

I tried various permutations of IS on/off and different AF areas last night stood in my garden trying to take photos of the Magpies, starlings, seagulls etc. They're sooooooooo fast!

I had to a have a shutter of a min 1/1600 before the body at least was not blurred. IS didn't really help so far as I could make out.

I was however very impressed with the large AF area mode, it seemed to track the bird and keep it in focus really well, only getting confused when they were landing in trees with branches etc. They all still ended up quite small in the frame though.

 

[Gaz J]

As I tried to explain, try IS off. Reading articles/discussing how many Angels can fit on the head of a pin etc tell you nothing. Experience of what actually works under field/real conditions is all that matters - hence my dislike if IS.

Just flick the switch and see what happens. To those who are not willing to try and just want to quote articles then I am sorry I cannot help you. To those who are more open minded then just give it a go - I would be very surprised if you are not happy with the results.

To Bollygum - I am sorry but, as I said, I have no experience of your particular camera so it would be unfair of me to comment - but give it a go and see if IS off works for you.

I've tried IS off and on extensively and sometimes it's a benefit and sometimes not. Your ability to get consistently sharp images at 1/160 with 800mm hand held must be quite unique and no way could I do that however much I practise.

You got any examples of images to demonstrate this?

 

[Mr Pid]

I know this contradicts everything I have been saying, but I found this whilst looking through my pics form Duxford.

I was shooting with the DO ii plus a 2x iii tele attached, without IS, just for fun at the end of the day. I am surprised at the number of usable photos.

This isn't pin sharp by any means but its still perfectly usable......

View media item 13247
I'm still planning to give the IS modes a thorough testing at the next air show though, just to see how the results compare in real world application...

 

[johnf3f]

I've tried IS off and on extensively and sometimes it's a benefit and sometimes not. Your ability to get consistently sharp images at 1/160 with 800mm hand held must be quite unique and no way could I do that however much I practise.

You got any examples of images to demonstrate this?

If you read my posts I have never claimed that I can "consistently" get sharp images at 1/160 sec with my 800mm hand held - I can't! I can get a fair proportion sharp but this is not consistency. At 1/250 sec then the most are fine, as per my previous posts.

If I post images what does that prove? On another forum I showed 2 consectutive images at 1/50 sec hand held with my 7D2, 1.4 Mk3 and 100-400 (at 400mm), so that is 560mm actual and 896 mm field of view and people thought it was sharper with IS off. So what? What matters is what you can do and whether the AF improvements of turning IS off matter for your photography - they do to mine and I have, yet, to find a disadvantage in turning IS off.

I see that you don't live that far from me and I do visit Kidwelly Quay now and again - maybe I can show you the advantages if you like? Perhaps I have already met you there?