Does Pentax use IBIS and if so any LONG lens users here

<p>I'm curious about Bodies with built in Image Stablization and LONG lenses 400mm to 500mm when used on a tripod.<br>

If the lens is mounted to the tripod it would seam to me the camera body is still subject to shake.<br>

If so can the Image Stablization be used while using a LONG lens and attached to a tripod?<br>

I'm not specifically interested in Pentax bodies but sine the body I am interested in the Olypmus E-2P appears short of long telephoto users I thought I might as here. Looking for a similar way of operating.</p>

<p>I use a Pentax K20D with an A*400/2.8 and TCs that keep me at 680mm or 800m. Its heavy and the tripod is further stabilized with a free weight on the center column holding the gimbal head. That said, I spent considerable time shooting test shots with stabilization on and off to compare. My results showed that I had a greater number of properly focused shots with IS turned OFF as recommended when shutter speed was greater than about 1/125. I noticed slightly better results with it ON for shutter speeds in the 1/30 to 1/90 range. </p>

<p>Different systems using different techniques for in-body stability are <strong>not comparable</strong>. E.g., Pentax uses a true, 6DOF (six degrees of freedom), free-floating sensor approach that can not only handle X-Y-Z 3D, but even rotate, thanx to electro-magnetic positioning (not mechanical). I noted this first-hand when I was newer to my K bodies and pressed the button too hard, literally inducing roll. The Shake Reduction (SR) compensated. Some agree and disagree with Pentax's statements on anywhere from 2 to 4 stops reduction, with most agreeing that 2 to 3 is realistic in most circumstances.<br /> I don't know what Olympus uses, but Olympus is regular criticized for over-stating its capabilities. E.g., the 4 to 5-stop reduction on early E-4xx and E-5xx bodies were definitely overstated and at the most ideal of situations. Olympus doesn't make as wild of claims on newer units, although they are known for their extensive customization compared to other systems. It's well liked and serves it's purpose well. The 4/3rds system is also half the size of 35mm, a full 2x crop, while APS-C is only 1.5x crop, so 4/3rds benefits from reduced size and weight when it comes to stabilization (with the corresponding negatives of a smaller sensor).<br /> Tripods mitigate (and virtually eliminate) the shake on the body or lens, if lens mounted, which includes the shake on the body as a result. The sensor is in the body, which is where in-body stability can be handled. If the body is mounted on a tripod, and the lens is long, less of the "fulcrum" can be cancelled out. Ideally the lens is tripod mounted itself, which stabilizes the lens well, and any shake is similar in the body. But normally a tripod on its own, especially when mounted on the lens, is already reducing shake as much as a free-floating sensor anyway, if not more.<br /> Hence why it's typical to turn off shake reduction (SR) on a Pentax body when the body/lens is tripod mounted. In the case of Olympus, there are additional controls for its in-body reduction system, and there may be a setting for tripods, especially the mounting. I'm not familiar so my apologies, and you should consider posting in the Olympus section or Olympus-centric forums.</p>

<p>Lee, did you use MLU for the slower shutter speeds? The K20D has a quiet shutter and mirror mechanism, but longer FL lenses on tripods are especially subject to vibration effects at slower shutter speeds.</p>

<p>BTW, if you're really wanting the ultimate image stabilization in an SLR-less system, Samsung does offer their SLR-less system with <strong>optical </strong>stabilized (<strong>in-lens</strong>) approach in the <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsungnx10/">Samsung NX10</a>. It's the same Pentax K-mount, APS-C sized lenses with half the thickness of the body thanx to the removal of the SLR, but with new lens options. Ironically, it's no wider or thicker than the Olympus E-P2 at all, only 17mm taller as required the APS-C mount. Just a consideration if you don't have any existing 4/3rds glass, although the darth of optically stabilized lenses does present a challenge, which keeps the reviews of the NX10 down (along with the aging Samsung 14.6MP sensor). Which brings me back to ...<br /> Pentax's newer APS-C sized bodies (K-x and K-7) and lenses are <strong>much, much smaller than Canon or Nikon APS-C</strong> sized bodies and lenses, and hardly much bigger than Olympus 4/3rds these days. This is because, unlike Canon or Nikon, Pentax has not only been very focused on APS-C only -- it is dedicated to such (or large Medium Format for "even bigger," so no ambiguity of APS-C v. full frame) -- so Pentax has a great number of small K-mount <strong>lenses designed only for APS-C.</strong> I know a lot of people look at Olympus for size, but Pentax really makes APS-C not much bigger than 4/3rds at all, and much, much smaller in both bodies and lenses than either Canon or Nikon at APS-C (let alone those two still focus heavily on full frame).<br /> <em><strong>Because it begs the question ...</strong></em><br /> Why are you looking at small, SLR-less bodies when you're going to be putting a huge, honking, long tele lens on it? Sorry, had to ask. I think you might be far better off with a real SLR in your body, based on a system with the most lens choices. If you're shooting at 400-500mm, then Canon and Nikon do come into play, especially for fast lenses and image quality.<br /> Another option is also the Pentax DA* lenses like the 7" long DA* 300 f/4, which then relies on the in-body SR of the Pentax system. That gives you 459mm equivalent 35mm at a f/4 stop, with a much better sensor than what you'll find in 4/3rds. The K-x and K-7 bodies are not much bigger than the E-4xx/5xx/6xx at all. The K-x's 12MP Sony CMOS sensor is well liked, and the K-7's aging 14.6MP Samsung CMOS is no slouch to any Olympus 4/3rds (although it's not the best in the APS-C world).<br>

Just curious. I've never seen anyone looking at the SLR-less bodies when they are thinking about long tele. ;)<br>

I personally use a K20D (not a small body by any stretch, would get a K-7 if I didn't already own the K20D) + 5" DA* 200 f/2.8, which is a nice, fast, 306mm equivalent tele, and then a K-x + light DA 55-300 f/4-5.8 as a slow, non-weather resistant backup.</p>

<p>Well Bryan that was a lot of typing<br>

The EP-2's short registration distance allows the mounting of Canon FD lenses. And I am specifically looking for a body to use with my 400mm f4.5 nFD and 500mm f4.5L S.S.C.<br>

Do you spend any time on the Canon FD forum or the Olympus forums Bryan as many many threads are specifically about using a Micro 4/3 body to work with Canon FD lenses.<br>

And to answer your begging question it's simple. My lenses would cost North of 10,000.00 to replace in Canon EF mount. I have no idea in Nikon I don't twist that way.<br>

The fact that the Samsung NX-10 has in lens IS is specifically why I am not considering it. As is the fact that it is a 1.6X crop factor body also is a knock against it. While it might be a little better in low light or high ISO setting then the Oly the reduced magnification that would result would mean to reach the 20X magnification I need for Birds I would still require a 1.4X extender that would degrade my image rather then being able to use only the sweet spot in the center of the long lenses. Not to mention the loss of a full stop of light. I also do not see any mention of a focus magnification while in Manual Focus mode with the NX-10 also a knock against it. As is the Mono Sound in Movie mode. All things the E-P2 has.<br>

And these knocks are to me more important then the E-P2 not being able to have the Viewfinder and a flash mounted at the same time. Or even the requirement of the accessory viewfinder. Since I am looking for a body to be used with 16X and 20X optic's Flash is of little concern.<br>

I posted here so that I might have a better chance of receiving an experienced answer like Lee W. tendered. It was exactly the type of answer I was hoping for.</p>

<p>To Lee<br>

It is my experience with hundreds of rolls of film shot through these two lenses that a solid tripod and mount (I use a Berleback Wooden tripod and Large Canon Ball head) is not enough to insure a rock steady capture. That one still gets camera shake and it's near impossible to hold a camera perfectly still with a 20X lens attached (as the 500mm mounted on a Micro 4/3 body would be. Same as when I use my 2X-A extender on the back of the lens for Birds) Sense the question about a LONG lens mounted on a tripod.<br>

Thank for you answer Lee it will add to my facts before I make any decisions.</p>

<p>Mark,<br>

Before you decide on whether to use a camera body witn an EVF or with just a rear display, try focusing a long lens with it. If you're using an Olympus camera with an Olympus lens in AF mode and if you trust the AF ability of the cmarea and lens combination then that's fine. Using a system like that for manually focusing long lenses is very different. I just got a Pentax K-x with the kit lens. Manual focusing is surprisingly good but I don't think I would want to rely on the rear display for focusing a macro or long telephoto lens. Image stabilization can't replace proper focusing. I have enough Pentax K mount lenses, M42 lenses and TX, T4 and Tamron lenses that I will be be able to enjoy using them on the K-x. With FD lenses on DSLR bodies, even if you can get correct infinity focus and even if you can get focus confirmation, will you have auto diapgragm control? Where FD lenses are concerned, it might be better to use them on Canon film cameras, have negatives made and then scan the negatives. </p>

 

<p>I use long lenses on my K20D and my experience is similar to Lee W. When I'm using a tripod, I don't always (ok--rarely ;-) get the sharpness I want with SR <strong>off</strong> but I<em> never</em> get it with SR<strong> on</strong>. </p>

<p>Jeff the E-P2 has a EVF that is better then the G-1 according to some reviews. It's just not perminately mounted.<br>

check out some photo's of the E-P2<br>

<strong>http://tinyurl.com/2964zub</strong><br>

I have no worries about using the lenses in stop down mode since the EVF will ramp up to match the loss in light. I have talked with the guys who do this with the Panasonic's and it works quite well. And since I rarely stop down the long glass past f8.0 it shouldn't be a problem to focus and shoot without touching the aperture.<br>

Keep in mind I'm talking about taking photo's of Birds while the rig is sitting on a tripod. Not chasing a tight end down a football field.</p>

<p>When I have some time and a lot of patience I will attach a 400mm Vivitar lens to my K-x and try to capture some bird photos in my back yard. Today I took my first test shots with a manual focus 135 in plain K mount. </p>

<p>The nature of in-body image stabilization is such that it is less useful as the lens gets longer, simply because the same slight movement requires more range of movement than the sensor can provide.</p>

<p>With 400 or 500mm lenses you might as well have it off, in my view.</p>

<p>Pentax says to turn SR off when on a tripod. In my experience this is exactly right. If I get a lousy shot on a tripod, it's usually because I left image stabilization on. I have absolutely no idea why this is the case, but it is.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Pentax uses a true, 6DOF (six degrees of freedom),</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Like heck it does.</p>

<p>It uses a motion control system capable of three degrees of freedom, pitch, yaw, and roll. That's all.</p>

<p>But attempts to measure whether it actually uses the roll capability show that it does not. This is OK, because roll only dominates pitch and yaw at outrageously short focal lengths, such as 14mm, so in real life, you'll never notice that it's not there.</p>

<p>Huh? You mean the sensor doesn't move X-Y-Z as well? When I cleaned my K100D, I clearly noted it did. ;)</p>

<p>Bryan, I don't think it moves in the Z direction. If I remember Pentax propaganda correctly it only moves in X and Y, and rotates for roll compensation.</p>

<p>Something else, the Sammy NX10 does not have a K mount. It uses a proprietary NX mount that Samsung designed, with lenses that are electronically controlled for both focusing and aperture close down.</p>

<p>Mark, I use a light travel tripod for the rare tripod work I do, and leave the IS on, which gives me sharper results. Do note that my tripod work is generally with short lenses at long shutter speeds, so IS will perform differently that with long lenses at short shutter speeds.</p>

<p>And something else for you to consider: The 4/3 12MP sensors are very taxing on a lens's resolution; are you sure your lenses are up to it? Using some of my old lenses on an Oly E-PL1 I found that not all of them faired well, while I'd had no issues when using them on my Pentax K10D with a 10MP APS-C sensor. Something to think about.</p>

<p>Miserere --<br>

Well, I'll take your word for it. But I could feel some Z when I cleaned my K100D. And it definitely rolled. In reality, the "free floating" seems to handle many different axes. I guess my point was that some sensors only have X-Y movement, no roll, no Z. But maybe I should leave it to those who know the exact technical details.<br>

As far as the NX mount, I understood it to be K-mount, but with no in-body SR. If it does lack pins, that's my ignorance, and thank you for correcting me. I guess I should have limited my commentary here.</p>

 

<p><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3835437">Miserere </a>I understand your point about lens resolution and the Micro 4/3 format. that said these lenses preform execptionally well on fine grain 50 ASA film like Velvia even with a Doubler behind them. So I have a hard time see how they wouldn't be able to hold up to the 12-14Mp sensors. And since there are no better options that I know of unless I bought new lenses and if I bought new lenses I would buy the matching body and have AF as well.</p>

<p>Thanks you for relaying your experiance using a tripod.</p>