FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

IBIS on a6600 and a6500?

Author
balacau View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 September 2010
Country: United Kingdom
Location: N-E England, UK
Status: Offline
Posts: 1653
Post Options Post Options   Quote balacau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: IBIS on a6600 and a6500?
    Posted: 16 September 2019 at 15:49
Now that at least there are a few reviews out there, do we know enough to say for sure if the IBIS has been improved on the a6600?

Thanks
Understanding is a 3-edged sword. Your side, their side and the truth.
 



Back to Top
Kilkry View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 August 2008
Country: Sweden
Location: ISO1600
Status: Offline
Posts: 2700
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kilkry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 15:58
"Up to five stops" says imaging-resource about both. Petapixel has an article on the A6600 that says that the IBIS remains unchanged but doesn't go into detail and its title is "..missed the boat".

I haven't heard a lot of positives about the A6500 and particularly its IBIS but it cannot be that bad. Have had both IBIS Sony bodies and non-IBIS ones since 2006 and have always found it to be a really useful feature.
-
Back to Top
balacau View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 September 2010
Country: United Kingdom
Location: N-E England, UK
Status: Offline
Posts: 1653
Post Options Post Options   Quote balacau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 16:17
Well I've certainly found the stabilisation system on A-mount bodies to be very useful indeed.

I'm not sure if the a6600 has missed the boat really but it appears to be an evolutionary improvement rather than a massively ground breaking revolutionary one.

The price of a new a6500 has dropped £150 if I buy local. At just slightly over £1000 it's finally within my budget.

Originally posted by Kilkry Kilkry wrote:

"Up to five stops" says imaging-resource about both. Petapixel has an article on the A6600 that says that the IBIS remains unchanged but doesn't go into detail and its title is "..missed the boat".

I haven't heard a lot of positives about the A6500 and particularly its IBIS but it cannot be that bad. Have had both IBIS Sony bodies and non-IBIS ones since 2006 and have always found it to be a really useful feature.
Understanding is a 3-edged sword. Your side, their side and the truth.
Back to Top
Kilkry View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 06 August 2008
Country: Sweden
Location: ISO1600
Status: Offline
Posts: 2700
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kilkry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 17:54
Originally posted by balacau balacau wrote:

Well I've certainly found the stabilisation system on A-mount bodies to be very useful indeed.

I'm not sure if the a6600 has missed the boat really but it appears to be an evolutionary improvement rather than a massively ground breaking revolutionary one.

The price of a new a6500 has dropped £150 if I buy local. At just slightly over £1000 it's finally within my budget.


Agreed, and they can be had slightly used for even less now. Have been thinking of one for 12/2 , E 30 3,5 and perhaps that new tele and birds (and a little bit because people have been mean to it since the A6400 was released).

But enough about me then, has anyone gathered anything further regarding the A6600 IBIS? : )
-
Back to Top
balacau View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 September 2010
Country: United Kingdom
Location: N-E England, UK
Status: Offline
Posts: 1653
Post Options Post Options   Quote balacau Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 18:14
I'd be very interested to see a direct comparison between the IBIS of the a6500 and a6600 and even comparing that to a full frame body such as the a7-III. I've found a video that more or less compares the a6400 with an OSS lens and the a6500 using its IBIS but nothing comparing the a6500 and a6600 just yet.

Originally posted by Kilkry Kilkry wrote:



Agreed, and they can be had slightly used for even less now. Have been thinking of one for 12/2 , E 30 3,5 and perhaps that new tele and birds (and a little bit because people have been mean to it since the A6400 was released).

But enough about me then, has anyone gathered anything further regarding the A6600 IBIS? : )


Understanding is a 3-edged sword. Your side, their side and the truth.
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3511
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2019 at 07:31
The problem, with IBIS is that any system which mvoes the sensor chip around is limited (1) in the speed it can move, and (2) in the amount; that is, the control servo loop has a limited gain-bandwidth product.
I've used IBIS on A-mount on several cameras (but not the E-mount version), and as an engineer I would expect the same limitations to appear on E-mount, though not necessarily to the same degree if the mechanical arrangements are different.

Essentiually, Ibis can work extremely well in correcting periodic (repetitive) wobble of limited total amplitude and modest frequency. On a 400-500mm lens I can get (some) sharp pictures down to 1/20th second with it which is about 4 stops benefit. But if you can't keep the lens 'nearly' still IBIS will lose it during the exposure and you get a big smeer. And on a physically shorter lens (where the mechanical oscillation is much faster) you won't get 4 stops either because the servo bandwidth is too low.

With IBIS, if you can take useable pictures at fairly slow shutter speeds *without* it, then you will find it helps a lot. If you can't, you'd be better off with OSS.
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
 



Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Online
Posts: 10724
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2019 at 12:39
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

The problem, with IBIS is that any system which mvoes the sensor chip around is limited (1) in the speed it can move, and (2) in the amount; that is, the control servo loop has a limited gain-bandwidth product.
I've used IBIS on A-mount on several cameras (but not the E-mount version), and as an engineer I would expect the same limitations to appear on E-mount, though not necessarily to the same degree if the mechanical arrangements are different.

Essentiually, Ibis can work extremely well in correcting periodic (repetitive) wobble of limited total amplitude and modest frequency. On a 400-500mm lens I can get (some) sharp pictures down to 1/20th second with it which is about 4 stops benefit. But if you can't keep the lens 'nearly' still IBIS will lose it during the exposure and you get a big smeer. And on a physically shorter lens (where the mechanical oscillation is much faster) you won't get 4 stops either because the servo bandwidth is too low.

With IBIS, if you can take useable pictures at fairly slow shutter speeds *without* it, then you will find it helps a lot. If you can't, you'd be better off with OSS.


OSS also has limitations with regard to to limits to the speed of movement as the lens elements have to move. Am I missing something here?

I do not quite understand what you mean by "limited gain bandwith product" with the "servo loop". Going back to my training in electronic engineering (while training for my Bachelor of Engineering) there is nothing fundamental about the limitations that affect the servo loop (a.k.a. negative feedback loop). With the advancement of electronics, the system will react faster then the versions you are used to in A-mount cameras. This is the reason image stabilisation improves over the years.

But you might be talking about something different. You also talk about "amount". If you mean the sensor has limited room to move, you are right. That also is not a fundamental problem, but it still is a limitation. Because the sensor is at the end of the light beam, it has to compensate more and there is just limited space in the camera body (and the bigger the movement, the harder it is to do it quickly). Remember Archimedes who said "Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world"? That is also what happens here. That is why lens based image stabilisation seems to be more efficient with longer focal lengths.

Some recent Sony cameras use the lens OSS and body IBIS in conjunction. However, I cannot find proof that the A6600 does this - the A6500 for sure does not do this.

As most of my APS-C lenses have OSS, I am happy with my A6400
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2917
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2019 at 13:53
The A6500 and A6600 have dual stabilization just like the A7II. See this slide for the A6500 This was a feature of the first 5-axis Sony not anything added later.

Sony choose a simple implementation: OSS handles pitch and yaw, the sensor handles x- and y-axis and roll.



Sigma even supports dual stabilization with their supported lenses on the MC-11. Sigma A-mount OS lenses however don't stabilize properly on Sony's adapters.

Edited by QuietOC - 21 September 2019 at 14:18
Sony A7III NEX-5T HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Online
Posts: 10724
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2019 at 14:38
I stand corrected. I tried to find this information and I found this:
Originally posted by pocket-lint pocket-lint wrote:

With a Sony OSS lens mounted to the A6500, thereofre, the camera passes on image stabilisation to the lens, so IBIS is only beneficial to those who use lenses lacking OSS.

Silly me for trusting pocket-lint
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3511
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2019 at 22:43
Addy, my interpretation is that IBIS is either bandwidth-limited or slew-rate limited; there is a maximum speed at which it can move sideways once it has started moving, and a maximum acceleration (change of speed) it can manage at each end. It can move very quickly when it only has to move a short distance (which it will with a short FL lens with a stable hand), or it can manage the much larger movement needed (for an equal angular wobble) on a longer FL lens. What it cannot do (IME) is to move the longer distance at the same speed/rate (cycles per second) as it does for a short FL or a smaller wobble.

Re dual stabilisation, X and Y axis shift is beneficial for short focus distances (high magnification) only, as the resulting error becomes minimal near infinity. I maybe wrong, but I don't think A-mount cameras can process X and Y shift information, only pitch and yaw. My experience on A-mount is certainly that IBIS is useless (or even worse than useless) in macro because it gives the wrong corrections in a situation where X and Y shift (translation) is much larger at the sensor than pitch and roll (rotation).
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
momech View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2904
Post Options Post Options   Quote momech Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2019 at 01:16
I thought x and y shift were included in the original IBIS with pitch and yaw added later?
I don't pretend to have the expertise to discuss on that level. I can say that shooting hand held macros with my A99 II and IBIS enabled I get far more usable shots than without. With either my Minolta 100/2.8 D or Tamron 180/3.5.   
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2917
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2019 at 01:50
The Konica-Minolta 7D had 4-axis stabilization capability. The marketing material talks about D lenses and the built-in focus distance encoder being used to improve the stabilization.

The focus range limiter in current A-mount bodies works with 5-pin lenses which implies they have an internal focus distance encoder. They don't record this information in the EXIF like they do with D lenses though. The range limiter doesn't show units on the scale with non-D lenses.

Edited by QuietOC - 22 September 2019 at 01:53
Sony A7III NEX-5T HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Online
Posts: 10724
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2019 at 08:43
I think we are in agreement Anthony!

@QuietOC: you have a source for that 4-axis claim, I guess.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3511
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 September 2019 at 11:41
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

I think we are in agreement Anthony!

Always nice to know

I've only recently been able to compare IBIS on A-mount with OSS on E-mount, and I have to say that the OSS beats IBIS hollow in user experience (works through the EVF ...), but both are effective with long lenses and slow shutter speeds. My provisional feeling is that OSS is more tolerant of shake than IBIS, but I haven't carried out testing to prove that.
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > E-mount APS-C

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.