Jump to content

Fuji X-T3 lack of IBIS - big deal?

dnaeye

By dnaeye
in Fuji X-T3 / Fuji X-T30

 Share

Recommended Posts

dnaeye Newbie

dnaeye

Posted
Posted

I'm looking to buy the X-T3, but every review and comparison with other cameras like the Sony A7III mention how their having IBIS is a critical advantage over the X-T3's lack of IBIS. Is the lack of IBIS such a big deal in either photos or videos? Can OIS in lenses like the kit 18-55 2.4-4 compensate for that? And is the A7III's IBIS that good? Is it better than OIS in Fuji lenses? Keep in mind that I do not want to spend a lot of money on a gimbal and just want to keep my photography simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
mawz Enthusiast

mawz

Posted
Posted

I'm purely a stills guy, so nothing I say applies to video.

I used to be a real cheerleader for IBIS. These days I really don't pay much attention to its presence. I shoot a lot of low-light stuff, but since I'm often shooting non-static subjects (people or vehicles), IBIS adds nothing for me. I moved from an A7II to an X-T1 and have yet to notice the lack of IBIS.

I can count on one hand the number of shots I have got because of IBIS. A couple really good ones, but it's very rare that I look at a missed shot with my Fuji's (or the Nikon's I've been shooting for most of the last 3-4 years) and thought 'I could have got that with IBIS'. 

And yes, OIS is equally effective on the lenses that have it.

Don't get me wrong, if you shoot a lot of low-light static subjects IBIS is invaluable. The video guys love it because it makes their manual lenses a lot better for video. For long-lens work IBIS and OIS are practically a requirement to avoid silly shutter speeds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
Khoji Rookie

Khoji

Posted
Posted (edited)

OIS is generally only really needed in longer lenses, allowing you to handhold them and still get decent pictures without incredibly short shutter speeds. Most of the longer Fuji lenses requiring that have their own OIS built in, and in-lens OIS can be optimized for the specific requirements of that lens, and that is said to be better.

All that being said, OIS has its limits anyway. It isn’t magic. In my experience it will help you get an acceptably sharp shot when you have no other options, but it is still not a substitute for a fast shutter speed if you want really sharp images. My policy is to use the shutter speeds I would choose if OIS wasn’t there unless I have no other options, even if it means bumping up the ISO a little. A genuinely sharp image with higher ISO will almost always look better than an only acceptably sharp image with lower ISO. 

The only exception to all this for me so far has been the 16-55 2.8 lens. Since I use it mostly for reportage and often in very low light situations, I desperately miss the OIS on that lens and would instantly buy a version with OIS, even if it weighed 150g more. I still use it over the optically excellent 18-55 kit lens in those situations because of its better ability to separate the background, but the lack of OIS makes its lead over the kit lens much smaller for low light work. I’m actually considering getting an X-H1 body just to use with that lens, particularly since it has now gone down in price so much. 

Edited by Khoji
Link to post
Share on other sites
Peetz Newbie

Peetz

Posted
Posted

To arrive at my personal opinion about stabilization, I did a series of test shots.

I have two lenses with OIS, the 18-55mm and 10-24mm in Fujifilm. I also have the Sony 10-18mm with OSS stabilization.

Start with 1/60th, 1/30th, 1/15th, 1/8th, 1/4th, 1/2, 1 sec.

All the time, take shots with and without OIS/OSS.

Zoom in to see the micro sharpness. I find I can get sharp shots often around 1/8th, even 1/4 and 1/2.

If the loss of micro-sharpness does not bother you, then, for you, OIS/IBIS is not important.

For photographers like myself, with static subject matter, the stabilization is important because it allows me to use minimum ISO with minimum grain. It is good for landscapes and static shots. For instance, if I am hand-holding a landscape shot (where I don't have a tripod), the OIS lets me shoot down to 1/8th with confidence, even just before sundown.

It can also be good with portraits where the person is very still, like a static shot.

It is not good for action shots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • thelostkiwi
      Looking for Full Frame lenses to adapt to GFX

      By thelostkiwi · Posted

      I also use a Nikon to GFX Fringer and it works very well.  24mm f/1.8 vignettes so best used on 35mm mode.  50mm f/1.8 covers the entire frame very well with no issues and is a superb little lens. 105mm Sigma vignettes slightly but is perfectly usable. 300 f/4 likewise the 105.  I have a 70-200 f/20+.8 incoming to test so will report back but I'm expecting a little vignetting.  Even in 35mm mode the image is still 60MP and if you're prepared to manually crop and correct you can get 80-90 MP images.  I also have a C/Y to GFX adapter.  The 24mm Sigma Superwide vignettes strongly. Ditto 28-80 Zeiss Sonnar. 80-200 f/4 Sonnar is perfectly usable. All work fine as 35mm mode lenses.  I also have an M42 adapter which I tried with the Carl Zeiss Jena 135mm f/3.5 with good results. 
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Thank you. I will research it.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Trevor R
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By Trevor R · Posted

      Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • jerryy
      Image correction with GF20-35

      By jerryy · Posted

      Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
×
×
  • Create New...