Image Stabilisation Challenge (IBIS and/or Optical OK)

[Skygod44]

We've terrible weather here today, so I thought I'd set a new, handheld photo challenge.

1) Post up to two photos with ≧100mm lens.
2) NO tripods/monopods/beanbags/lying down, leaning on a wall, etc
3) NO sharpening at all in PP
4) NO cropping
5) Post the shutter speed & focal length under each photo (and any other details, if you think they're relevant).

The challenge is to see just how long a lens you can use + a slow shutter speed, and yet get a reasonably sharp image.

This is all about technique improvement, so you can add any hints and tips if you want to.
And photos don't need to be award-winning stuff - don't stress about that.

I'll start, of course.

This is 1/125s F5 200mm (equiv.) shot with Olympus EP7 m43.


And here's as close as I could mimic the first shot, but:
1/10s f11 200mm (equiv.)

Go for it, and may the (rock-steady) force be with you.

Cheers for now,

Simon

 

[Mike_d]

This is the only 100mm lens I have without IS, so it's all up to the R6's IBIS on this one.

 

[Skygod44]

This is the only 100mm lens I have without IS, so it's all up to the R6's IBIS on this one.


View attachment 139849

That's a cracker Mike.

I'm not a Canon user anymore...

Is that a macro lens?

 

[Mike_d]

That's a cracker Mike.

I'm not a Canon user anymore...

Is that a macro lens?

Yes, it's the older EF non-L macro.

 

[West Coast Birder]

1/80 sec with the 500/4 II and 7D Mark II. Full EXIF is below the image. Just tucked my elbows, took a deep breath and shot between heartbeats. Ok, I made up that last bit. I'm not a sniper.

Edit: There is no IBIS as this is with a 7D Mark II. So only the lens IS.

 

[Skygod44]

1/80 sec with the 500/4 II and 7D Mark II. Full EXIF is below the image. Just tucked my elbows, took a deep breath and shot between heartbeats. Ok, I made up that last bit. I'm not a sniper.

Edit: There is no IBIS as this is with a 7D Mark II. So only the lens IS.

View attachment 139852

This is wonderful, Sam

And already, I'm seeing something interesting, and worth noting...
(yes, I'm stating the obvious, but that's sometimes important for clarification)

...a non-L with a close subject
versus
...a massively expensive L-lens with a distant subject

Both of the above resulted in sharp subjects.
So...

Is the true challenge more about distance-to-subject than any kind of stabilisation?

 

[West Coast Birder]

To be fair, the squirrel wasn't that far off. Maybe 20-ish feet?

 

[Skygod44]

...and I've just realised we can think of the thread title as a bit of a pun.

"In Body" could be read as "In (your) Body"...as in, great handheld photo skills.

Furthermore, it's been many years since I sold all my Canon gear, so I kinda forgot about lens-only stabilisation.

But all of these are ok, as far as I'm concerned:

Sensor Stabilisation

Lens Stabilisation

Both of the above...

... or, dare I say it?
Stabilisation Off

 

[West Coast Birder]

...and I've just realised we can think of the thread title as a bit of a pun.

"In Body" could be read as "In (your) Body"...as in, great handheld photo skills.

Furthermore, it's been many years since I sold all my Canon gear, so I kinda forgot about lens-only stabilisation.

But all of these are ok, as far as I'm concerned:

Sensor Stabilisation

Lens Stabilisation

Both of the above...

... or, dare I say it?
Stabilisation Off

Stabilization off! Now, that's a different thing altogether. I'll have to try it next time I trot out the wee beastie.

 

[West Coast Birder]

Simon, do you want me to change the title of the thread to say No Stabilization Challenge?

 

[Skygod44]

Stabilization off! Now, that's a different thing altogether. I'll have to try it next time I trot out the wee beastie.

That's right...

But I'm sure you remember way back, when a "stabilised shot" (without a tri/monopod) simply meant locking your arms by your sides.

It's still not "at arms length", like smartphone shooters have to do...
...so let's include non-mechanical techniques too.

 

[Skygod44]

Simon, do you want me to change the title of the thread to say No Stabilization Challenge?

Nope...
Not for now...

Let's just keep it as is, and see if it develops into something useful, fun, developmental, etc.

 

[Mike_d]

IBIS + lens IS on a cheap, slow lens they say is unusable except under direct sunlight. (RF 24-105 STM)

 

[Skygod44]

IBIS + lens IS on a cheap, slow lens they say is unusable except under direct sunlight. (RF 24-105 STM)

View attachment 139893

Wow
An 1/8 of a second, handheld?

Fantastic

It just goes to show that "they" don't know diddly-squat!

Keep 'em coming.

Cheers for now,
Simon

 

[Skygod44]

I'm so disappointed with this image (which is the best of 15 or so, which I took).

It was cold, raining and dull.
Which shouldn't have been an issue.

But for the life of me, I couldn't get a decent handheld photo of this little kink in a hillside brook.

I'll go back again on another day, but as this thread is for learning, I thought it's the right place to share...


The shutter speed wasn't even very slow...


Cheers for now,
Simon

 

[Lester Wareham]

I'm so disappointed with this image (which is the best of 15 or so, which I took).
View attachment 142313
It was cold, raining and dull.
Which shouldn't have been an issue.

But for the life of me, I couldn't get a decent handheld photo of this little kink in a hillside brook.

I'll go back again on another day, but as this thread is for learning, I thought it's the right place to share...


The shutter speed wasn't even very slow...


Cheers for now,
Simon

So that is what standard focal length for the format?
I take it the lens does not have optical stabilisation so you are just getting the IBIS effect?
Are you sure IBIS is enabled?

When I do the flowing water thing handheld I normally use UWA, like:
land River A07_05-05-24-0003 by Lester W, on Flickr
R6II EF17-40mm f/4L USM 17.0 mm ƒ/16.0 1/15

So that is a lot wider by 50/17 ~= 3x that your shot, ie you would need 1/45 for the same stationary subject sharpness assuming equivalent IBIS and hand shake performance.
I think I have gone as low as 1/10 or 1/8 with the same setup at that is starting to get a best of three situation.

 

[Cliff Hilbert]

I'm so disappointed with this image (which is the best of 15 or so, which I took).
View attachment 142313
It was cold, raining and dull.
Which shouldn't have been an issue.

But for the life of me, I couldn't get a decent handheld photo of this little kink in a hillside brook.

I'll go back again on another day, but as this thread is for learning, I thought it's the right place to share...


The shutter speed wasn't even very slow...


Cheers for now,
Simon

The older you get the more your hands shake.

 

[great grandma Rosalie]

Tanzania - gazelle - not sure what kind - I would have to look up my notes. Taken from a safari vehicle. But these are not a slow shutter speed - that wasn't in the list. It was just in your comments after the list. So this may not qualify

 

[Skygod44]

So that is what standard focal length for the format?
I take it the lens does not have optical stabilisation so you are just getting the IBIS effect?
Are you sure IBIS is enabled?

When I do the flowing water thing handheld I normally use UWA, like:
land River A07_05-05-24-0003 by Lester W, on Flickr
R6II EF17-40mm f/4L USM 17.0 mm ƒ/16.0 1/15

So that is a lot wider by 50/17 ~= 3x that your shot, ie you would need 1/45 for the same stationary subject sharpness assuming equivalent IBIS and hand shake performance.
I think I have gone as low as 1/10 or 1/8 with the same setup at that is starting to get a best of three situation.

Hi Lester,
Thanks for the suggestions...
The lens was set at 26mm, which gives the same FoV as 52mm (basically, "standard") on a 35mm camera body.
It's the mossy rocks which are curious, as I'm sure the details in the moss should be crisp.

I'm going out again today, so I'll check all the camera settings as I didn't take that lens off that body.

But to me, it's a mystery at the moment....

Thanks again,
Simon

 

[Skygod44]

Tanzania - gazelle - not sure what kind - I would have to look up my notes. Taken from a safari vehicle. But these are not a slow shutter speed - that wasn't in the list. It was just in your comments after the list. So this may not qualify
View attachment 142389View attachment 142391

Hello Rosalie,

Thanks for the additions to the thread, and beautiful images they are

As to "qualifying", well, under the numbers 1~5, I added the details of:

"The challenge is to see just how long a lens you can use + a slow shutter speed, and yet get a reasonably sharp image."

But don't worry about it, this time.


Cheers for now,
Simon