I wonder how many photographers—digital natives especially but not exclusively—actually run their own tests on their own equipment any more. In Ye Olden Daze it was sort of a given that you'd run tests as needed, or as time allowed...I actually kept a notebook with notes about various tests I'd run on my materials and equipment. It wasn't exhaustive and it wasn't exactly done for "fun" (although sometimes it could be engagingly interesting); it was just a way to keep on top of your technique and continue to understand your materials better. Sometimes, test would uncover problems, necessitating further tests, until you had "chased down" whatever the problem or discrepancy was.
Carl in particular is great about running tests with his own materials and methods; he has a number of standard tests that he's worked out over the years. He's by no means an ordinary photographer, though.
I just don't know if this is a "thing" any more. As in, a thing most people regularly do.
Anyway, I was bored tonight and realized I'd never actually tested the in-body image stabilization (IBIS) of the Olympus OM-D E-M1. So I designed a quick trial just so I could take a look for myself and see how it was doing its job, in my own hands.
Here's the setup—my office as I look to the right from my desk:
Note that I placed the knob of the right-hand drawer more or less in the center of the frame.
In every case I pre-focused, using 10X view to confirm.
First, I braced the camera solidly on the desk and took three shots:
All three crisp, as you might expect.
Also in all these cases, the shutter speed is set to 1/20th sec.
Next, I tried handholding, with IBIS turned on but with good handling technique:
Not quite as crisp, but good.
After that, the acid test. I held the camera with one hand, away from my face, and tried to "tremble," as if I suffered from a tremor, and took three shots:
The third one is a tad soft, but I was surprised at how well the Oly's IBIS performed.
Lastly, because I'm really only interested in how this compares to what I can do without it, I turned the IBIS off and tried my best to handhold three shots steadily:
I was pleased that I did almost as well with the IBIS off as with it on, at 1/focal length (I used the 20mm lens). (That third shot's a little iffy.) But I was really impressed with how well the camera coped with my unsteady hold and deliberate shaking—slightly better than the best I could do without it.
A bit too late I realized I'd shot the first set, the one with the camera braced on the desktop as a lazy man's tripod (the tripod's upstairs in the car)—with the IBIS on. So I ran one more quick test with the camera braced on the desk but with the IBIS turned off:
(I had the exposure set slightly differently which is why the color changed a tad...I could redo it, but see comments above about laziness). I can't tell much difference in the "tripod" shots between IBIS-on and IBIS-off, but maybe your eyes are better than mine. Seems like it's below the threshold of something I'd worry about.
One of the big advantages of running your own tests (or trials as I call 'em) is that it helps settle things in your own mind. You don't have to take things on faith, or on anyone else's word (although we all have reviewers we trust). I'm personally convinced that, for me, one of the real advantages of IS is that is relaxes me, and being relaxed lets me hold the camera steadier. That contention isn't in evidence here. The bottom line, however, is that I've come to trust the E-M1's IBIS, and I think I'm right to do so. Nothing in this trial that gave me cause for concern...or any cause for further trials, either.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2014 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Good turns thou hast done, and good shall come to thee
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
No featured comments yet—please check back soon!
