Am I the only one who thinks OIS is overrated?

[D13H4RD]

Well, this is going to be controversial to quite a number.

 

But am I the only one who thinks optical stabilization is overrated?

 

First of all, yes, I know what OIS is and I know how it can be useful as I am well aware that it is able to provide a steadier image by compensating for handshake, allowing a slower shutter speed to be utilized. For longer focal lengths, it can be made even more useful as you can stop down the shutter speed to a much lower speed for a lower ISO, resulting in a cleaner image that doesn’t require a lot of destructive NR.

 

It is very useful, but I sometimes feel that people give it too much credit. Personally, I feel that OIS should complement a great sensor and lens combo. I’ve used a lot of cameras with OIS and let’s be real. OIS is great, but it won’t make a camera with a crap sensor and lens combo suddenly be very good. They have to work as a system.

 

This is also why I’m unimpressed at anyone who shuns a camera simply for lacking OIS without taking into account other factors. What if the sensor itself is great at capturing light? 

 

[Himommies]

Are we talking about camera camera's or phones.They are significantly less important on a camera than a phone

[themctipers]

OIS to me is a nice tack on feature, but some people really WANT that nice tack on feature as I assume they take a lot of videos and not photos (i take a lot of photos more than videos, so OIS isn't that important to me)

its like having a webcam on your laptop, its a nice tack on feature, not something required, you might not even use it at all and it will be completely useless to me

 

when i do take a video .. OIS helps a lot. i shake so much while holding my phone, and OIS makes it feel like its only a tiny bit shaky (iphone 6s+)
 

 

[Jurrunio]

Maybe because camera nowadays without OIS usually are crap as a whole? Not OIS's fault, but that's what these people find out.

 

Edit: I'm referring to phone cameras

Edited August 25, 2017 by Jurrunio

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, Himommies said:

Are we talking about camera camera's or phones.They are significantly less important on a camera than a phone

A mix of both.

 

I feel that the effectiveness of OIS really depends on the implementation. LG phones, for example, are known to have very large fields of compensation for their OIS, but others, like HTC, are known to be more shallow.

 

Dedicated cameras don’t benefit much because their larger sensors are much more sensitive to light, coupled with lenses that can be had with larger apertures.

[Himommies]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

I feel that the effectiveness of OIS really depends on the implementation. LG phones, for example, are known to have very large fields of compensation for their OIS, but others, like HTC, are known to be more shallow.

Good OIS stabilization on a phone is really important.It makes a good looking shot come out much easier. OIS is a godsend for armatures.But on other one's like the Red Hydrogen or pretty much any camera over 500.It's not really neccary because everybody knows what there doing

[DrMacintosh]

Smartphones must have OIS. 

 

Anyone who says not having it isn't a big deal is just having buyers remorse. 

[D13H4RD]

I hate to say it.

 

But I still think it should be paired with a good sensor and lens combo.

 

OIS is really useful when done right, but there’s always that one phone where even with OIS, that sensor just isn’t capable enough.

 

Funnily enough, I like the Pixel’s camera, even though it doesn’t utilize optical stabilization.

[captain_to_fire]

Most implementations of optical image stabilization from 2012 until now can sometimes give a video a jello like effect as it tries to compensate for the shaking. The iPhone 7+'s wide angle sensor with OIS is actually very good in stabilization and minimizing the jello effect while recording video. 

 

Which is why Samsung's demo of the iPhone's shaky video comes from the telephoto sensor and not from the wide angle one with OIS. 

[D13H4RD]

Just now, hey_yo_ said:

Most implementations of optical image stabilization from 2012 until now can sometimes give a video a jello like effect as it tries to compensate for the shaking. The iPhone 7+'s wide angle sensor with OIS is actually very good in stabilization and minimizing the jello effect while recording video. 

 

Which is why Samsung's demo of the iPhone's shaky video comes from the telephoto sensor and not from the wide angle one with OIS. 

The iPhone uses a hybrid stabilization system. It’s using OIS while also combining it with DIS to help smooth it out a little.

 

I’m typically not big on DIS, but a few phones manages to pull it off quite well, the iPhone being one of them.

[captain_to_fire]

5 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

The iPhone uses a hybrid stabilization system. It’s using OIS while also combining it with DIS to help smooth it out a little.

 

I’m typically not big on DIS, but a few phones manages to pull it off quite well, the iPhone being one of them.

That's why I think that Samsung comparison is a little bit of bullcrap. That video with a lady in a small boat looks like it's a toddler's hand is the one doing it for th 7+ part. 

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, hey_yo_ said:

That's why I think that Samsung comparison is a little bit of bullcrap. That video with a lady in a small boat looks like it's a toddler's hand is the one doing it for th 7+ part. 

Well, they were comparing stability.

 

The secondary camera on the Note has stabilization while the 7+ doesn’t, at least on a hardware level.

 

Stabilization there is a bigger deal than people realize, simply due to the focal length. When it is longer, it is more susceptible to handshake. The effectiveness of OIS increases with a longer focal length.

 

It’s not really much to do with low-light though. That 1/3.6” sensor with 1-micron pixels coupled with an f/2.4 aperture ain’t gonna do favors for low-light, even with OIS.

[captain_to_fire]

7 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

The secondary camera on the Note has stabilization while the 7+ doesn’t, at least on a hardware level.

 

Stabilization there is a bigger deal than people realize, simply due to the focal length. When it is longer, it is more susceptible to handshake. The effectiveness of OIS increases with a longer focal length.

Even then if you've seen the presentation, it's as if Samsung is not trying to keep the hands steady in the iPhone part. I know if it's normal shaky hands or just moving it up and down.

[D13H4RD]

For the record, I want to say this.

 

I do not think OIS is useless at all. However, I just feel that people are giving it a wee bit too much credit.

 

I’ve seen phone cameras where they can eek out a good image even without stabilization, either through clever computing in combination with a large sensor plus big pixels (Google Pixel) or dual cameras with a monochrome sensor (Essential PH-1, Huawei Honor 8).

 

However, I should also note that these are far from the norm, at least for now. For many single sensor phones, having a steadier “floating” camera module seems to be the way to do to offer extra stability and slightly slower shutter speeds for better low light performance. With all that being said, I think more focus has to be shown on the camera’s actual ability to sense light or how the DSP is able to handle low-light processing. OIS alone can only do so much. They need to work as a system to get the best possible image.

 

This is an exaggeration, but I would honestly prefer having a camera with a good lens and sensor combo that’s not stabilized than having a camera with a crap sensor and lens combo but is stabilized. You can’t polish a turd in the hopes of making it good. Sadly, my Moto Z falls in the latter. Even with stabilization, when I’m not using Night mode, the images come out splotchy and looks so much like a watercolor painting, it’s not even funny. It’s a noisy, splotchy mess, unless I’m using the HDR+ app, which came out a little noisier at times but wasn’t splotchy.

 

I would honestly LOVE to have a phone with a 1/2.3” stacked BSI CMOS sensor with 1.55 micron pixels on a 12.3MP resolution, phase detection dual-photodiode autofocus with a beefy signal processor, 5-axis stabilization with 3-degrees of compensation, an f/2 aperture and an approximately 28mm focal length combined with intelligent computational photography post processing and full-on manual operation of ISO and shutter speed plus focus. It would be an absolute dream for me.

[Mihle]

13 hours ago, hey_yo_ said:

Most implementations of optical image stabilization from 2012 until now can sometimes give a video a jello like effect as it tries to compensate for the shaking. The iPhone 7+'s wide angle sensor with OIS is actually very good in stabilization and minimizing the jello effect while recording video. 

 

Which is why Samsung's demo of the iPhone's shaky video comes from the telephoto sensor and not from the wide angle one with OIS. 

Its DIS that have most jello effect when it comes to stabilizations on phones. I havent seen OIS that have much of a jello effect. (well, compared to DIS at least)

[Mihle]

Ofc. isnt OIS the only thing that matters, but I would rather have something that has OIS and perform 7% worse than another camera that doest have OIS. 
Its the hole package that matters.

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, Mihle said:

Ofc. isnt OIS the only thing that matters, but I would rather have something that has OIS and perform 7% worse than another camera that doest have OIS. 
Its the hole package that matters.

I'll say this though.

 

I am weird, in the sense that I actually like using a turd-quality camera and try to make it shoot good photos.

[AkiraDaarkst]

Depends on the type of camera.  If you are talking about image stabilization inside low profile, thin panel phone cameras... there's not much space inside for good OIS systems.

 

But DSLRs, good size mirrorless, video cameras, and inside lenses, OIS systems are pretty good and come in handy.  You just got to know how and when to use it.  My 70-200 lens from Nikon, and other telephoto lenses, have 3 settings. Off, normal, and active.  Just gotta know which one to use when.

[Zodiark1593]

On 8/24/2017 at 6:20 PM, DrMacintosh said:

Smartphones must have OIS. 

 

Anyone who says not having it isn't a big deal is just having buyers remorse. 

For still shots, lack of OIS can be worked around (some stand or tripod if shutter time is required). Trying to capture steady video without OIS however is an utter PITA.

 

OIS itself isn't very useful, though it helps in squeezing that little bit of extra quality from cramped smartphone cameras.

[DrMacintosh]

13 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

OIS itself isn't very useful, though it helps in squeezing that little bit of extra quality from cramped smartphone cameras.

Well it stabilizes photos, video, and helps with exposure in low light. 

 

Really it is a must for all smartphone cameras these days. 

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

Well it stabilizes photos, video, and helps with exposure in low light. 

 

Really it is a must for all smartphone cameras these days. 

Outdoor daylight shots arguably are not in need of OiS where you can utilize fast shutter speeds (like the only place smartphone cameras are reasonably competent). Though I can agree with low light, that or a tripod really. I have been able to get by with slower shutter speeds, though it took a lot of trying until I got a good shot, or using a table or some other object for stabilization.

 

 

 

Edit: note to self to resize pictures before uploading as Chrome doesn't so anymore, vs Opera.

[D13H4RD]

3 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

Well it stabilizes photos, video, and helps with exposure in low light. 

 

Really it is a must for all smartphone cameras these days. 

It sort of depends on how much compensation it can provide.

 

Some modules like the one featured on the LG V20 can compensate for a very wide range and degree of hand movement, making it very useful. Others, like the HTC 10, offer less compensation due to the lack of space owing to a very large sensor, hence why even that phone took low-light shots that were occasionally grainy and blurry.

 

There are some exceptions to the rule that smartphone shooters need OIS. The Google Pixel is actually a pretty solid example.

[eddieceidde]

You're not the only one. OIS (phone camera) is pretty shit. It doesn't help much in low light, the sensor and aperture is much more important (pixel) and it doesn't do much in videos (pixel and OnePlus 5 eis is so much smoother than the s8/iPhone stabilization with ois) people think ois is magical and will instantly improve your shot, no. No it doesn't.