Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,124
    Thanks
    65
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    I know what the manual says about the technical difference between IS-1 and IS-Auto but in practice, what have members found to be the most useful in what situation? Frankly, I don't see any significant difference.
    E-M1, 12-40mm PRO, 60mm macro, MMF-3
    E-450, 50-200mm SWD, 25mm f2.8, EC-14
    FL-50R

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 117 Times in 102 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    I simply use IS-1, or if the light is good enough, IS-off. Things happen so quickly in the field I don't have time to monkey around with it. I have a myset for fast moving subjects and good light where the ISO is at 800 and IS is off. The rest of the time it is IS-1 and it is really a life saver.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Daniel Bradley For This Useful Post:

    BobT (10-22-2016)

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    That's interesting, Daniel. I just revisited the manual myself, and see that under S-IS Auto it says: "The camera detects the panning direction and applies the appropriate image stabilization."


    I have always thought that that was just poorly worded - I mean, it says "panning," kind of implying that it shouldn't be used for normal hand-hold shaking, which is more random. But it's called "Auto" and it is the default, which is why I have thought it was just poorly worded.


    But now you are saying that you use S-IS1, which, based on its description, certainly sounds more like a random shake remedy. It almost seems like the names should be reversed and the current S-IS1 should be the default. Is that what you are thinking - that the current AUTO really is mainly for "panning"? I'm ready to start using S-IS1, but would appreciate if you would elaborate a little - I mean, you did switch yourself (from the default).
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,566
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 129 Times in 89 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    I would guess that IS-1 is for combating shaking in still images mainly for low light, IS-2 is for when you are definitely panning, and IS-Auto is a general setting to detect the type of movement for those who don't understand the difference. To be avoided I would think.
    I took these yesterday, set on IS-2, but to be honest, I did not see much detectable difference when I turned it off. I do use IS-1 quite often for dimmer light, or using a long tele in most light.
    Cheers,
    Don

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Peeking 1-rsa.jpg 
Views:	118 
Size:	240.8 KB 
ID:	50013


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Chicks On Slicks-rsa.jpg 
Views:	108 
Size:	190.8 KB 
ID:	50012

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Don Baldwinson For This Useful Post:

    RAH (10-24-2016)

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 117 Times in 102 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Hi Rich,
    I don't really even know what the "default" is. I just find that IS-1 works for what I want, even in panning situations. I do believe though that the autofocus works better on birds in flight against a background with the IS off as there is less chance that it will freeze details in the background and throw the AF off. Hard to test systematically, but I have experienced problems of this sort. Part of it is inherent in the Oly on chip AF as opposed to a DSLR's dedicated AF sensor. Oly AF loves background detail. Hopefully that will also be improved in the Mark II.

    That all said, there is a difference in sharpness in good light, that is, if there is enough light to freeze any movement, you are BETTER OFF without IS!

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Daniel Bradley For This Useful Post:

    BobT (10-27-2016),RAH (10-24-2016)

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Thanks guys. I am definitely going to start using IS-1 for my general-purpose IS from now on. Very useful advice!
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    1,192
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 199 Times in 149 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    This is definitely interesting, I too have been using IS-Auto all this time!
    Olympus E-M1 Mk II
    7.5mm f/2.0 - 17mm f/1.2 - 56mm f/1.4 - 9-18mm - 14-150mm II

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Wait, this is killing me! This is the second photography-related thread in about 2 weeks where my problem basically boiled down to not reading the manual (RTFM!). The other one was related to updating the firmware on my E-M10 - you need to have the Oly software installed on your PC to do it - who knew!?! So now I have to start reading manuals? - but real photographers [or fill in any hobby you want here] don't read manuals!
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    1,192
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 199 Times in 149 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    It makes you wonder... what else do you NOT know and have been doing wrong all your life?
    Olympus E-M1 Mk II
    7.5mm f/2.0 - 17mm f/1.2 - 56mm f/1.4 - 9-18mm - 14-150mm II

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Edmunds For This Useful Post:

    RAH (10-24-2016)

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 117 Times in 102 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Reading manuals is for sissies!

    REAL men Never read them

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Daniel Bradley For This Useful Post:

    BobT (10-30-2016)

  16. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,124
    Thanks
    65
    Thanked 18 Times in 13 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    I find the Oly manual (and the Subaru manual) rather "Jinglish". It doesn't have to be like this. Honda do it perfectly. Anyway, from what you guys have said, it seems to me that IS-1 is perfect for the experienced photographer who is practiced at firmly hand holding a camera whereas IS-Auto is more for the less experienced photographer or an action photographer where some camera motion as well as shake can be expected. So IS-1 may be a finer setting compared to IS-Auto. If so, it's a pity Oly doesn't just say so. It may be that Asian thing about not wanting to offend anyone by suggesting that some photographers may not be as practiced as others
    E-M1, 12-40mm PRO, 60mm macro, MMF-3
    E-450, 50-200mm SWD, 25mm f2.8, EC-14
    FL-50R

  17. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 117 Times in 102 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Not sure if that is the philosophy behind it. I think it is more that compensation for horizontal or vertical movement is suppressed in the two panning modes. It makes sense, and lenses with IS built in also often have at least a horizontal panning mode. Auto simply detects larger movements from panning and automatically switches the IS to the "proper" mode. But that again brings up the two questions being asked here, 1. is it effective or does it really make any practical difference as opposed to IS-1, and 2. do you want the camera to decide which mode you want? I can see their thinking on this, but I have yet to see any difference in the real world. It would require systematic testing, not easy to do here, and something I have not yet done.

  18. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    623
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    Default Re: IS-1 versus IS-Auto

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Bradley View Post
    Reading manuals is for sissies!



    REAL men Never read them
    I can't read. Does that make me a real man?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •