# Patent: Canon in-body image stabilization



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 28, 2019)

> A detailed patent showing IBIS from Canon has appeared at the USPTO. This is a broad patent, but one of the embodiments describes IBIS.
> *Canon News breaks down US Patent Application 20190094566:*
> “This patent application attempts to remove backlash from the ultrasonic motors in either an in body stabilization system or an in lens stabilized system without increasing their size.  The IBIS patent that they reference in this patent application is an Olympus patent application 2008-220031.
> it’s a difficult patent to read; however in figure 5A; this shows the image stabilization unit as being inside the camera, and the text surrounding the description of this camera in 5A is as follows:”
> FIG. 5A is a cross-sectional view of the camera system (optical apparatus) including the image pickup apparatus 10 including the image stabilizing...



Continue reading...


----------



## Maximilian (Mar 28, 2019)

Canon IBIS will come. Canon IBIS will work. The only questions are: "When?" and "How much?"


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 28, 2019)

In 2012 Sony bought a 11.5% stake in Olympus for $ 650M in the wake of Olympus accounting scandal which nearly saw the death of Olympus. Sony has reduced its holding to 5% and done well out of the investment. Ever wondered how Sony got it its in-body image stabilisation, yep via Olympus technology. It may well be that Olympus designed the best system and that Canon is looking to license it. Panasonic continued to have in-lens image stabilisation but you could use the lenses on Olympus cameras as well as vis-versa regarding Olympus lenses (without in lens stabilisation). 

In a decreasing market it would be expensive to design & develop every element of a camera and Canon already use sensors for compact cameras from Sony so why not IBIS from Olympus?


----------



## Trey T (Mar 28, 2019)

Canon have been touting their operation as "consolidation" and I can understand that if they contract out the IBIS to Olympus, it would be beneficial to minimize the R&D to implementation schedule.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Mar 28, 2019)

Depending on how the original IBIS patent was written, Canon may find it difficult to design one from scratch without infringing on another patent. You see these infringements all the time with smart phone manufacturers. The last thing Canon would want to do is steal patent ideas and get whacked for it. If there is no easy way around it or it becomes a design nightmare, Canon could seek some patent rights. Just get it done!


----------



## addola (Mar 28, 2019)

jeffa4444 said:


> Ever wondered how Sony got it its in-body image stabilisation, yep via Olympus technology.



Sony's first IBIS was based on sensor-shift stabilization from Minolta. Minolta had 2-axis sensor-shift stabilization. Maybe the 5-axis stabilization have something to do with Olympus, but reviewers seem to suggest that Olympus's IBIS is far superior to Sony's.


----------



## Mikehit (Mar 28, 2019)

addola said:


> Sony's first IBIS was based on sensor-shift stabilization from Minolta. Minolta had 2-axis sensor-shift stabilization. Maybe the 5-axis stabilization have something to do with Olympus, but reviewers seem to suggest that Olympus's IBIS is far superior to Sony's.


I tend to agree, but I suspect the reason that Sony's IBIS is not as good as Olympus/Panasonic is because they are trying to stabilise a sensor 4 times larger.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 28, 2019)

Mikehit said:


> I tend to agree, but I suspect the reason that Sony's IBIS is not as good as Olympus/Panasonic is because they are trying to stabilise a sensor 4 times larger.


Sony 5-axis system is based on the Olympus system, and yes a full-frame sensor is harder to do because of the increased mass.


----------



## Expat Photographer (Mar 29, 2019)

Yeah, Canon is probably finding 'breathing room' between the patents difficult, and potentially very expensive. There's numerous ways Canon could get access to Olympus' technology. Cheaper iteration development based on Olympus' patent in a contractual form, simply licensing it, IP rights access via direct investment, and of course with a current market capitalization of over $31 billion they could just buy it.

And that is where it gets interesting. Olympus, whose new president literally starts the job Monday, just dispelled rumors that they're selling off the camera division. (Sony's sell/re-alignment, Nikon barely missing bankruptcy last year, Olympus under heavy investor pressure, camera companies that aren't named Canon have been having a tough time.)

Now that Olympus is restructuring (remember Olympus is and long has been a medical company, not a camera company) may VERY well be looking to cut a deal with Canon. As Sony needed semi-conductor profits to fuel camera R&D, Olympus needs medical equipment sales to pay for camera R&D. With Hale (senior partner at ValueAct Capital) on the board now, this makes a lot of sense. Floating product R&D this way is something investors, generally, loathe.

"There’s always a chance Canon may be working with Olympus for their IBIS solution, but that simply doesn’t seem likely knowing the way Canon works. "

_sigh_
Business news from business sources. Opinions on a camera's button lay-out from reviewers and rumor sites.
Thus isn't a hard concept.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Mar 29, 2019)

I feel like the RF mount body this year was pushed back because they want to iron this technology out. I look forward to there being a camera with IBIS in the future, but I am not excited about the potential sacrifices Canon will make to incorporate that technology at a particular price point. While I would like IBIS, it's not exactly something I'm obsessing over. It may be wise for Canon to release an EOS-M camera with it first to demonstrate the production capability of the technology. An M5 Mark II with IBIS and a new sensor? That would be brilliant...but wishful thinking.


----------



## Expat Photographer (Apr 4, 2019)

SwissFrank said:


> Well, worked well enough when MSFT funded cloud with OS sales. That said you clearly know business. You work in finance? I do mostly arbitrage software in Asia and before that Europe.



Yeah, as it certainly worked well for Sony's mirrorless move and a good number of other such ventures. One problem investors have with the approach though? It usually doesn't work. 

I don't work in finance, but I need to stay informed of business finance (a part anyway) so when it comes to camera companies I just work that aspect into my media/news consumption.

So many great reviewers/personalities out there, but years ago I very quickly realized most of what they say about business operations and finance is just made up, and wrong.


----------

