# Suggestions for testing R6/R5 IBIS?



## YuengLinger (Nov 30, 2020)

I'd like to do some simple tests of IBIS, but if I do them on a tripod, would the results be meaningful? And if I did them handheld, how do I convince myself, much less Canon CPS, that my technique is not causing problems?

I'm beginning to see pretty consistent problems with slight motion blur in the 1/250th-1/600th sec. shutter speed range when IBIS is on. It can happen on an EF lens with IBIS, such as the ef 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro which I use for walkaround and portraits sometimes, or on the EF 35mm f/1.4L II. It's happening in both ECFS and mechanical shutter modes, so I'm definitely suspecting IBIS--not shutter shock.

I've suspected some issues with RF lens IS for a while now, even when they are on the R, but I'm consistently seeing these issues with adapted EF lenses on the R6. I'll get one shot in focus, subject standing still, and then the next two or three just showing a little blur, not tack sharp, and then the next few sharp again. This is happening in bursts where I don't think I'm jerking while holding the camera, but how can I be sure? 

My idea is to use a mannequin to take shots with IBIS on and off, but if I'm doing this handheld because that's when we use IBIS, how do I eliminate handshake as a significant factor? Just keep repeating until I have a clear trend (or not)? 

Thanks!


----------



## Joules (Nov 30, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> My idea is to use a mannequin to take shots with IBIS on and off, but if I'm doing this handheld because that's when we use IBIS, how do I eliminate handshake as a significant factor?


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of IS / IBIS to reduce the impact of jitter / shakiness in the hands on the image quality? If you remove that factor out of your testing, what exactly is it you are testing?

If there are shutter speeds that the IS / IBIS is less effective or even harming the results, I would expect that to show up in a comparison like this:

You take a number of shots per setting to be evaluated. Maybe 10 to 30 images per setting. The same amount for each. Then go through them and rate their quality.

s = sharp, image is as crisp as you would expect with the lens and aperture combination in use
m = mediocre, image is not really blurry but shows lesser contrast on edges compared to a sharp one
b = blurry, image does show some clear sign of blur, maybe even to the degree that the kind of blur (motion, focus, diffraction) can be determined

Format the results for better presentation in a way similar to the following table. Keep every numeric value in a seperate cell if you want to employ some software evaluation techniques. I combined them here for clarity of what belongs together.


Shutter speed% s / m / b without any stabilization% s / m / b with only IS% s / m / b with IS + IBIS1/10025 / 50 / 2535 / 50 / 1550 / 50 / 01/50050 / 30 / 2060 / 30 / 1070 / 30 / 01/100070 / 20 / 1080 / 15 / 590 / 5 / 0

If you suspect IBIS to be the culprit, involving the R in the testing may help. But to keep variables like the differenc in resolution and low pass filter in use the same, using just the R5 may make things easier if there is a clear issue. Anyway, if the data is presented in a form as above, I would expect the proportion of sharp shots to alway increase if you move left to right through the table, or top to bottom. I'm not sure how the slope of the increase should look, but you could plot that based on the numbers as see if there is some weird plateu or kink when looking at the IBIS data.

Not sure how many shots you'd need per cell of the table, but in any case it highly depends on how much effort you are willing to spend and how precisely you want to nail down the issue. Using only 3 shutter speeds for example may not be particularly insightfull if issues appear only in a narrow range of settings.

What I also would note is to use a plane with some texture on it (Like stripes printed on carboard, or something along those lines) and angle that plane with regards to your shooting. So if blur is caused by problems with focus, that can be detected by looking at where the point of focus is along that plane (IBIS may indeed have an impact here as the sensor DOES move relative to the lens elements, after all).


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 30, 2020)

Joules said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of IS / IBIS to reduce the impact of jitter / shakiness in the hands on the image quality? If you remove that factor out of your testing, what exactly is it you are testing?...


Great! Thank you! I have a project this week. And I think, also, taking some "control" shots, with IBIS off, on a tripod at very close to the same perspective/distance as the handheld shots will give me a baseline.

The only way I know to do this with "only IS" is to use the R. I don't think we've had a firmware update giving us an option to turn one off without the other.

One other thing: I think I have a method that suggests whether a general softness is being caused (or worsened) by motion blur--rather than just AF problems. I know somebody will correct me if I'm wrong! But some of these shots that have been concerning me are improved amazingly by PS CC's Filters>>>Sharpen>>>Shake Reduction. 

In the attached examples, cropped to approximately 200% to show what is happening with the pixels, if you can toggle between them you will see that all the pixels get shifted a tiny bit to one side. If it were just the boy moving, I'd expect the print on the bags to camera right would not be improved--they'd be shifted to a less sharp position. But they all get moved the same, and the whole image was sharpened.

I've noticed this before and now believe, when Shake Reduction works, which isn't always, it detects slight motion blur and shifts the pixels. If it were just AF being off, or general lens softness, would this be the case? Would the Shake Reduction be as effective?

Btw, image taken with the R6 + ef 35mm f/1.4L II, f/2.2, 1/400th sec, ISO 1250, EFCS.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 30, 2020)

If you want to look for motion blur, then use a proper target with graduated vertical and horizontal lines, concentric circles, and stars, like this one from Bob Atkins. That way, you will readily detect motion or shutter slap by differential resolution in the horizontal and vertical directions. I test my lenses hand held at different shutter speeds to know which ranges I can use without motion or mechanical blurring.


----------



## Joules (Nov 30, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> One other thing: I think I have a method that suggests whether a general softness is being caused (or worsened) by motion blur--rather than just AF problems. I know somebody will correct me if I'm wrong! But some of these shots that have been concerning me are improved amazingly by PS CC's Filters>>>Sharpen>>>Shake Reduction.


I don't know if you'll have much success with that. I just tried that filter and it definitively adds contrast to edges and thereby adds to the impression of sharpness even in pictures with 0 motion blur. I just took a picture of a chart I had at hand in silent mode (EFCS) with my 80D + Sigma 35 mm Art @ 2.8, 1/25 s ISO 100. From a tripod, with 2 second timer. The chart rested on an office chair, so I took one picture with the chair at rest and one with it gently spinning to introduce some simple motion blur.

Attached are gifs showing the results for those two shots, where I left one unprocessed (0 sharpening and noise in LR, no profil corrections. That applies to all of these), one processed by the filter you mentioned, with the default settings, and one tweaked manually with smart sharpen to deconvolve some details (no enhancements of contrast beyond recovering actual detail).

With the chair spinning:



Without any motion blur:



You can see the Shake reduction filter applies thick halos along the edges, and moves the image, despite no motion blur being present in the lower images.

What Alan proposes sounds much more reliable and allows you to make judgements without using additional software. I think it will work best with the chart parallel to the sensor though, so to check for front / back focus and focus tilt, my proposed angled chart with lines also seems a decent supplement.


----------



## snappy604 (Nov 30, 2020)

whoa... glad someone is taking this on.. I now have my EF adapter and using 3rd party glass (specifically sigma 150-600 C ) and noticed exactly in that range I was getting way more unexpected blur from eagles but I hadn't had time to see if it was my technique or not.. I was shooting in poor conditions, but would've thought 1/640th of a second with me panning should've got more consistant results. 

I also was thinking maybe 3rd party might not communicate something correctly so was going to test with IBIS off vs on.... really want to see your results. 

For tests with tripod, shouldn't IBIS be off? I seem to recall I.S. is recommended to be off on tripod work, would expect same from IBIS? it's always micro adjusting from I understood and on a tripod its a lot more still.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 30, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> whoa... glad someone is taking this on.. I now have my EF adapter and using 3rd party glass (specifically sigma 150-600 C ) and noticed exactly in that range I was getting way more unexpected blur from eagles but I hadn't had time to see if it was my technique or not.. I was shooting in poor conditions, but would've thought 1/640th of a second with me panning should've got more consistant results.
> 
> I also was thinking maybe 3rd party might not communicate something correctly so was going to test with IBIS off vs on.... really want to see your results.
> 
> For tests with tripod, shouldn't IBIS be off? I seem to recall I.S. is recommended to be off on tripod work, would expect same from IBIS? it's always micro adjusting from I understood and on a tripod its a lot more still.


I found AF with the 150-600mm C on the R5 rather slow, even with upgrading the firmware. I never use shutter speeds as low as 1/640s for BIF.


----------



## snappy604 (Nov 30, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I found AF with the 150-600mm C on the R5 rather slow, even with upgrading the firmware. I never use shutter speeds as low as 1/640s for BIF.


fair ... there were enough variables in which it could've been me..but I've gotten results with my 80D and the same lens at those speeds that were good..

Some shots were in focus but a dismal rate. At a glance there was some further blur on either side of the body making me think I was in focus (read depth of field blur on either side of the body/eyes) but something else causing the blur. Again too many variables, but its not the first time I thought I saw some oddities. Was thinking of more structure similar to what is being described here, so pleased to see someone else do it as well.

like any tool, need to figure out what it can and can't do.. so I'm pushing a bit, but thought that was a safer range. 1/1000th of a second had better results. Eagles tend to be a bit lazy flying


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 30, 2020)

AlanF said:


> If you want to look for motion blur, then use a proper target with graduated vertical and horizontal lines, concentric circles, and stars, like this one from Bob Atkins. That way, you will readily detect motion or shutter slap by differential resolution in the horizontal and vertical directions. I test my lenses hand held at different shutter speeds to know which ranges I can use without motion or mechanical blurring...



Thank you, Alan. I'm printing five of these on 4x6 glossy now to glue to a foam board. I'm sure this won't be the last time I want to test lenses, IBIS, AF.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 30, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Thank you, Alan. I'm printing five of these on 4x6 glossy now to glue to a foam board. I'm sure this won't be the last time I want to test lenses, IBIS, AF.


I have a row of 5 on a wall at the back of our house.


----------



## VegasCameraGuy (Dec 1, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I'm beginning to see pretty consistent problems with slight motion blur in the 1/250th-1/600th sec. shutter speed range when IBIS is on.



If you are seeing motion blur at 1/250, then it's difficult to believe that it is related to the shaking of the camera body, unless you're on a roller coaster. The original poster did not indicate what he/she was taking a picture of but I'm assuming that it was a still object. If the image is blurred then the only logical reason is a defect in the IBIS algorithms used to correct for body shake. I would try both on and off tripod shots of a resolution chart with and without IS turned on. I think the only way to turn IBIS off is by turning IS off.

I have seen previous posts about IBIS issues at higher shutter speeds but don't remember where. Personally, I have never noticed the problem with my R5 and any of my RF lenses 15-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, or 100-500 but without testing, don't have a dog in this fight.

Have you checked the focus of the lens to be sure it is not front or back focusing on the subject? If the aperture was set at a wider open setting and the lens focused before/after the subject, you could be mistaking out of focus for motion blur due to DOF issues?


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 1, 2020)

VegasCameraGuy said:


> If you are seeing motion blur at 1/250, then it's difficult to believe that it is related to the shaking of the camera body, unless you're on a roller coaster. The original poster did not indicate what he/she was taking a picture of but I'm assuming that it was a still object. If the image is blurred then the only logical reason is a defect in the IBIS algorithms used to correct for body shake. I would try both on and off tripod shots of a resolution chart with and without IS turned on. I think the only way to turn IBIS off is by turning IS off.
> 
> I have seen previous posts about IBIS issues at higher shutter speeds but don't remember where. Personally, I have never noticed the problem with my R5 and any of my RF lenses 15-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, or 100-500 but without testing, don't have a dog in this fight.
> 
> Have you checked the focus of the lens to be sure it is not front or back focusing on the subject? If the aperture was set at a wider open setting and the lens focused before/after the subject, you could be mistaking out of focus for motion blur due to DOF issues?


It's happening with different lenses, but _seems_ to be showing more on EF lenses. I notice the issues most from 1/400th to 1/800th. But before talking to CPS, I'm going to conduct careful tests, helped by Joules's method suggestions, and AlanF's link to a very useful test target. The camera in question right now is my R6.

Unless what I do can be reproduced by techs at Canon, they won't see it as an issue. I ask myself why I'm getting soft shots at good shutter speeds, an issue I never saw on the R, but there are so many variables! My technique, shutter modes, IBIS, lens IS, AF... I'd like to nail this down!

I decided to go with a block of nine 4x6 prints for a test target, all permanently glued to a foam board. Seems like too many, right? But this way I've got all my edges covered for other types of tests in the future! Right now a few prints are drying, and then I'll glue them in place, and then, hopefully by the weekend have some results to share.


----------



## Bdbtoys (Dec 1, 2020)

YuengLinger,

Could you try asking Canon for the 1.0.0 firmware for testing?

I remember someone mentioning shutter shock after updating to 1.1.0... that it wasn't there before. 1.0.0>1.1.0 introduced some IBIS changes... so perhaps you could start there and compare firmware just to rule that out (would be easy to convince Canon to do something if you show before/after firmware pictures). It might save you a lot of time if it's as easy as the firmware.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 2, 2020)

Bdbtoys said:


> YuengLinger,
> 
> Could you try asking Canon for the 1.0.0 firmware for testing?
> 
> I remember someone mentioning shutter shock after updating to 1.1.0... that it wasn't there before. 1.0.0>1.1.0 introduced some IBIS changes... so perhaps you could start there and compare firmware just to rule that out (would be easy to convince Canon to do something if you show before/after firmware pictures). It might save you a lot of time if it's as easy as the firmware.


Sorry, I've updated my firmware already. I will look at older images, but I've only had the camera about a month. 

I can really only perform tests with the firmware currently installed.

I do not have any contacts at Canon. If a problem does exist, Canon will have to be convinced by many photographers who have taken the time to perform simple tests that can be reproduced, or provide other clear evidence.


----------



## Bdbtoys (Dec 2, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Sorry, I've updated my firmware already. I will look at older images, but I've only had the camera about a month.
> 
> I can really only perform tests with the firmware currently installed.
> 
> I do not have any contacts at Canon. If a problem does exist, Canon will have to be convinced by many photographers who have taken the time to perform simple tests that can be reproduced, or provide other clear evidence.



Tech support may supply the firmware if asked and you tell them what you're doing. Not an issue to flash back... do the test, and flash back to current.


----------



## Joules (Dec 2, 2020)

Bdbtoys said:


> Tech support may supply the firmware if asked and you tell them what you're doing. Not an issue to flash back... do the test, and flash back to current.


I think showing that there IS a problem in the current firmware is more important than showing that there may not be one on the earlier ones.

If he uses an earlier one, and finds no issue, the existence of a problem has not been proven and therefore Canon is very unlikely to put any time or effort into the matter while they have bigger issues on the backlog.

If there is an issue in the current firmware though, that can be demonstrated (and reproduced), I would expect Canon to do their job and spend the time and money for investigating where islt comes from themselves.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Dec 2, 2020)

Very interested to see your results. I don’t seem to be having any of these issues with my R5 and RF lenses. Very curious to hear what other people have to say too.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 2, 2020)

Wouldn't it be loverly if DPP shows whether we had IBIS on or off?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 2, 2020)

There is a test method, here is a draft copy. Obviously, The average person is not able to do this, but understanding how it is done might at least let someone devise their own method.

Image Stabilization Document CIPA

There is also a thread on DPR discussing correction capability away from the center. 

Theoretical limits of IBIS away from the center of an image: Photographic Science and Technology Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Finally, Jeffrey Fridel did a tripod stability experiment several years ago. I think his method might be adapted to test IBIS by turning ibis on and off. There are 3 parts. The jist of his testing was that cranking up the center column created a problem if you need good stability. Crank up your center column and compare? You might get some repeatability by dropping a 5 lb bag or box on the floor at a specific spot to get the same vibration each time (within limits).

Jeffrey Friedl's Blog » Tripod Stability Tests, Part I (regex.info)


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 3, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> There is a test method, here is a draft copy. Obviously, The average person is not able to do this, but understanding how it is done might at least let someone devise their own method.
> 
> Image Stabilization Document CIPA
> 
> ...


Scanning all three, they look very interesting and informative. As I'm a portrait and event photographer, plus landscape for personal enjoyment, I'm not concerned at this time with the question of tripod use and IBIS/IS. (My habit is to turn off stabilization when the camera goes on a tripod, but I don't photograph enough wildlife to think it through much.)

If you or others see a significant problem with what I lay out below, please let me know!

I've just finished with one of three lenses (Rf 50mm, Rf 24-70mm, EF 35mm f/1.4 II), using a common target and the same exposure over a range of shutter speeds, from 1/60th to 1/2000th. So, as my shutter speed gets faster, my ISO goes up also. My histogram looks nearly identical for many, many shots.

In order to include/eliminate several factors, I tested Drive Modes ( single shot, and the three burst speeds) and Servo vs One-Shot AF. Plus I did one series on a tripod with IS Off and One-Shot AF, which, for my purposes right now is good enough for a control set. To save time I just took five shots in each Drive Mode. (With high-speed burst I just went by what sound like five-seven shots, it's so fast.)

I'm doing these tests to see for myself, under controlled conditions, with a stationary subject, with no pressure to hurry up and move on, etc., whether IBIS is causing softness from 1/400th and 1/800th, shutter speeds I've never had trouble or doubts with using non-IBIS bodies. Of course they aren't perfectly controlled! Handholding itself is so variable, even for one person. Some parts of the day I know my hands are shakier than others, for example, and I can't really take the whole array of shots in a single session. (I just never get that kind of block of time anymore!) But I'm being as consistent as I can be.

If the results show nothing conclusive, well I'd have to dig deeper--if during real world shooting I keep seeing issues. If my simple tests strongly suggest certain shutter speeds are unexpectedly soft with IBIS on, then what I will share here might encourage others to try their own tests, and, more immediately, be something I can send to CPS, as in the past they have been willing to reproduce shooting scenarios.

In any event, I've just tucked in the kids. I'm eager to look at the huge set from the first lens.

Thanks, all, for the suggestions and encouragement! I hope to have something useful posted by the weekend!


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 3, 2020)

To get straight to the point, I just have to get the doubts out of my mind. We've waited a long time for IBIS. Going through these tests will hopefully show me that everything is fine with the R6. If not, then I just report to Canon and hope others will too!

Cheers!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 3, 2020)

When using a mechanical shutter, it is known that there are certain shutter speeds where a resonance softens images slightly. I think its a slower shutter speed though. With electronic shutter, its high speeds that can cause issues. That's covered in the manual and is a issue with very fast lenses as I recall. There was quite a bit of discussion and testing in the Fred Miranda forum but it was several weeks ago. The answer was to use electronic shutter for slower shutter speeds, mechanical for higher speeds to get the utmost performance. I've forgotten the affected shutter speeds.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 4, 2020)

Based on a careful viewing of *1139* images taken with the R6 + Rf 50mm 1.2, I am seeing only negligible differences between IBIS on and off at shutter speeds from 1/250th to 1/1000th. (And, yes, I'm seeing big help from IBIS at 1/60th to 1/125th.)

I was standing four feet from the target. All shots at f/5.6.

*Using only EFCS,* I took four main sets of shots for shutter speeds from 1/60th to 1/2000th: 1) IS on, Servo AF 2) IS off, Servo AF 3) IS on, One Shot AF 4) IS off, One Shot AF, on a tripod

Within each main set of shots, I took four subsets of shots: Single, Low Speed, High Speed, and High Speed+. I was curious about whether IBIS was behaving differently when mashing the shutter button for each shot than for holding it down for bursts. I saw no significant differences. The few I did see, and they were very subtle, suggest that IBIS, for my own brand of hand shake, seems to improve _slightly_ near the end of a burst_, _but I did not take nearly enough shots to be sure, and, in my opinion, this has to do with my technique (or lack of!).

How many burst shots did I take? Good question. Of course with Single and Low Speed, I could just count to five. With High Speed I had to time it, and I was probably getting 5-6 shots most bursts. With High Speed+, no way could I do anything but guess that I had passed five shots--and then try to let go asap.

Since I don't see any significant difference in any of the drive modes, and since I can't find a way in DPP to sort by drive mode, I'm not going to take the time to use ratings or colors, etc. for this. If I had seen differences, I'd make the effort.

One thing I've confirmed regarding my own style of shooting: When I am standing still, and the subject is still, I do better with Servo AF enabled. I don't think this has anything to do with IBIS. One reason I plunged into mirrorless after buying the R was because of how amazing Servo AF is for very shallow depth of field, for consistently nailing the sharpest shots I've ever gotten with handheld, and I just assumed it was because I tend to sway a bit as I shoot, and the Servo AF was making micro compensations. Any thoughts?

So where does this leave me? I am definitely going to take some shots with an RF zoom that has lens IS. I've done a lot of shots with one lens, but not nearly enough for statisticians. If I had seen any kind of a trend with the prime, I'd plan to do the exact same sets with an Rf zoom, but now I'm balancing what I might learn against work and family life. (Very busy, as are many CR members, I imagine, with things other than the gear aspects of life!)

I'm planning to use the Rf 70-200mm at a longer focal length next. Should I just go with 200mm because it needs more stabilization than shorter focal lengths? I don't really have time, _unless I see an issue_, to try at various focal lengths. And I also plan to discard two main sets: 3) IS on, One Shot, and 4) IS Off, One Shot, on a tripod. This is because what I really want to see is how IBIS is working with _handheld_ shots, and, as mentioned above, I just leave AF Servo enabled when handholding. On a tripod, I go with one shot, and I turn off IBIS. Just habit.

I do have three ef lenses to choose from: ef 100mm 2.8L IS, ef 35mm f/1.4 II, and ef 135mm f/2.

I've learned a few things so far for sure: Don't jump to conclusions, but be open minded when somebody is describing an issue. Also, it is very time consuming to do proper tests, and they take some careful thought to set up. And presenting the findings in a clear, convincing way is also a challenge.

And what do I do with all my sample shots? Cherry-pick a few to show my target? As there is, to my eyes, no significant differences with the rf 50mm f/1.2, the shots reveal nothing beyond what I've stated here.

Attached are just a couple as examples, both taken at 1/400th, what I was apparently imagining to be in the problematic range. 

Now I understand this is a bit of an anticlimax, and some here are going to want full and better tests for more lenses, but anybody with an R6 (or an R5) would learn a lot by setting up their own tests! And I welcome any suggestions regarding streamlining!

I'll see what happens with the zoom with lens IS. And I will also do one of the ef lenses.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 4, 2020)

Here's the worksheet I used for the 50mm to make sure I took all the shots intended. I was surprised too that it was over 1000! The colors referred to at the bottom were what I used in LR CC to group according to my "main sets."

Today I'll take more shots at 200mm (but not as many!!!), and will try tomorrow to take shots with the ef 35mm 1.4L II, a lens that is so wonderful and so well balanced on the R6 that I imagine other photographers will be keeping it with mirrorless for years to come. I intend to!

And I MIGHT take a few shots with the ef 100mm 2.8L IS Macro. It is the only ef lens I have with IS. 

From now on, much greater respect to the reviewers and those here who go through the time and effort to provide test results!

In the meantime, have some pretzels. (R6 + ef 35mm 1.4L II, ISO1250, f/5.6, 1/80th sec, IBIS definitely on).

Cheers!


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Wouldn't it be loverly if DPP shows whether we had IBIS on or off?




was about to ask and ask about results and about whether there was a way to tell if IBIS was or wasn't on.

I was taking a sunset pano of the city today on a tripod and noticing some blur on random images. using R5, firmware 1.2 and I think latest firmware on my RF24-70IS 2.8L. I believe I had manual focus for all tests and I.S (and therefore IBIS I think) off. Even tried variations where I used mechanical and electric shutter.... even tried to account for maybe my strap was moving things so I'd let it rest a second or two and I also used the live view touch screen to take the picture to reduce movement. In same series of settings for the multiple pano shots some sharp and others seemed to have a softness and some had a more blur....

I was using 1/8th of second shutter speeds but been able to do much lower speeds without issues on a tripod.

not sure how that can happen on a tripod with autofocus off and I think IS / IBIS off.. again this isn't hte first time I'm getting weird results and this is with a fully RF set up!

I don't recall seeing that prior to 1.2 firmware but I didn't have the camera long before updating to 1.2 so weird.

I can attach 2 RAWs but not sure how to upload those files here... taken split second after each other... one more or less sharp (could be better) and the one right after is a WTF fuzzy. No wind or movement.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> was about to ask and ask about results and about whether there was a way to tell if IBIS was or wasn't on.
> 
> I was taking a sunset pano of the city today on a tripod and noticing some blur on random images. using R5, firmware 1.2 and I think latest firmware on my RF24-70IS 2.8L. I believe I had manual focus for all tests and I.S (and therefore IBIS I think) off. Even tried variations where I used mechanical and electric shutter.... even tried to account for maybe my strap was moving things so I'd let it rest a second or two and I also used the live view touch screen to take the picture to reduce movement. In same series of settings for the multiple pano shots some sharp and others seemed to have a softness and some had a more blur....
> 
> ...


Very strange. Did you use a countdown timer or a remote to trigger the shutter?


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Very strange. Did you use a countdown timer or a remote to trigger the shutter?


nope, just a very mild touch on the live view.. works fine on my 80d, no shake.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> nope, just a very mild touch on the live view.. works fine on my 80d, no shake.


Try a countdown timer and see if the results are the same?


----------



## Joules (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> nope, just a very mild touch on the live view.. works fine on my 80d, no shake.


If you want a consistent chance if getting sharp images, you absolutely have to use the 2 second timer. Especially with such slow shutter speeds.

There are a lot of things beyond the camera that can account for random blur. Is the blur uniform across the image? If so, did you stand in a bridge with cars passing by, or a wooden platform of any sorts? Was it maybe windy and your tripod not extremely solid?

Or does the blur differ in different parts of the image? In that case, is the city scape you shot across a body of water and perhaps located in warm climate?

With you touching the camera, that's of course the most likely source of blur, if we are just talking about a mild softening here.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 5, 2020)

These recent posts are reminding me of something that I did notice during my test shots. I have the camera set to allow manual focus of electronic lenses, but it's possible that with both those and with ef mechanical lenses, I have been slightly changing Focus while the shutter button is depressed. I am not sure about this, but certainly on the 50 mm 1.2, the big Focus ring is very, very easy to turn while am holding the lens in the way I hold most lenses. So I might be back to questions of technique.

Since macro photography is usually the only time I choose manual focus, I'm going to disable the option to manual focus while using autofocus.

Last night I did too sets of test shots th the RF 24-70, and today I'm going to try EF 100 2.8 IS macro.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 5, 2020)

*Conclusions!*

After having tested the Rf 50mm f/1.2L IS, the Rf 24-70mm f/2.8L IS, and the Ef 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, I am NOT seeing anything unexpected with IBIS and sharp images. The IBIS is doing an excellent job with both non-IS and IS lenses, including an older Ef lens with IS.

Images get shaper at higher shutter speeds with IBIS on and IBIS off, but they are very sharp, completely as hoped, with IBIS on from 1/60th sec. through 1/2000th sec. for me.

One thing I realized is that I must be very careful to avoid inadvertently moving the focus ring on the Rf 50mm 1.2. I only had one focus-by-wire lens in the past, the ef 85mm f/1.2L II, and I rarely used it for manual focus, so I never enabled "Lens Electronic MF" on my 5DIV (when I still that body and lens). But with the much better MF features on the R bodies, I did enable it. Now I realize it carries more risks than benefits for most situations other than still-lifes, landscapes, and macro, so I'll just keep it on my custom menu for special occasions.

So, my conclusion is that, under controlled testing, IBIS is performing as expected. But I am not discounting what I and others seem to be seeing with our own eyes when reviewing images. Is it possible that when the camera is being moved quickly in real-life use the IBIS "jumps" during a shot? I have no idea, that's just a brainstorm, but I am not going to say that it can only be user error. I will say that things seem to be 100% as expected when taking a series of test shots.

Since "real-world" use situations are difficult for Canon techs to reproduce, I wouldn't expect any of this to be addressed unless many photographers are reporting a pattern of problems that can be traced to a few common factors.

Personally, I'll continue to review my images as carefully as ever, but also be more relaxed (and happy!) with my R6, and be paying more attention to my shooting techniques generally.

Attached, just as an example of my ef 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro test shots, is one image taken from about five feet back, 1/640th, f/5, ISO 800, with lens IS on. It is representative of the whole series of shots from 1/60th-1/2000th.

I hope Canon continues to offer tweaks and improvements with firmware updates, but for now, my R6 seems to have IBIS performing as expected.

PS This test image was considerably sharper on my computer. Anybody have the optimal resolution numbers for posting here? Thanks!


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Try a countdown timer and see if the results are the same?
> [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Earthquake tremors? Whoa!
> 
> Any chance your balcony is picking up vibrations? That's horrible.



Looks like an earthquake, but its on solid ground, not a balcony.. . I do this a lot with 80D and don't see that kind of result. I only had the R5 for a couple of weeks prior to upgrading the firmware to 1.2 and don't recall seeing those results, but hadn't tried tripod work.


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Have you contacted Canon support yet? Sent these images?




nope.. never had to contact them. certainly thinking on it, but not sure if there is additional info I should gather.. right now I think I'm eliminating most variables and I'm trying to see if others having similar issues before going down that path. Other times the damn things takes wonderful shots.... so peeved.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> nope.. never had to contact them. certainly thinking on it, but not sure if there is additional info I should gather.. right now I think I'm eliminating most variables and I'm trying to see if others having similar issues before going down that path. Other times the damn things takes wonderful shots.... so peeved.


I think you have to try with a delayed or remote release. Canon is likely to say this too, regardless of your good luck with the 80D. It's just standard practice at longer shutter speeds to use a delay or remote!


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I think you have to try with a delayed or remote release. Canon is likely to say this too, regardless of your good luck with the 80D. It's just standard practice at longer shutter speeds to use a delay or remote!



its kind of why I don't want to call them.. call centres primary purpose is to avoid blame and often will blame a hundred things first... it always a painful and irritating experience. I've had success on these kinds of settings and even slower with 80D, 7D, point and shoots, phones... so needing to use a timer is... silly.. but it's also why I was trying electronic to reduce change of vibration. Pre-firmware I was (with same combo with IS and IBIS) able to handhold and get clear shots at 1/4th of a second (attached).. this is why I don't think it's hardware.. I just had not tried tripod work with IS/IBIS disabled pre-firmware

so really puzzled by all this.

its why I wanted to see what others found... and I also wish I could roll firmware back (like another person mentioned).. I've worked in IT for 30+ yrs and often find in-intended bugs in firmware upgrades. Its quite possible and also acceptable to me as long as I know it will be corrected in near future (within a few months)

what I am suspecting is that its not properly shutting down IBIS even though it is supposed to.


----------



## Joules (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> I've had success on these kinds of settings and even slower with 80D, 7D, point and shoots, phones...


I'm not trying to imply that the issue is defintively user error. But not seeing as much impact from potential sources of camera shake (touching the camera, shutter shock, resonant frequencies due to these two or wind, ...) on a 80D or 7D compared to the R5 is to be expected. After all, the latter has almost or more than double the resolution of these older models, and also features a much finer low pass (AA) filter.

What you show in your two images does look like some pretty hefty camera shake though. Looking at the light point sources, it looks like motion blur, almost exclusively in the vertical. If you hadn't also encountered this issue with the electronic shutter, I would have guessed shutter shock.

If you want to rule out a potential variable for future assesment of the issue, I would still recommend using the 2 second timer. I do it all the time on my 80D and am sure it helps.


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 5, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> its kind of why I don't want to call them.. call centres primary purpose is to avoid blame and often will blame a hundred things first... it always a painful and irritating experience. I've had success on these kinds of settings and even slower with 80D, 7D, point and shoots, phones... so needing to use a timer is... silly.. but it's also why I was trying electronic to reduce change of vibration. Pre-firmware I was (with same combo with IS and IBIS) able to handhold and get clear shots at 1/4th of a second (attached).. this is why I don't think it's hardware.. I just had not tried tripod work with IS/IBIS disabled pre-firmware
> View attachment 194296
> so really puzzled by all this.
> 
> ...



If I were in your shoes and found that using a delay or remote resolved the issue, I would feel very relieved. If it doesn't resolve the issue, then it does sound like something Canon should look at. I will try exactly what you are doing with mine later. Too busy during the day, so this evening I can get the same basic lighting in our Suburban neighborhood.


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

Joules said:


> I'm not trying to imply that the issue is defintively user error. But not seeing as much impact from potential sources of camera shake (touching the camera, shutter shock, resonant frequencies due to these two or wind, ...) on a 80D or 7D compared to the R5 is to be expected. After all, the latter has almost or more than double the resolution of these older models, and also features a much finer low pass (AA) filter.
> 
> What you show in your two images does look like some pretty hefty camera shake though. Looking at the light point sources, it looks like motion blur, almost exclusively in the vertical. If you hadn't also encountered this issue with the electronic shutter, I would have guessed shutter shock.
> 
> If you want to rule out a potential variable for future assesment of the issue, I would still recommend using the 2 second timer. I do it all the time on my 80D and am sure it helps.




yep I will probably try quite a few more variables.. mostly I'm trying to see if others are having any issues.. also why I was interested in this thread. I noticed it in daylight as well when shooting bald eagles... 1/400th of a second but wasn't sure at time if it was because I was panning by hand with a 3rd party lens (sigma)... there are times where it just seems to decide it doesn't want to cooperate, but haven't found a trigger I can reproduce and sadly not a lot of cycles to do so.. a proper test is time consuming  but yes I'll likely do 2 sec pause.. I've used many times in past but this was the barest of touches on the liveview screen on a tripod.. hence the concern, but yep 45 MP vs 18MP can produce other results, but that seems drastic... more so given how much success I had pre-firmware handheld at even slower speeds.


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 5, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> If I were in your shoes and found that using a delay or remote resolved the issue, I would feel very relieved. If it doesn't resolve the issue, then it does sound like something Canon should look at. I will try exactly what you are doing with mine later. Too busy during the day, so this evening I can get the same basic lighting in our Suburban neighborhood.


cool, more or less looking for feedback from others if they've seen similar. If you have the time it'd be great, but not expected  just posted because I saw your concerns as well, lucky your tests showed otherwise. I might just get annoyed enough to stay on phone with them... might. My day is incredibly busy usually and prefer to spend my free time out actually taking pics 

there is a lot of new tech and now the sensor does move thanks to IBIS and it's first gen IBIS, but it seemed fine pre-firmware. Wish I'd taken more time or not upgraded  so I could rule it in or out.. intermittent issues are really the most irritating ones to troubleshoot (as you saw I also had clear images in prior by about a second)


----------



## YuengLinger (Dec 6, 2020)

I tried. Without a delay, using Single Shot, I could not get a shot without blur at 1/8th of a second on a very good tripod and ball-head. I tried taking photos of a neighbor's Christmas lights at 1/8th of a second at 200mm . (I wanted 200mm to really see if there was any vibration happening with the timer.) Using one shot and pressing as lightly as I could, there was obvious motion blur. Five shots in a row with 2-second timer, all is fine.

I think you must have had great luck on the 80D. I'm not understanding the reluctance to just try a delay or a remote for 1/8th of a second?!? That would assure you the IBIS system, when turned off, is not malfunctioning, as you seem to worry is happening. Don't forget--I started this thread with testing IBIS, so I'm very open minded, but 1/8th of a second is pretty much, from my experience, mandatory delay or remote.


----------



## snappy604 (Dec 6, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I tried. Without a delay, using Single Shot, I could not get a shot without blur at 1/8th of a second on a very good tripod and ball-head. I tried taking photos of a neighbor's Christmas lights at 1/8th of a second at 200mm . (I wanted 200mm to really see if there was any vibration happening with the timer.) Using one shot and pressing as lightly as I could, there was obvious motion blur. Five shots in a row with 2-second timer, all is fine.
> 
> I think you must have had great luck on the 80D. I'm not understanding the reluctance to just try a delay or a remote for 1/8th of a second?!? That would assure you the IBIS system, when turned off, is not malfunctioning, as you seem to worry is happening. Don't forget--I started this thread with testing IBIS, so I'm very open minded, but 1/8th of a second is pretty much, from my experience, mandatory delay or remote.




thanks and appreciate the tests and feedback. Wouldn't call it luck given I've done it with 40D, 7D, 80D and some with the R5... and various phones etc. I get its more sensitive with higher megapixel (this is a leap) but it was fully manual, and while not a countdown shutter, I did wait a few seconds each time I moved it to ensure things were before touching it and the gentlest of touches on the live view.. on a tripod, on solid ground, not windy, even with electronic shutter etc. Even checked to see if my strap was pulling etc. I also would get absolutely sharp images BEFORE the fuzzy ones without any movement...

I've also gotten sharp shots at lower speeds handheld on the R5! though with IS/IBIS. I wasn't particularly zoomed.. think maybe 30mm.. so really shouldn't get anything like that, but meh... but like any tool, need to learn what it can/can't do.. hence seeing if others experienced similar and not immediately whining at canon.

One thing I haven't done and I might is a full reset of the camera... sometimes when you do a firmware update it can help. Does anyone know if there is a hardcore reset vs the menu one?

took quite a few images so could work around the blurry ones.. this is what I was building


----------

