Customizable Image Stabilization for RF Lenses

[Since5DMarkIII]

I own a C80 which I love, but I do not like the RF lens stabilization for video.  Plain and simple: RF lens stabilization is too jerky.  This applies to all of the RF lenses I've used so far which include the 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS, 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS, 24-105mm f/2.8 L IS and 24-105 f/4 IS.  I miss the buttery smooth image stabilization of the EF lenses.

Since there is so much technology in the RF lenses, why not give us the option to customize the image stabilization?  For example, make it less "locked on" and more "smooth motion".

There could be a menu option that has a variable slider with "Locked On" on one side, and "Smooth Motion" on the right.

There could be another menu option that lets you choose the amount of "IS Responsiveness".  One one end of this menu slider it could be super responsive like it is now, and on the other end it could be set it to a minimum amount so the IS just eliminates the micro-jitters that cause blurry images.

If this were implemented I would probably replace all of my EF lenses.  As it is now, I'm forced to use the EF to RF mount to get the look I want.

[cleva87]

Hello,

It sounds like you're really passionate about achieving smooth, cinematic video shots with your Canon C80, and I can totally understand why you'd want more control over the image stabilization (IS) behavior. The RF lens stabilization system is indeed very advanced, but the "jerky" or overly responsive feel you're describing seems like an issue when filming in dynamic situations.

Your suggestion for a customizable IS system with a variable slider for "Locked On" vs. "Smooth Motion" and a "Responsiveness" control could address these concerns perfectly. It would allow users to fine-tune their stabilization preferences for different shooting environments. This would also provide an opportunity for videographers who prefer a smoother, more organic look in their footage—something you typically get with EF lenses.

I think this could be a great feature for Canon to consider, especially as they continue to improve the RF lens lineup. The flexibility to adjust the IS behavior could be a game-changer for filmmakers who rely on precise control over their camera movements.

Best Regards

[rs-eos]

Best to provide this feedback by clicking on "[+]Feedback" at the top or bottom of the following page: https://www.usa.canon.com/

[Waddizzle]

I am not certain that I understand your issue, or even if there is one.  What you are describing sounds more like dampening in mechanical gimbal stabilizer or a fluid video head, than in-camera stabilization.  The behavior you are describing never happens when the camera is still, only when it is moving or panning.

The main job of IS / IBIS is to stabilize the image for the AF System when you are shooting handheld.  The IS spends over 99% of its time performing this function, probably even more.  The shutter fires in only a small fraction of a second.  If your shutter speed is 1/1000 and you capture a burst of 10 fps, then only 10/1000 of second was spent stabilizing the images for capture.  The other 990/1000 of second was spent stabilizing the image for AF.  Holding the image steady for the AF system is exactly why you are making the observations that you are.

On the other hand, a mechanical stabilizer has the controls and adjustments that you are describing.  The IS is not a substitute for a mechanical stabilibzer.  The jerkinzess that you describe is usually a result of locking focus on something distant, and then panning while locked on to the distant subject.  What is supposed to happen when that subject is panned out of the frame, or the camera otherwise loses tracking of the subject?  It usually shapes focus to a new subject.

One last note, the behavior you are describing can also occur when you have IS enabled when you are shooting from a tripod and move the camera.  The IS should be turned off when shooting from a tripod or gimbal.