Interesting question. Both the in-lens solutions (Can*n & Nik*n) and the
Minolt* in-body solutions use motion sensors that correct for camera
movement, but do nothing for subject movement.
The obvious solution is an extension of the focusing system to sense the
movement of a small, high-contrast portion of the image (the point the
focusing system has chosen) and electronically move the image into pixel
alignment with its previous location in the output. In IS mode, you
would have to lose a portion of the sensor pixels around the perimeter,
a small price to pay for complete subject & object IS. So why isn't
anybody doing it? Because it requires long exposures to be the sum of
many exposures at the maximun shutter speed, which requires high speed
electronic shutter action (or some mechanical kludge like a spinning
shutter blade). Since they are still using mechanical shutters, that
means the electronics don't yet have the capability for this method. It
will show up sometime in the future. Lets hope the Wyoming skunk works
is working on it!
Moose
om4t@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>I would really like an E-1 I'm sure. My fear was that the lack of IS capability
>would relegate the E system to the same path as the OM system without
>auto focus. To do the anti-shake thing, does the camera need to be able
>to move the sensor, do it digitally (multiple readout), or add an optical
>control path? And which approaches are not possible if Olympus chooses to
>not pay patent licensing fees? Ideally they would to it in the body if
>possible so
>we would not need to purchase new lenses. At the moment, I just don't see any
>path to IS for the E system. Moving the sensor to compensate seems the logical
>solution.
>
>Wayne
>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|