Olympus in-body Image Stabilization misrepresentation

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by Orange, Nov 17, 2007.

  1. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Hello. A word to the wise:
    I bought an Olympus E-510 camera for the in-body image stabilization.
    They advertised the in-body Image Stabilization as "works with any
    lens." Now they are repeating the same hype with their new E-3 camera.

    The sales rap was, "With Nikon or Canon, you have to pay for expensive
    optical image stabilization in the lens, and you have to pay for it in
    every lens that you want stabilized. But with Olympus, you buy the in-
    body image stabilization once, and it stabilizes every lens."

    'John Knaur, senior marketing manager, Digital SLR, Olympus Imaging
    America Inc said,
    "The new E-3 will satisfy the pro-level needs of our customers with
    incredible AF speed, superior image quality ue, in part, to In-body
    Mechanical Image Stabilization that stabilizes all lenses attached to
    the camera..." '

    Olympus Product Manager Sally Smith Clemens said, "Our feeling in this
    camera is that in-body-based image stabilization is an advantage to
    the user because every lens or every existing lens they have would be
    able to take advantage of image stabilization by having it built into
    the body."

    "...Every lens, or every existing lens..." That's pretty definite.

    But that isn't true. The minute that you mount a legacy manual-focus
    lens on either camera, the camera responds by TURNING OFF the in-body
    image stabilization and the Focus Confirmation. Even classic Olympus
    Zuiko manual focus lenses are disabled.

    I have written to Olympus about this, asking for a firmware update to
    fix the problem, and received an answer that said, in so many words,
    "Thank you loyal Olympus customer. Many people have mentioned this. We
    will think about it." It turns out that the owners of Olympus E-1 and
    E-300 cameras have been begging for several years for a firmware
    upgrade that would enable the Focus Confirmation with legacy lenses.
    And Olympus refuses to fix the problem. They are still "thinking about

    The apparent corporate policy is to pressure you to buy all new lenses
    from them.
    So, it seems that Hell will freeze over before they issue a fix.

    On the other hand, I have learned that Pentax also has in-body image
    stabilization. And when they say that their in-body image
    stabilization will stabilize any and all lenses that you can attach to
    the camera, they mean ALL LENSES. You just dial in the focal length of
    the manual-focus lens you have mounted, and it works. Look at the

    And someone in Russia just came out with a "liar chip". (There are
    some samples being marketed on the German eBay web site.) It's a
    little piece of PC board with gold contacts and a chip. You glue it
    onto your lens adapter so that the contacts connect with the camera
    just as if you had an electronic Four-Thirds lens on the camera.
    The chip lies to the camera and says, "Yes, I'm a genuine Four-Thirds
    lens, and my focal length is XXX."
    And the Image Stabilization and Focus Confirmation immediately start
    All you need is a chip that will tell sweet lies to your camera body.

    So it isn't an engineering problem. It's a corporate policy problem.
    Orange, Nov 17, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. Orange

    RichA Guest

    You'll get the same "f--- you" from Olympus as they gave people
    wanting focus confirmation with legacy lenses. They could care less.
    They want the E-3 buyers to cough up $2000+ each for the digital top
    pro lenses, tbey do not want you using old OM or any other lenses.
    They had to be beaten to death just to release the MF-1 adapter to
    attach the old OM lenses.
    Pentax's K10D apparently does IS with any lens and focus
    RichA, Nov 18, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Orange

    Douglas Guest

    How precise do you want them to describe things?

    Any lens with a mount to fit the camera and the on-board IS will work.

    This does not and should never include lenses you have to buy an adaptor
    to mount them. You can't mount an OM lens without an adaptor. They are
    designed for a different, earlier system.

    Even though Olympus "sell" OM to 4/3rd adapters, it's no guarantee the
    lens will have infinity focus or any other function. It is only a way to
    get some use from your non digital lenses during the transition to a
    digital system.

    Douglas, Nov 18, 2007
  4. Orange

    JG Guest

    On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 10:47:03 -0800 (PST), Orange

    A load of wining garbage.

    Who cares about legacy lenses?
    Olympus are right and you are wrong. Deal with it. Grow up. No one
    cares a **** about crappy old legacy lenses not designed for four

    Jeeez...some people eh?

    Email replies remove REMOVE
    Powered by Agent 4.2 Mail/News
    JG, Nov 18, 2007
  5. Orange

    Orange Guest

    "Should not"? The word "should" implies some rules. Whose rules?
    The rule that I'm sure of is that companies *should* not engage in
    false advertising.

    You can't mount an OM lens without an adaptor. They are
    So what? The laws of physics haven't changed lately. The lenses still
    And Pentax had no trouble making their old lenses work with their new
    Well in fact, I have infinity focus with all of my legacy lenses and
    That is a totally different issue from anti-shake technology.
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  6. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Yeh, can you imagine?
    Some people shell out over $1200 for a camera and accessories, and
    then expect it to work as advertised?
    How stupid can anybody be?
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  7. Orange

    RichA Guest

    I've used about a 14 OM Zuiko lenses, they've all worked. The
    problems come with cheap Chinese adapters for other brands of lenses
    where the adapters are slightly too thick to allow infinity focus.
    RichA, Nov 18, 2007
  8. Orange

    RichA Guest

    Yes, old OM lenses are SO crappy some Canon FF users have shaved down
    their mirrors in order to fit those lenses, rather than use Canon's
    "modern" versions. Are you intentionally clueless?
    RichA, Nov 18, 2007
  9. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Yes, unfortunately, that's the conclusion I'm coming to. I'm learning
    that the people who want FC have been waiting for years, and the
    answer is always, "Thank you loyal Olympus customer, for the
    suggestion. We will think about it." It's the polite Japanese way of
    saying, "F... you."

    Yes, Pentax brags that the K10D will stabilize any lens that you can
    somehow manage to physically hang off of the front of the camera.
    Wish I'd know that before I bought the E-510.
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  10. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Ah, but I have to add that Olympus does have another big advantage for
    use with third-party lenses: The Four-Thirds system just happens to
    have the shortest registration distance of any DSLR brand. That's the
    "flange-to-film" distance. If you want to mount a lot of foreign
    lenses on a camera, the camera body needs to have a shorter
    registration distance than the foreign lenses that you are attempting
    to use so that you have room between the two for the adapter.

    The very short registration distance of the Olympus DSLRs makes them a
    lens-hackers dream. If you want to use a lot of different kinds of
    legacy lenses, Oly bodies are the ones to choose. You can put almost
    anything on Oly bodies, with a little hacking (like putting a Konica
    back on a Canon FD lens, and stuff like that). So it's a shame that
    Olympus chooses to be positively hostile to the idea of using legacy
    lenses with their camera bodies.

    I think if they were really smart they would exploit that advantage
    for all it's worth, and make Oly the gold standard for lens hackers.

    Especially since the second-lowest registration distance is now Canon
    EF. (Not counting the dead-and-gone lines of camera bodies, like
    Konica and Minolta).

    Pentax, on the other hand, has a much longer registration distance.
    (45.46mm versus 38.67mm for Oly.) So if I were to switch to Pentax, I
    would lose the Konica lenses, and Canon FD lenses. And on the high
    side, I'd also lose the Nikon-mount lenses, because Pentax and Nikon
    have such similar registration distances that there is no room for an
    adapter between the two. (45.46mm for Pentax, 46.5mm for Nikon)

    You mentioned that the users had to "beat Olympus to death" to get
    them to put out the MF-1 adapter for old OM lenses. Well maybe, just
    maybe, if enough people bug Oly enough, they might see the light
    again. It's along shot, but worth a try. I'm doing my part.
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  11. Orange

    JG Guest

    Yeah you and orange are probably bugging the phone companies to enable
    your spangly new digital phone to work on the old analogue network,
    you also cry into your beer because your raw converter does not work
    with windows 3.1, your car is 12 years old, and your TV runs on gas.
    No need to pay the electric bill, your still using candles, ****
    powergen for not making the system compatible with MY type of candles.

    Its time to move on, face it, deal with it, those lenses were designed
    for a DIFFERENT system.

    As for clueless...Rich A you define it in the dictionary.

    Email replies remove REMOVE
    Powered by Agent 4.2 Mail/News
    JG, Nov 18, 2007
  12. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Wrong. The whole rap about how the Olympus system was designed from
    the ground up to be digital is just advertising hype.

    The Olympus system was designed to be CHEAP. Olympus noticed that
    making full-frame sensors was very expensive, so they decided to go
    That also allowed them to use smaller lenses to project an image on
    those smaller sensors.
    That means lower manufacturing costs.

    Note that Olympus didn't bother to pass the savings on to us. The pro
    Oly Zuiko lenses are every bit as expensive as full-frame Canon or
    Nikon gear.
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  13. Orange

    John Bean Guest

    *Terminally* clueless if you please. "Rich A" meets all the
    requirements to be classified as a full-blown fuckwit:

    "Fuckwits, basically, are fuckwits.
    There is no cure.

    You'll know when you meet a fuckwit."

    See http://www.fuckwit.info/whatis.htm
    John Bean, Nov 18, 2007
  14. Orange

    Orange Guest

    Funny that you should use the word "include". So did Olympus, in their

    On the second page of the Passion Episodes (11) it states;
    "On the other hand, if you put the image stabilization mechanism in
    the camera body, you can stabilize the image no matter what lens you
    use, including all existing ZUIKO DIGITAL lenses. "

    INCLUDING. Not "restricted to", not "only works with". No, they said
    that it stabilizes the images NO MATTER WHAT LENS YOU USE.

    INCLUDING all existing Zuiko lenses.

    Now that is false advertising.
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  15. Orange

    John Bean Guest

    No they didn't. The statement is fact: it does work with any
    lens that fits the camera without adaptors or modification,
    and that of course *includes* but is not restricted to all
    existing Digital Zuiko lenses.
    They didn't say that, read your own quote above. All Zuiko
    *digital* lenses are 4/3 mount... and they all work, as do
    all other 4/3 lenses from Panasonic/Leica and Sigma.
    Only if you alter what was written in a pathetic attempt to
    make it sound that way.
    John Bean, Nov 18, 2007
  16. Orange

    Orange Guest

    On the contrary, John, it is you who is altering it in an attempt to
    make Olympus seem without blame.
    Do you work for Olympus?

    They said:
    "On the other hand, if you put the image stabilization mechanism in
    the camera body, you can stabilize the image no matter what lens you
    use, including all existing ZUIKO DIGITAL lenses. "


    There was no mention of adapters. There were no qualifiers to limit
    that broad sweeping statement.
    They didn't say that the image stabilization wouldn't work if you used
    an adapter to mount an existing manual focus Zuiko lens on a new

    They said that it could work regardless of which lens you use. Oh, and
    it will also work with all Zuiko Digital lenses.


    (Just like how Pentax made their system work with any lens.)
    Orange, Nov 18, 2007
  17. Orange

    Frank Arthur Guest

    Yes idiot! You deserve everything you can imagine. A full size 24x36
    free adapters a 20meg stabilization system and the whole thing should
    sell the Olympus for $50. Keep dreaming!
    Frank Arthur, Nov 18, 2007
  18. Orange

    RichA Guest

    It would have been fantastic with the Olympus cameras because they can
    adapt almost any lens you can think of. Pentax can't.
    RichA, Nov 19, 2007
  19. Orange

    RichA Guest

    Click, whirrr, "I am a loy-al com-pan-EE-man, I will do as I am told
    RichA, Nov 19, 2007
  20. Orange

    RichA Guest

    As usual, bean brain adds nothing of value.
    RichA, Nov 19, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.