Options in Steadyshot on Z1

[Augusto Manuel]

Has anyone noticed any difference between the types of Steadyshots the Z1?

Yesterday I was covering the Pebble Beach Concourse d'Elegance and some shots needed to be done handheld. I switched back and forth between the HARD and NORMAL setting and could not see a difference. I shot it in widescreen DV (No HDV mode, althought I would not think that matters).

I still think the camera stabilization system of the Canon XL2 is one of the best. The stabilization has the feel of shooting handheld with a bigger, heavier camera.

[John Poore]

I use medium steadyshot and can see no difference. Without steadyshot a small camera is really jerky and unstable compared to a shoulder mounted camera. Therefore steadyshot is indespensible, especially in handheld. I find as well that small camera's are less stable on the tripod, for example strong wind or a passing truck. So I leave steadyshot on all the time.

[Augusto Manuel]

I wouldn't leave the steadyshot on when on tripod. Have you seen the effect that you get when you do a pan when the steadyshot is on and on tripod?

Also, I would really like to hear from others anout why Sony put so many type of steadyshots in the Z1. None seems as good as the Canon cameras. Not that I am sold to Canon.

Originally Posted by John Poore

I use medium steadyshot and can see no difference. Without steadyshot a small camera is really jerky and unstable compared to a shoulder mounted camera. Therefore steadyshot is indespensible, especially in handheld. I find as well that small camera's are less stable on the tripod, for example strong wind or a passing truck. So I leave steadyshot on all the time.

[Boyd Ostroff]

Originally Posted by Augusto Manuel

I wouldn't leave the steadyshot on when on tripod.

I'd urge everyone to try this in their specific circumstances. There are a lot of variables, such as the amount of zoom and the speed of your pans. I haven't worked with the Z1 enough yet to have an opinion, but have used it extensively on the VX-2000 and PDX-10.

I shoot performance video of our operas from over 100' away from the stage and most of the time I'm at maximum zoom (500mm equivalent 35mm SLR lens). I also use a 2x tele extenter sometimes (1000mm in 35mm terms). These shots are completely unacceptable on my Miller DS-5 tripod UNLESS I turn ON steadyshot. It does a great job of smoothing out all the little bumps and the vibration inherent in this kind of shot. Out of maybe 60 hours of tape I can only remember one minor glitch caused by Steadyshot, and that was when I made a jerky camera movement. Slow pans and tilts in this kind of shot shouldn't be an issue with the Steadyshot system.

[Augusto Manuel]

That makes sense.

I have an old Miller 50 tripod which I use with the Z1. It can support even a heavy Arri 35mm motion picture camera so I would not worry too much about these issues.

The real question was what the heck SOny puts out so many types of Steadyshot if there is not much of difference between them. That's the question of the original thread.

Originally Posted by Boyd Ostroff

I'd urge everyone to try this in their specific circumstances. There are a lot of variables, such as the amount of zoom and the speed of your pans. I haven't worked with the Z1 enough yet to have an opinion, but have used it extensively on the VX-2000 and PDX-10.

I shoot performance video of our operas from over 100' away from the stage and most of the time I'm at maximum zoom (500mm equivalent 35mm SLR lens). I also use a 2x tele extenter sometimes (1000mm in 35mm terms). These shots are completely unacceptable on my Miller DS-5 tripod UNLESS I turn ON steadyshot. It does a great job of smoothing out all the little bumps and the vibration inherent in this kind of shot. Out of maybe 60 hours of tape I can only remember one minor glitch caused by Steadyshot, and that was when I made a jerky camera movement. Slow pans and tilts in this kind of shot shouldn't be an issue with the Steadyshot system.

[John Poore]

medium steadyshot will make no difference to your picture even if you pan fast. If you use maximum steadyshot this will cause bluring etc, and suggest you never use it ever. All things in moderation.

[Augusto Manuel]

I used the "maximum steadyshot" (HARD) as you said and did not notice any difference, not even the bluring you are talking about. So I go back to my first question in this post.

Originally Posted by John Poore

medium steadyshot will make no difference to your picture even if you pan fast. If you use maximum steadyshot this will cause bluring etc, and suggest you never use it ever. All things in moderation.

[Jeremy Rochefort]

Originally Posted by Augusto Manuel

Has anyone noticed any difference between the types of Steadyshots the Z1?
I shot it in widescreen DV (No HDV mode, althought I would not think that matters).

This is where the difference lies. In shooting HDV, I do notice a difference when using the medium and hard setting.

Do a test and render out to a Media Player 9 file so that you can view the difference on you computer. Track a moving subject and you will clearly see the difference between the two modes.

Cheers

[Taylor Moore]

I am doing a Helicopter shoot with the Z1 and am trying to find the right Steady Shot setting for the shot.

I did a test and went up in the chopper, I did it with no Steadyshot, and with Standard. i am shooting at full wide on the zoom.

The Standard definitly helped but there was still noticable vibration.
I am not doing any pans or tilts just straight shooting from the back seat.
I wished I had of used Hard to see what effect it would have had, but no time...

I want to get this right before I spend $1200 per hour heli time.
Any help would be great.

Thanx

[Robin Davies-Rollinson]

I always use the HARD setting for grabbed interviews- there is a difference, you can almost feel the Steadyshot "lock in" as opposed to the other settings.
As for using Steadyshot whilst on a tripod, that's a definite no-no as far as I'm concerned. Stop panning and you will get a drift at the end that is just not acceptable...

Robin

[Jeff Baker]

I think I read that you lose about 5% of your pixels when using steadyshot mode. Is this correct and does that percentage increase with the hard mode?

I used the hard mode once will shooting from a convertible driving on the single lane very curvy road to Hana in Maui. The footage looks a little jerky but I don't see any bluring.
Also quite a few artifacts due to fast moving foilage in the scene...

[Colin Pearce]

Originally Posted by Jeff Baker

I think I read that you lose about 5% of your pixels when using steadyshot mode. Is this correct and does that percentage increase with the hard mode?

This is not correct with the Z1 or FX1 as they use optical stabilisation. The loss of pixels is the case with cheaper cameras that use electronic stabilisation.

[Jeff Baker]

I did think it was digital so thanks for clearing that up for me, but I still think some pixels are used as I read here:

Optical Image Stabilization Always better than electronic image stabilization, optical image stabilization does not involve as many pixels on the CCD as the electronic method which frees them up for other, more important, things. The stabilization seemed to work fine, though it's tough to make any major improvements.

[Tom Hardwick]

Come on John Poore - how on earth can the hard Steadyshot setting 'cause blurring'?

The difference between the settings is down to a combination of the vibrating element travel and the 'stickiness' in the system. The Hard setting will try and 'hang onto' the image for as long as possible, such that at the start of a pan (say) you might be able to notice a slight hysterisis effect in the v'finder. You camera is moving but the OIS is hanging onto the image because it thinks your pan is the start of camera shake.

At the opposite end of the scale the Steadyshot is less effective (which is why it's designed for wide-angle converters) but at the same time it's less 'sticky'. This means you won't have the lens hood appearing momentarily in scene as you shake the camera violently.

Jeff - there's no 'loss of pixels' in Sony's Steadyshot. The internal elements are vibrating to counteract your shakes, sending the same image to the chips. DIS systems do indeed hunt for an image within a bigger area on the chip, but these systems are generally inferior. They can be made a lot more powerful though but their side-effects become noticeable as in the Hard OIS setting.

Taylor: I'd go up with the Hard setting selected if I were you. The side-effects are a lot less noticeable than the camera shake will be!

tom.

[Jeff Baker]

Well call me satisfied, thanks for the answers.