OIS and why Google says HDR+ makes it irrelevant

[LeoRex]

There's a flood of camera reviews floating about now and I watched one yesterday by a well known reviewer who seemed hung up on the fact that the Pixel's camera lacks OIS... and how low light will suffer, details, etc... outside of the fact that her conclusions were way off, she also showed a fundamental lack of understanding as to why HDR+ negates the need for OIS on still shots.

OIS basically acts as a suspension for the camera sensor. These are extremely small sensors, with tiny lenses, so they have to expose images longer in order to take in enough light. But longer exposures also mean that any camera motion will result in motion blur. OIS is one of the solutions. It's aim is to dampen vibration and small movements by the phone, isolating the camera sensor so it is able to remain still...

The Pixel's sensor doesn't have OIS... but all is not lost. Here is where HDR+ comes into play, and why I think HDR+ is actually superior to OIS. HDR+ works by taking a series of identical exposures and then processes a final image based on the information in those exposures. Now, these exposures are actually each a little bit underexposed to avoid blowing out any bright sources that might be in the shot. Now, going with a shorter exposure has its own issues, but the Pixel also happens to have one of the largest sensors on the market and is able to handle less light better than anything on the market (not named the 6P/5X and HTC 10, who all use a similar sensor).

So in lower light, rather than one long exposure with the hope that OIS will keep things pointed, the Pixel uses up to 9 (depending on which HDR+ mode you are in) shorter ones, then goes in and cherry picks the best one and uses the others to clean things up.

Now, yes... having OIS AND HDR+ would give the best of both worlds, but Google is fairly confident that its software solutions can remove the need to add complexity and size (OIS requires a larger camera module) to the design.

Now, considering that even with the 'crutch' of not having OIS, the Pixel can outperform all comers when it comes to lower light photography, I think they are on to something.

 

[B. Diddy]

Nice explanation, sir!

 

[iceman64]

Here Google explain why they chose EIS and not OIS

When Google announced its Pixel smartphone last week and boasted about its “best smartphone camera ever,” there was one notable thing it lacked compared to the iPhone: optical image stabilization. Instead of physically stabilizing shots, the Pixel uses readings from the phone’s built-in gyroscope to compensate for shake.

Google has since shed some light on why it decided to go with electronic image stabilization (EIS) instead of optical (OIS). Over in the Pixel User Community forums, a user named Jake Crystal asked for an explanation about the choice.

“Why is Google choosing electronic image stabilization over optical image stabilization?” Crystal writes. “Is electronic image stabilization just better than OIS?”

Isaac Reynolds, Google’s camera product lead who shared sample photos, gave a lengthy answer:

EIS and OIS have very different goals, so you can’t compare them to ask which is better/worse. OIS primarily improves low light photography by physically compensating for hand shake within each single frame, and EIS improves shaky video by maintaining a consistent framing between multiple video frames. OIS is primarily for photo, and EIS is only for video.

Where OIS helps is still low-light photos. It compensates for hand shake, allowing longer exposures in low light, but this in turn increases motion blur within the frame. And it comes with all kinds of tradeoffs, starting off with its physical size (meaning it would be harder to produce the slim/small device that Pixel is).

And despite lacking OIS, Pixel is still very strong in still low-light photos, beating other cameras that do have OIS modules. That’s a testament to its world-class software algorithms, notably HDR+. And with software algorithms instead of OIS hardware, Pixel can get better and better over time.

At the end of the day, Pixel takes some of the best low-light photos you’ll find on any smartphone, even without OIS. And that’s what really matters — better pictures, not how Pixel does it.
Here’s a video from the Pixel’s unveiling showing non-stabilized and stabilized footage from the Google Pixel side-by-side

 

[LeoRex]

At the end of the day, Pixel takes some of the best low-light photos you’ll find on any smartphone, even without OIS. And that’s what really matters — better pictures, not how Pixel does it.

Exactly... and this seems to be lost on most of the people that mention it. They, like the reviewer I mentioned, get hung up on the fact that it is missing OIS, becomg predisposed to think that the pictures and video will suffer as a result, and then go on to make rather poor conclusions based on that assumption... like her seeing the heavy sharpening and post-processing on the S7 and crediting OIS for that. So you end up with this odd juxtaposition were the review starts with "The Pixel's camera performance will suffer due to a lack of OIS" and ends with "The PIxel's camera does better than this other one that has OIS"

Of course, I already knew this... my wife's S7 Edge rips off pictures faster than anything I've ever seen, but my somewhat slow in comparison 6P takes better quality pictures in bright, medium AND low and mixed lighting.