I was apparently put on someone's ignore list because I called BS on that fact that they were saying IBIS was useless over 200mm. I still say bullshit, that's a flat out lie. Lack of understanding of how it is useful, poor technique, or not having a very capable IBIS system is no excuse to make a blanket statement like that.
If others would like to post examples where it was useful to them, I'd be happy to do the same. I won't do it in this post as then this would get moved to another section.
mcveed
Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)
Cdouthitt wrote:
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list because I called BS on that fact that they were saying IBIS was useless over 200mm. I still say bullshit, that's a flat out lie. Lack of understanding of how it is useful, poor technique, or not having a very capable IBIS system is no excuse to make a blanket statement like that.
If others would like to post examples where it was useful to them, I'd be happy to do the same. I won't do it in this post as then this would get moved to another section.
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list beca... (
show quote)
I agree with you completely. I have tested it using a Panasonic 100-400 (equiv 200-800)mm lens on a Olympus E-M1 MkII at 400mm with the lens stabilization turned off. The IBIS was effective at stabilizing the image in the viewfinder so I could focus and compose. It was also effective at getting sharp shots at that range. I think the recent bruhaha over this resulted from a misunderstanding of a statement that, beyond 200mm (or somewhere near 200-300mm) In-lens stabilization is more effective than IBIS. I cannot confirm that statement as I have never tested it.
mcveed wrote:
I agree with you completely. I have tested it using a Panasonic 100-400 (equiv 200-800)mm lens on a Olympus E-M1 MkII at 400mm with the lens stabilization turned off. The IBIS was effective at stabilizing the image in the viewfinder so I could focus and compose. It was also effective at getting sharp shots at that range. I think the recent bruhaha over this resulted from a misunderstanding of a statement that, beyond 200mm (or somewhere near 200-300mm) In-lens stabilization is more effective than IBIS. I cannot confirm that statement as I have never tested it.
I agree with you completely. I have tested it usin... (
show quote)
AGREE 100%.
The stabilized 150f2 with EC-14/20 would be so tough to compose without IBIS.
This was shot at 425mm eq. from a fast moving boat that was rocking pretty hard.
Cdouthitt wrote:
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list because I called BS on that fact that they were saying IBIS was useless over 200mm. I still say bullshit, that's a flat out lie. Lack of understanding of how it is useful, poor technique, or not having a very capable IBIS system is no excuse to make a blanket statement like that.
If others would like to post examples where it was useful to them, I'd be happy to do the same. I won't do it in this post as then this would get moved to another section.
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list beca... (
show quote)
IBIS is useful out to at least 800mm full frame equivalent. It's just that the effect is most useful at shorter than 200mm FFE. I don't personally have any documentation for this, but various manufacturers and testing groups have shown it to be true.
In-lens stabilization (ILIS) is better at longer focal lengths than is IBIS, primarily because ILIS mechanisms are engineered specifically for each lens. Due to increased magnification of shake, longer lenses need more stabilization compensation.
That's why Panasonic and Olympus are stealing each others' thunder and combining the two technologies. IBIS plus ILIS (Dual IS) is better than either by itself. The Olympus 300mm f/4 IS and the Panasonic Leica 100-400mm f/4 - f/6.3 OIS both take advantage of this combination (but a little differently). Unfortunately, cross-brand compatibility isn't there... You have to use the Oly lens on the Oly body, and the Leica lens on the Panny body, to get the combined benefits.
As others note, the benefit of IBIS is not just image shake reduction, it is viewfinder shake reduction. You can see to compose better.
The new GH5 has Dual IS II in it. Cinematographers are finding they can work hand-held, or on a monopod, in situations where any other camera would produce too much jitter without a tripod or steady cam device. There are numerous review videos on YouTube demonstrating this.
The download shows you nailed that capture...and IBIS did work.
jederick wrote:
The download shows you nailed that capture...and IBIS did work.
:-)
Granted a fast shutter did help, but composing this without was virtually impossible (that's how bumpy it was).
Cdouthitt wrote:
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list because I called BS on that fact that they were saying IBIS was useless over 200mm. I still say bullshit, that's a flat out lie. Lack of understanding of how it is useful, poor technique, or not having a very capable IBIS system is no excuse to make a blanket statement like that.
If others would like to post examples where it was useful to them, I'd be happy to do the same. I won't do it in this post as then this would get moved to another section.
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list beca... (
show quote)
Put on "someone's" ignore list? Gee, I wonder who that could have been.
You are now a member of an exclusive club!
ChrisT...Because I used the word Bullshit in calling out the false stuff he was/is spewing
Cdouthitt wrote:
ChrisT...Because I used the word Bullshit in calling out the false stuff he was/is spewing
My post was meant as humor. I think we all knew exactly who put you on the ignore list.
mcveed
Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)
I've had him on my ignore list for some time. But the ridiculous stuff he comes up with forces me to try to stop it, or reign it in. Alas, to no avail!
n3eg
Loc: West coast USA
I've used IBIS with my 500mm lens and 2x DTC. No problems at all, except with the person who ignored us.
mcveed wrote:
I've had him on my ignore list for some time. But the ridiculous stuff he comes up with forces me to try to stop it, or reign it in. Alas, to no avail!
Putting him on your ignore list doesn't do anything. He seldom adds to anyone else's threads. He is too busy adding to his own to keep them from fading away. I asked him to put me on his ignore list, pointing out that I would be in good company. So far he has kept me from joining the club.
--
Bill_de wrote:
Putting him on your ignore list doesn't do anything. He seldom adds to anyone else's threads. He is too busy adding to his own to keep them from fading away. I asked him to put me on his ignore list, pointing out that I would be in good company. So far he has kept me from joining the club.
--
apparently all it takes is a cuss word to get on his ignore list ;-)
Cdouthitt wrote:
apparently all it takes is a cuss word to get on his ignore list ;-)
Or if you hurt his feelings
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.