mcacm111

Seeking better image quality, I'm in the process of choosing a crop frame or perhaps a compact full frame mirrorless to replace my Sony RX100 IV. I have a separate thread on that issue, but thought it better to start a new one regarding one aspect of choosing: in-camera stabilization vs in-lens stabilization vs none. I am spoiled by being able to shoot the Sony in relatively low light, not just because of the relatively fast lens f1.8-2.8 built-in zoom, but also because of the in-body stabilization it provides. Those two features really help make the most of the 1-inch sensor. I'd like to hear your opinion about which system is best, all-around, in real world shooting, for crop and full frame cameras. I'm mostly concerned with keeping ISOs lower while hand-holding in low light. I understand that stabilization does not help if the object is moving. I have a musician's hands, but feel stabilization has been beneficial.

Thank you in advance for your advice.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Well, you did not mention a budget, the Canon R5 with 5 stop IBIS and 3 Stop IS in the lenses looks like it might fit the bill if you are willing to spend $4500+ for that new camera.

repleo Loc: Boston

I believe the general guidance is that in-lens stabilization is best for long lenses and IBIS is best for shorter lenses. Wide or ultra wide lenses benefit least from stabilization.
You should take a look at the new full frame Sony Sony A7C which is basically an A7iii in an A6xxx body. It has 5 axis stabilization which means that if the lens is stabilized it will use that for 2 of the axis and the body stabilization for the other 3 - best of both worlds. $1700 for body.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

It doesn't matter much which you choose. Obviously, reliably shooting handheld at 3+ stops under 1/(focal length) is great for a minimal ISO, but is that your regular shooting situation, as in does in-body at 5 differ from 3 in the lens? The in-body stabilization improves all lenses, including the old non-electronic manual focus lenses. Cameras today perform fine for high ISOs, post processing is even better. A modern camera with industry-leading 5-stop IBIS probably is a great ISO performer too. So again, what does it really matter as a difference in choosing?

Ourspolair

I have chosen to pre-order an a7c after much thought. It also uses the in-lens system for native Sony lenses which have IS.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

I shoot Nikon and Sony A-mount (in lens and IBIS respectfully) and think both work fine for most situations. I love IBIS as it gives me stabilization with any lens I use on the Sony's, even old/manual/Non-Sony/etc. etc.....and for me, none of the Sony cameras I have ever had an IBIS failure (A200/300/390/A37/A58) and they are well used...not "high-end" bodies. On the other hand, I often see post's and sale ads for lenses that have lost ILIS (some Nikon, some other brands). I have never had one fail (even used) during my ownership, but probably some luck, and I rarely handle any camera gear roughly, never dropped one either (Note - I have hurt myself falling with gear in hand, due to protecting the camera/lens instead of my head, but luckily, the two times it happened the wounds were minor - roots, tree roots.... my dreaded enemy when lurking in the brush and woods!!!!). And apparently my head is pretty hard!!!

My first inclination/speculation is that the In Lens Image Stabilization (ILIS) is maybe not as electro-mechanically robust as IBIS.... and in general, possibly lenses suffer a bit rougher handling than the camera bodies. With the better ISO capability allowing for faster shutter in lower light versus the older/lower/slower it often turns into a moot point for me, but as I age I expect that steadiness will become a "tester" for the IBIS/ILIS systems as time passes.

Personal preference if I can only have one method is the IBIS, as it gives me a huge range of lens capability, and it works, a dual IBIS/ILIS system would be excellent .... For now, I have both stabilization types, use both when I need them, don't when light is good and I'm shooting above 1/400...... when using my big lenses (not f2.8 lenses) it is very handy, as the critters I chase are often not in direct sunlight..... out in the bright, at high shutter speed, not necessary.

Just another $.02

Lorendn Loc: Jackson, WY

Both can be used with Sony. I have usable shots at 1/4 second at 24mm.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

I love the in body stabilization of my Olympus! It gives me greater choice in the lenses that I can use. Now my tripod only gets to go out at night.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

With my Nikon Z7 the IBIS is a benefit no matter the lens, but even better is that using the FTZ all of my old VR lenses will give the added benefit of the VR working in conjunction with the IBIS. I’m guessing that any of the native Z mount lenses that have VR will work even better with the IBIS.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

Will your glass be stabilized or will you be using non stabilized lenses such as adapted legacy glass?

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

7+ stops are possible with Olympus E-M1 mkIII and E-M1X. 6.5 stops is possible with the E-M5 mkIII (the camera industry leaders). It is done by using both the IBIS in conjunction with the Olympus ILIS. It is possible to handhold 10 second shots (I personally have done 4 seconds). The E-M1X, the flagship camera, has a sale going on and is available at $1700 or $2000 depending on the sale conditions. It is the only camera in the industry that has AI. It will find a car, a helmet, a plane, and/or bird anywhere in the frame (or multiples there of) and focus on it and continue to focus on it as it moves anywhere in the frame. You do not need to put any fixed focus points on the subject for the camera to find it. But $2000 is still a chunk of money for the AI technology. You will not get the AI, but you will get nearly everything else with the E-M1 mkIII for I believe about $1200 with certain sales conditions. And the E-M1X, E-M1 mkIII, and E-M5 mkIII matched with a weatherproof lens makes for a weatherproof system. Go shooting in snow, salt spray, rain, dust, and wind without anything else other than the camera and lens. And all Panasonic bodies and lenses are interchangeable for all basic functions. Personally I find the "pros" outweight the "cons" of shooting 4/3rds versus APS-C or FF. It also usually results in less size, weight, and cost compared to the same angle of view for APS-C and FF. You still needs to do your research and compare FF, APS-C, and 4/3rds for their "pros and cons" so you get the system you need or want.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

Getting a camera body with image stabilization will give you broader options in choosing lenses. I only know the Sony ecosystem well, having used a Sony A7 III for over two years. Wide-angle and standard prime lenses generally are not stabilized. Also budget telephoto lenses, like the entire lineup by Tamron, are not stabilized. So having a stabilized body goes a long way.

The Sony A7 III has amazing low-light abilities. I often shoot at ISO 6400 without noticeably noise. I frequently use it with the Sony 24-105mm lens that is stabilized also, which allows me to get sharp images at 1/30 of a second hand-held--even though the 24-105 is an f/4 lens. The smaller A7C has very similar specs. I do not know the Canon lineup, but I would assume that the most recent Canon bodies give you a comparable performance.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Also, no matter what you get, you may want to invest in a 3 stop neutral density filter for your handheld shooting. Long handheld shooting takes in lots of light and can force your camera to go to the smallest f-stop, causing diffraction-related softening, and lowest ISO setting, which may or may not be a imaging problem depending on the camera. This is the reason that my next filters will be 3 stop neutral density filters for all my lens sizes (I have all my polarizers now).

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

In-body = better at shorter than 200mm full frame equivalent. In-lens is better at longer than 200mm FF equivalent.

Panasonic Dual IS II combines the best of both.

mcacm111

A sincere thank you for everyone's opinions and guidance.