The demise of Canon and Nikon DSLRs a good thing? (Page 10): No. 2 on the list is wrong. IBIS stands for In-Body Image Stabilization. The image sensor is stabilized not the lens.

Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

CHG_CANON wrote:

Pretending DSLRs are superior to the corresponding... (show quote)

No. 2 on the list is wrong. IBIS stands for In-Body Image Stabilization. The image sensor is stabilized not the lens.
Lenses with built-in stabilization can have the camera use this feature or IBIS, or sometimes both if the camera supports this function.

will

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Soul Dr. wrote:

No. 2 on the list is wrong. IBIS stands for In-Body Image Stabilization. The image sensor is stabilized not the lens.
Lenses with built-in stabilization can have the camera use this feature or IBIS, or sometimes both if the camera supports this function.

will

You misunderstand. In-camera stabilization turns every attached lens into a stabilized lens via the camera feature. It's a bit of word play, being more important to understand the benefit and the result rather than the actual implementation.

BebuLamar

twb930s wrote:

Tell that to Ansel Adams and other B&W landscape photographers. You well know it ain't the equipment, its the eye through the viewfinder. I suppose this is another of your snarky comments. Going to mirror-less will not by itself make you a better photographer, and neither will going to Canon. I'm certain DSLR death will happen eventually, at least if they can develop a way for mirror-less to have equal battery performance to DSLR.

I don't know about that. Adams equipment is far superior to what I ever had. I never had a camera that can provide the image quality of his 8x10 camera.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

CHG_CANON wrote:

Pretending DSLRs are superior to the corresponding... (show quote)

Your turn twb930s. What feature(s) on your SLR is not covered with a mirrorless and better than you SLR? I'm sure you are happy with your SLR and it's fine to stay with that, if want. OTOH don't denigrate the mirrorless if you haven't tried one. There are tons of videos, quite good, on youtube.

Jim Bianco

CHG_CANON wrote:

If you want to be a better photographer, there are two things you must do above all others: buy a mirrorless camera and use it.

If you want to be a better photographer, get any camera and use it!!!!

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Jim Bianco wrote:

If you want to be a better photographer, get any camera and use it!!!!

That's the fact of the matter. Alas, the UHH community thinks it's the mirrorless part (or the brand, or the sensor size, or file type) that is the more important aspect of getting better.

sjb3

CHG_CANON wrote:

If you want to be a better photographer, there are two things you must do above all others: buy a mirrorless camera and use it.

Is this what you were saying?: Mirrorless cameras are what cameras in general are evolving into, so it makes good sense to learn about them, get one, and practice, practice, practice; you'll become a better photographer. Nothing at all wrong with that in my view, although I'm old and slow and will thus stick with what I've got; if I was 20 years younger, though....

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

sjb3 wrote:

Is this what you were saying?: Mirrorless cameras are what cameras in general are evolving into, so it makes good sense to learn about them, get one, and practice, practice, practice; you'll become a better photographer. Nothing at all wrong with that in my view, although I'm old and slow and will thus stick with what I've got; if I was 20 years younger, though....

See post / reply just above yours ...

sjb3

stanikon wrote:

...Do you think having a mirrorless camera would have made Ansel Adams a better photographer?

Given Mr. Adams' wonderfully artistic eye, if he'd had that kind of equipment available to him during his time..heck yeah, he would have been even better than he already was; there's no telling what kind of images he'd have produced, but they would something to see. Just my opinion...

Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

CHG_CANON wrote:

You misunderstand. In-camera stabilization turns every attached lens into a stabilized lens via the camera feature. It's a bit of word play, being more important to understand the benefit and the result rather than the actual implementation.

No, you do not underdstand. If a lens does not have a stabilizing motor in it, it can not be stabilized by any feature. The only thing that will be stabilized is the camera sensor if the camera has IBIS.
You can say it any way you like, but a lens can not be stabilized if it doesn't have a stabilizing feature built in.

The actual implementation is important in understanding how stabilization works in camera bodies vs lenses.

Will

therwol Loc: USA

BebuLamar wrote:

I don't know about that. Adams equipment is far superior to what I ever had. I never had a camera that can provide the image quality of his 8x10 camera.

I have a couple of books of Adams' photos. I have a couple of posters as well. You can see the deficiencies of his 30s and 40s lenses, sometimes soft around the edges. Of course this is irrelevant. His composition and what he did to "post process" his negatives is all that counts. I think that if he had a medium format digital camera at his disposal now, he could get the same results with post processing on a computer. The equipment is just a starting point for what he accomplished.

sjb3

CHG_CANON wrote:

See post / reply just above yours ...

I get it now. And you're exactly right.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Soul Dr. wrote:

No, you do not underdstand. If a lens does not hav... (show quote)

I try to avoid arguing with the obtuse, so don't expect more from me on this.

therwol Loc: USA

CHG_CANON wrote:

That's the fact of the matter. Alas, the UHH community thinks it's the mirrorless part (or the brand, or the sensor size, or file type) that is the more important aspect of getting better.

The way I read you and your posts, that's what you're trying to convey to people with your sarcasm. Some people don't get it. I get it, and I've defended your posts many times.

leeh01 Loc: Georgia USA

From a strictly mechanical view, the elimination of the mirror box and the mechanical shutter will greatly simplify and increase the reliability of professional grade cameras.

I recently went from Canon (5D) to Sony (a6000 and a7iii) and I don't see any upside to sticking with the DSLR design. My first DSLR was the Canon 10D in around 2003.