IBIS over 200mm
Oct 17, 2017 13:51:39 #
rehess wrote:
Do you make the same comment whenever "FX" or "DX" is used??
Out of politeness and civility I do not write full words for Nikon f***ing XXX and D--n XXX Nikon; where XXX is the model number!
Oct 17, 2017 13:54:57 #
MadMikeOne wrote:
Clint, what does "IBIS" stand for? It sounds familiar and I googled it but only came up with the beaked type. I'm thinking some sort of stabilization? Many thanks!
"Mike"
Edit - never mind! Found the answer by reading the entire thread. Sorry! Apparently, I'm not awake yet.
"Mike"
Edit - never mind! Found the answer by reading the entire thread. Sorry! Apparently, I'm not awake yet.
Karen, that stands for In Body Image Stabilization.
Oct 17, 2017 13:59:23 #
dpullum wrote:
Yes, true about commenting on IBIS, but there are new people to UHH and for that mater multi-lens cameras we mis-name as S for single lens cameras ... I have a stable full of Minolta and Sony Alpha lenses...
Huh?
You do understand that the “S” in “SLR” means one lens at a time, and is in comparison to “TLR”, right? We name cameras to compare to other cameras, and if someone is too new to this field to understand, then we need to explain when s/he says “I don’t understand”, but we cannot go back to first principles for each and every post.
Oct 17, 2017 14:08:21 #
rehess wrote:
Huh?
You do understand that the “S” in “SLR” means one lens at a time, and is in comparison to “TLR”, right? We name cameras to compare to other cameras, and if someone is too new to this field to understand, then we need to explain when s/he says “I don’t understand”, but we cannot go back to first principles for each and every post.
You do understand that the “S” in “SLR” means one lens at a time, and is in comparison to “TLR”, right? We name cameras to compare to other cameras, and if someone is too new to this field to understand, then we need to explain when s/he says “I don’t understand”, but we cannot go back to first principles for each and every post.
I do believe that the “S” in SLR means a camera with just one lens as opposed to the “T” in TLR, referring to a camera that has two lenses, one for viewing and one to cast the image onto the film.
Oct 17, 2017 14:14:50 #
OddJobber wrote:
Good point that I hadn't considered. (But I've never had a camera with in-body stabilization.)
Isn't any sort of image stabilization good whether it be in the body, lens or both?
I only own in lens stabilization but have tried a camera with the in body and found it seems to work just fine. The lens was a 75-300 Olympus and the body was a M10.
Worked well at 300mm.
Oct 17, 2017 14:47:31 #
Wingpilot wrote:
I do believe that the “S” in SLR means a camera with just one lens as opposed to the “T” in TLR, referring to a camera that has two lenses, one for viewing and one to cast the image onto the film.
Unforunately I trashed mine during one of our moves. It was used by my Dad to take baby pictures of me.
Exactly two lenses in this case. The top one reflects up to the viewfinder and the bottom one goes to the film.
Oct 17, 2017 15:05:13 #
rehess wrote:
Unforunately I trashed mine during one of our moves. It was used by my Dad to take baby pictures of me.
Exactly two lenses in this case. The top one reflects up to the viewfinder and the bottom one goes to the film.
Exactly two lenses in this case. The top one reflects up to the viewfinder and the bottom one goes to the film.
It is almost universal that people look down on these cameras [humor... sorry] I had one it was a knock off of a good brand... my first really good camera 1953? My oldest sister had an Argus C4 [?] wow the mystique of a 35mm
Oct 17, 2017 16:32:03 #
Oct 18, 2017 00:38:12 #
Yes--a few folks around here know a lot less than they think they know, and they show it on a regular basis.
Cdouthitt wrote:
I was apparently put on someone's ignore list beca... (show quote)
Oct 18, 2017 00:42:51 #
MadMikeOne wrote:
Clint, what does "IBIS" stand for? It sounds familiar and I googled it but only came up with the beaked type. I'm thinking some sort of stabilization? Many thanks!
"Mike"
Edit - never mind! Found the answer by reading the entire thread. Sorry! Apparently, I'm not awake yet.
"Mike"
Edit - never mind! Found the answer by reading the entire thread. Sorry! Apparently, I'm not awake yet.
Don't feel bad--responding before reading the whole thread is a time honored internet tradition.
Oct 18, 2017 00:47:49 #
dpullum wrote:
Yes, true about commenting on IBIS, but there are new people to UHH and for that mater multi-lens cameras we mis-name as S for single lens cameras ... I have a stable full of Minolta and Sony Alpha lenses... So I have a Sony A-65 DMLR [no flipin mirror] OK... but the new to advance cameras like Sony.. may not realize that older technologies like IBIS still exist. [poke ... wink wink ... nod nod]
Single lens cameras only means one at a time. Other than TLRs, and that new multi-lens thing, shat else is there.
(I think you know this, right? I just want to be clear what you meant.)
Oct 18, 2017 06:43:39 #
Also IBIS works differently with different focal lengths. I´m using Pentax and with new lenses the camera changes the IBIS-function automaticly, but with old lenses I have to tell the camera what focal length the lens have so the IBIS-function will work perfect for that lens. That is why I can use my 300mm Tair Grand Prix from 1958 with the same shake reduction as my modern lenses.
Oct 18, 2017 07:05:37 #
Narog50 wrote:
Also IBIS works differently with different focal lengths. I´m using Pentax and with new lenses the camera changes the IBIS-function automaticly, but with old lenses I have to tell the camera what focal length the lens have so the IBIS-function will work perfect for that lens. That is why I can use my 300mm Tair Grand Prix from 1958 with the same shake reduction as my modern lenses.
With the older zooms its best set shorter rather than longer it's not as effective but that way you are not introducing vibration.
It's better with some rather than none but if you are switching focal lengths its a pain to reset the ibis each time.
Oct 18, 2017 07:52:29 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Isn't any sort of image stabilization good whether it be in the body, lens or both?
I only own in lens stabilization but have tried a camera with the in body and found it seems to work just fine. The lens was a 75-300 Olympus and the body was a M10.
Worked well at 300mm.
I only own in lens stabilization but have tried a camera with the in body and found it seems to work just fine. The lens was a 75-300 Olympus and the body was a M10.
Worked well at 300mm.
“Worked well” is relative
Oct 18, 2017 08:21:25 #
It is no pain to change focal length because the camera asks automaticly when you put an old lens on. It takes a few seconds to chose the right focal length.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.