Don't think good IBIS matters? Take a look at this guy's comparison

In article 1270b29e-e74a-45f2-b620-
,
says...

Sony A7II (5-axis) versus Olympus. AND just imagine if they added another camera without IBIS!!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60293258

Actually his results are not terribly impressive. Here
is what I get with my Olympus E-M1 II with the 12-100
lens:

https://www.molon.de/images/P2190202.JPG
12mm, 6 seconds, handheld

Stabilisation: 6 * 24 = 144 = 7 stops
(1/ 35m focal length as reference exposure time)

https://www.molon.de/images/P2240327.jpg
12mm, 3.2 seconds, handheld
Stabilisation: 3.2 * 24 = 77 = more than 6 stops

https://www.molon.de/images/P5263785.JPG
44mm, 1.6 seconds, handheld
Stabilisation: 1.6 * 88 = 141 = 7 stops

For the last one I was on the balcony, pointing the
camera to the fireworks in P mode, not expecting
anything, in the end getting that result.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
https://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 04/05/2019 10:51, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article 1270b29e-e74a-45f2-b620-
,
says...

Sony A7II (5-axis) versus Olympus. AND just imagine if they added another camera without IBIS!!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60293258

Actually his results are not terribly impressive. Here
is what I get with my Olympus E-M1 II with the 12-100
lens:

https://www.molon.de/images/P2190202.JPG
12mm, 6 seconds, handheld

Stabilisation: 6 * 24 = 144 = 7 stops
(1/ 35m focal length as reference exposure time)

https://www.molon.de/images/P2240327.jpg
12mm, 3.2 seconds, handheld
Stabilisation: 3.2 * 24 = 77 = more than 6 stops

https://www.molon.de/images/P5263785.JPG
44mm, 1.6 seconds, handheld
Stabilisation: 1.6 * 88 = 141 = 7 stops

For the last one I was on the balcony, pointing the
camera to the fireworks in P mode, not expecting
anything, in the end getting that result.

I especially like the last one!

Alfred Molon:
...
12mm, 6 seconds, handheld

No, I don't think "good IBIS" is irrelevant. You're obsessed with
persuading us that our camera bodies sans IBIS are useless, and that
makes the matter relevant to you. In 53 years of making photos I have
never had occasion to make a long, hand-held exposure. I have a
selection of tripods and equatorial telescope mounts (can you hand-hold
and track stars for 15 minutes with IBIS?) I only very rarely that I
have occasion to use IS. So your IBIS is of no interest to me at this
time. Thanks for your concern for my immortal soul, though.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

In article ,
says...
You're obsessed with
persuading us that our camera bodies sans IBIS are useless,

No, they are not useless. It's just that IBIS makes them
more capable, i.e. extends the usage envelope.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
https://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 05/05/2019 00:02, Davoud wrote:
Alfred Molon:
...
12mm, 6 seconds, handheld

No, I don't think "good IBIS" is irrelevant. You're obsessed with
persuading us that our camera bodies sans IBIS are useless, and that
makes the matter relevant to you. In 53 years of making photos I have
never had occasion to make a long, hand-held exposure. I have a
selection of tripods and equatorial telescope mounts (can you hand-hold
and track stars for 15 minutes with IBIS?) I only very rarely that I
have occasion to use IS. So your IBIS is of no interest to me at this
time. Thanks for your concern for my immortal soul, though.


In balance . . . it also helps in low light and at distance. If you
don't happen to own wide lenses, IBIS (and ILIS) can save the day if you
like to take pictures under those circumstances. And weight and money.

I accept that you don't (and you don't mind the weight or cost) - but
you're not everybody.

--
Cheers, Rob

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

You're obsessed with
persuading us that our camera bodies sans IBIS are useless,

No, they are not useless. It's just that IBIS makes them
more capable, i.e. extends the usage envelope.

same for ilis.

Alfred Molon:
...IBIS... extends the usage envelope.

"Extends the usage envelope!?" I think I'll try to forget I read that.

You're really hung up on this, aren't you? Are you by any chance the
inventor and patent holder for IBIS? That would explain your obsessive
posting on its supposed virtues.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm