I think the problem is, IS generally works well, but are made of floating
elements (as far as I understand) and thus reduce overall image quality.
BUT, a non-blurry shot at 25ln/mm is better than a blurry one at 35ln/mm, so
people generally like IS. But that being said, IS is not a substitute for
Tripod + mirror lockup, which C*non and N*kon would like you to believe..
Albert
----- Original Message -----
From: <GMcGrath@xxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2002 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] C2100uz
> In a message dated 1/6/02 8:00:20 PM Central Standard Time,
> dreammoose@xxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> > How well does the image stabilization work
> > in your experience with these cameras?
>
> I've only had my 2100 for a few weeks, but I think the IS works well. I
took
> some handheld shots at a school Christmas play of a subject all the way
> across a gym at full optical zoom, and couldn't detect any shake. The
> lighting was fairly dim, so the shutter speed had to be slow, but I don't
> know what it was for sure.
> HTH,
> Greg
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|