Moose:
As you have the E-M5 mk2 and the 12-100, have you tried the IBIS and OIS
together? If so, what improvement do you see?
Martin
On 2017-02-16 11:27 PM, Moose wrote:
On 2/16/2017 4:27 PM, Bob Benson wrote:
Moose said: the PLeica 100-400 lens. I love that lens more than I will
ever love a camera bag.
I'm curious ... if you use on an Oly body, do you rely on the lens
I*** or
the body I*** ?
Using that acronym repeatedly is just asking for NSA to send your name
to the folks with the black helicopters. It's a shame that those
insurgents took the name of the old Egyptian Creation Goddess, but
whaddya gonna do?
As to in-lens IS (OIS) vs. in-body IS (IBIS) (notice the unavoidable
connection to the Nile?), on my first serious outing, I took a number
of duplicate shots of various stuff out in nature. I didn't keep notes
as to which was which. When I later pixel peeped, necessarily
unbiased, as I didn't know which was which, I couldn't see any
difference, so I stopped worrying about it. I've been using the IBIS
since, figuring 5-axis is better than 2 axis, esp. as I have had a
tendency over the years to rotate the camera around the lens axis as I
make spastic stabs at the shutter button, and the 5-axis should help
there. As it happens, that's doesn't seem to be a problem with this
relatively large, heavy lens.
If one really wants the theoretically best IS for this lens, the lens
(and many Panny OIS lenses) coordinates with the IBIS in the GX8 (and
85 etc??) to give the best of both. Howsomever, I don't really know if
that might be best, better than E-M5 II IBIS alone.
When I was using E-M5 and GX7 side-by-side, I would rate the Panny
3-axis and Oly 5-axis IBIS systems as a push. When I looked closely at
a few 300 mm images where I thought there was a difference, I found it
was really a slight difference is the focal plane chosen by AF, with
either defensible as good AF, on a 3D subject much deeper than DoF.
But then the E-M5 II came along, with much better IBIS than either of
those earlier bodies. What I don't know is whether the GX8 has a
similar improvement. Although I've not heard that it does, I've not
paid much attention. It got bigger and heavier, to no discernible
purpose - AND - Oly added HR Mode and Focus Bracketing, which are a
giant leap forward for my photography, so the GX8 became moot.
On the other side, The new Oly lenses with OIS, 300/4 and 12-100/4,
also co-ordinate OIS and IBIS, actually extending the range of motion
over which X-Y compensation can operate. Either it's slicker than the
Panny system, or Oly's video is slicker. :-)
Unfortunately, the two body-lens IS coordination systems are
incompatible.
E-M5 II IBIS is amazing - 1/20 sec @ 600 mm eq?
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/E-M5II_IBIS/Robin.htm>
So I'm pretty content. As with the example robin, I have more problems
with subject motion than IS in practical use. The E-M1 II is supposed
to be even better. I hope to encounter that improvement this
fall/winter in an E-M5 III. :-)
Thanks.
Whelks,
Shellfish Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|