E M-5 and lenses . Reason to be concerned?

Started Apr 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
Anders W
Forum ProPosts: 20,620Gear list
Like?
Re: In most conditions stabilisation is irrelevant
In reply to slimandy, Apr 10, 2013

slimandy wrote:

Anders W wrote:

sgoldswo wrote:

Valentinian wrote:

Money might not be an important issue for some (or many) in this forum. However, it is for me.

After buying the E M-5 with the 12-50 kit, money being what it is, or rather, what it isn't, I had to wait some time before considering other lenses.

Then, one lens at the (long) time, I bought first the 25/1.4,  then the 45-175, then the 14/2.5.

Maybe my next lens (future) will be the Oly 75/1.8 - Or maybe not. Maybe it will be the soon to come Panasonic 150/2.8 - In any case, either of these two lenses will not have stabilization -

So, all my lenses (except the kit lens) will work with IBIS only. Which means that when in a long, long future, I will replace the E M-5 with another mirrorless, it HAS to be an Olympus, for IBIS reasons

And here comes my concern:

Panasonic and others keep releasing cameras, lenses, and more are coming out.

And Olympus? why don't we see other Olympus lenses coming up? What's happening there? did I invest in a sound system?

Stabilisation is irrelevant at the vast majority of shutter speeds.

How do you define "the vast majority of shutter speeds"?

I assume he means the shutter speeds people most often use,

I figured that much. But which would you say those are? And where would you draw the borderline between those where IS is of help and those where it isn't?

and in my case he'd be right. I still use IBIS enough to want to have it rather than not. Not many of my DSLR lenses have stabalisation. My 2 latest purchases are a Sigma 35mm f1.4 and a Zeiss 100mm f2 makro. Heck, the Zeiss doesn't even have AF.

While I am old enough to be thoroughly familiar with a world without AF as well as IS, I appreciate them both, although in the case of AF, I wasn't happy with the way it worked in all regards as long as I was shooting a DSLR with PDAF. Fast and convenient, yes, but not accurate enough for my standards with random errors as well as systematic back- and front-focus issues of various kinds. And MF was harder to use than in the pre-AF days due to the camera and lenses being made for AF. That all got better with MFT, however. IS, by contrast, I found to be a blessing from the very beginning.

In fact at faster shutter speeds it can degrade image quality to leave it on.

Do you have any evidence that it actually does so with any of the stabilization systems available for MFT?

I have for other systems. Bokeh was not as nice with VR (Nikon 70~200). I can find you a link. I have not seen the same research for MFT though.

I have heard about problems with other systems too. But with those I have personally used (Pentax SR, Panasonic OIS, Olympus IBIS as implemented in the E-M5), I have never found any indication that keeping the system on when at shutter speeds so high that it isn't really needed has any adverse effects.

The oly 45 and 75 both perform excellently on the GH3. The announcement I saw suggested the 150mm would have OIS if that's what floats your boat.

similarly, the E-M5 hasn't become a bad camera by virtue of being over 12 months old.

I'm not really sure I understand your concerns

-- hide signature --

www.andrewsandersphotography.co.uk

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow