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

Started Apr 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
MatsP
Senior MemberPosts: 1,154Gear list
Like?
Re: In most conditions stabilisation is irrelevant
In reply to Anders W, Apr 10, 2013

Anders W wrote:

MatsP wrote:

Agree. I had before my OMD a Canon 40D and I only used lenses without stabilization  Very seldom I really missed it. I swapped some mediocre IS equipped lenses like the kit lens 17-55 and the 55-250, for the much sharper Sigma 17-70/2,8-4,5 and 70-210/2,8 (wonderful lens) without IS and was much happier.

You should have mated the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 with another body Mats. I chose that lens as well, after careful selection, and used it successfully for quite a few years with my Pentax K100D, equipped with Pentax SR of course.

Nothing wrong with 40D, it was a very nice camera and a good mate to the 17-70. I really liked that lens and I miss something of similar sharpness, fastness, "ruggedness" and reach as a standard zoom for my E-M5. Maybe the coming 12-40 will be something like that.

Of course IS is a good thing in certain situations with bad light if you've got it, but you'll manage without. Just remember the rule not to use longer shutter times than the FF equivalent focus lengths. For instance if you use 150 mm on m4/3, don't go under 1/300 s unless you have a tripod or other support or very steady hands.

Sometimes I have a feeling that the IBIS seems to have it's own life in certain situations and causes a kind of "circular" blur which is visible on big prints or when pixel peeping, so if the shutter time is short enough I think it might be better to put it off.

 MatsP's gear list:MatsP's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Canon Pixma MG8150 DxO Optics Pro Standard +1 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