Reading mode: Light Dark

Blown away by panasonic MEGA OIS

Go to last post
A

Artifact

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
292
Reaction score
14
Location
US
I had an opportunity recently to try Panasonic FZ50 with their image stabilization and compare it to Rebel XT (350d).

What can I say.. obvious negatives aside I was very impressed by panasonic IS. At the maximum zoom (equiv 420 mm) I was able to take blur-free shots @ 1/30s. At the same time I was unable to get shots without visible shake with my rebel and it was only 70mm and the same 1/30s.

I know about the 1/focal length rule but something is not right here. IS can not be THAT good :)

I heard that some people had similar experiences with Pentax in-body IS but could not believe them. My disbelief is now shaken. If in-body IS is really that good then canon should really do something. Not everyone can take tripods with them everywhere and not so many can afford lenses with IS.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photoartifact/
 
Artifact said:
... IS can not be THAT good :)
Click to expand...
It can, and is THAT good.
Artifact said:
I heard that some people had similar experiences with Pentax
in-body IS but could not believe them. My disbelief is now shaken.
If in-body IS is really that good then canon should really do
something.
Click to expand...
Point of order, Panasonic MEGA OIS is in-lens stabilisation. ;-)
Artifact said:
Not everyone can take tripods with them everywhere and
not so many can afford lenses with IS.
Click to expand...
Can't afford IS lenses, then Pentax/Sony is for you. Canon, and many of their users, consider in-lens superior and are not interested in in-body IS. Vive la différence.
 
Artifact said:
I had an opportunity recently to try Panasonic FZ50 with their
image stabilization and compare it to Rebel XT (350d).
What can I say.. obvious negatives aside I was very impressed by
panasonic IS. At the maximum zoom (equiv 420 mm) I was able to take
blur-free shots @ 1/30s. At the same time I was unable to get shots
without visible shake with my rebel and it was only 70mm and the
same 1/30s.
I know about the 1/focal length rule but something is not right
here. IS can not be THAT good :)
Click to expand...
Well, the actual focal length of Panasonic's lens is 7.4-88.8mm, the rest is due to the huge "crop factor" (smaller sensor), so may be this has something to to with it. By the same token, the 70mm lens you tested should be counted as 112mm in comparative terms.
Artifact said:
I heard that some people had similar experiences with Pentax
in-body IS but could not believe them. My disbelief is now shaken.
If in-body IS is really that good then canon should really do
something.
Click to expand...
The Panasonic has in-lens stabilization.

--
Misha
 
If you want to compare the same class, I used a Minolta Z6 , in body stabilization, to Sony and Panasonic in lens and they both blew away the Minolta for steadiness.

Obviously ANY extra feature would be welcome but the reason we all bought Canon DSLRs is for what we consider the better image quality. Image stabilization can be that good so if your style of shooting would vastly benefit from it then maybe it should be a prime consideration for you and the Sony and Pentax offerings are up your alley. It certainly was for me but image quality was also paramount and Canon has the long quality glass with IS so that was my route.
Regards,
Kurt
 
why would you count FOV changes on one camera and not the other? fair would be to compare focal length to focal length, 70-88 in this case.
 
I routinely get 1/2 second at 24mm on my 24-105L, 1/15th at 200mm (320 equivalent) on my 70-200/2.8L IS and just as good on my S3IS.

From a recent trip with just the S3 IS. These shots were just the keepers.



--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
The FZ50, and all other Panasonic P&S cameras have lens IS, not body IS.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
Having owned & hated a Z30 due to its horrendous noise levels, the fact this range has an image stabilisation mode seems rather trite, IMO. The Z50 not only seems just as bad in noise levels but the washed out images with the noise reduction algorithims are just plain awful. It was the poor Z30 image quality that lead me to the world of Canon SLRs, which I am eternally grateful! BTW, if the Z30 was used on a hot day., it seemed that the noise levels increased exponentially

Having owned several cameras with IS (Sony FD91, Sony FD97, Panasonic Z1 & Z30 and now having Canon lenses with IS, I would have to state that the Panasonic system is the least effective, the Sony FD97 was the best (but cumbersome).

My 2c worth.
Stephen
Artifact said:
I had an opportunity recently to try Panasonic FZ50 with their
image stabilization and compare it to Rebel XT (350d).
What can I say.. obvious negatives aside I was very impressed by
panasonic IS. At the maximum zoom (equiv 420 mm) I was able to take
blur-free shots @ 1/30s. At the same time I was unable to get shots
without visible shake with my rebel and it was only 70mm and the
same 1/30s.
I know about the 1/focal length rule but something is not right
here. IS can not be THAT good :)

I heard that some people had similar experiences with Pentax
in-body IS but could not believe them. My disbelief is now shaken.
If in-body IS is really that good then canon should really do
something. Not everyone can take tripods with them everywhere and
not so many can afford lenses with IS.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photoartifact/
Click to expand...
 
Artifact said:
I had an opportunity recently to try Panasonic FZ50 with their
image stabilization and compare it to Rebel XT (350d).
What can I say.. obvious negatives aside I was very impressed by
panasonic IS. At the maximum zoom (equiv 420 mm) I was able to take
blur-free shots @ 1/30s. At the same time I was unable to get shots
without visible shake with my rebel and it was only 70mm and the
same 1/30s.
I know about the 1/focal length rule but something is not right
here. IS can not be THAT good :)

I heard that some people had similar experiences with Pentax
in-body IS but could not believe them. My disbelief is now shaken.
If in-body IS is really that good then canon should really do
something. Not everyone can take tripods with them everywhere and
not so many can afford lenses with IS.
Click to expand...
I shoot with an XT and more recently XTi and use IS with a 24-105 IS and 70-200 f/2.8 IS. I bought an FZ50 for my wife at Christmas. It has all the features I want for her, but I was a little worried about noise after reading all the reviews.

After a few shoots together, I was surprised how well the FZ50 IS works, even at 420mm. With good light, the FZ50 produces very nice JPGs. I keep it set to the lowest ISO, or sometimes IA ISO.

--
Macro-
http://www.pbase.com/dbh/galleries
 
Size / Weight / Lens length / weight.

I can get blur free shots with my Minox B at 1/20s, (about the size and weight of two 9v square batteries), without IS but strangely can't on my 400 with 70-200 f2.8 lens on, can anyone shed any light, (which would allow me to inrease shutter speed at least) :)
 
Are you using your Sigma 17-70, and comparing a non-IS lense with a (built-in) IS lense? What's the point of that?

--
It depends on the eye
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top