How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

Started Feb 13, 2013 | Questions thread
bowportes Veteran Member • Posts: 3,489
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

Skeeterbytes wrote:

Hi Len,

I think it's reasonable to go with a Panny body so long as you can work around this limitation (lack of IS with legacy and non-OIS lenses). With that said, I chose Oly specifically because of IBIS when picking a dslr system and when selecting my first µ4/3 camera.

Conservatively, it gives an extra one to two stops that become a distinct advantage in a lot of scenarios. Good high-ISO performance has made lack of IS a problem less often, but I've learned to leverage IBIS in situations I'd not bother to shoot otherwise.

Many fine OIS lenses are available, but you can rest assured wide and superwide won't typically be aming them. So a lot of the answer depends on your gear and your goals.

While I agree with most of what you say, I'd certainly call the POIS-stabilized Panny 12-35mm "wide;" it (24mm film-equivalent) used to be categorized as the beginning point of ultra-wide. And the various 14-42mm and 14-45mm OIS stabilized Pannys certainly include "wide," even though it is not a fast wide. With the unstabilized Oly 12mm, one should be able to shoot as slow as 1/30th and get consistently good results. At 1/15th some of the shots would still be sharp.

 bowportes's gear list:bowportes's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Fujifilm X-M1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm X-Pro2 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +13 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow