How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

Started Feb 13, 2013 | Questions thread
Kim Letkeman
Kim Letkeman Forum Pro • Posts: 33,424
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

lsundy wrote:


I've been considering (for a while now) buying a Pany G3/G5 kit, which, together with a wide angle and/or portrait prime, would hopefully give me a step-up from my current Pany FZ-35.

However, what troubles me is the lack of IS in the Pany bodies. if I want the advantages of IS (and I am battling to understand why one wouldn't), then am I not excluding the option of using Olympus lenses and many third party lenses which are not stabilized with the Pany body?

Some of us come from Canikon land where in body IS in Sony and Pentax bodies did not trump the big guns in any way shape or form.

So why is that?

Because with fast primes, you are often shooting people and you need high shutter speed sto stop their movement, which stops your hand shake too. And if you are shooting still life or architecture, you can stabilize by bracing or using a mono/tripod ...

Photographers can still use techniques from before a decade ago ... it;s not the new world that Oly shooters think it is ...

This clearly does not seem to bother the thousands of Pany m43 users out there, and I am hoping that someone can explain to me why!

As above. And for those of us coming from Nikon (as one obvious example) ergonomics trump everything, and Panny bodies are very good on that score.

 Kim Letkeman's gear list:Kim Letkeman's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 990 Fujifilm FinePix F770EXR Nikon D90 Nikon D600 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +15 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