Old age and IBIS

jerryf128 · Dec 12, 2019

First thing.... I have the x-t2. Due to old age, and who knows what else, it is getting harder to handhold the camera for shooting small animals like squirrels, ducks in ponds etc. I am toying with the idea of buying/trading my t-2 for the x-h1, for it's IBIS. The only lenses I have are the 16-50 and the 50-230mm ( I know I know ) the xc lenses are not the greatest, but it is what it is. My question is, will the IBIS on the x-h1 make much of a difference? I know I can use a tripod or monopod, but I prefer handholding for shooting critters in a parks etc. I have read that Panasonic cameras and lenses have really good Ibis, but I like the " Fuji sims."

Any thoughts?

Thanks

JNR · Dec 13, 2019

OK, then... Given that you're leaning toward keeping the your current body perhaps the logical move would be to trade the 50-230 for the 55-200 - which is a bit heavier and pulls in a full stop extra light.

Not that I have anything against the 50-230 - it is my all-time favorite zoom. Still, that extra stop will allow you to increase shutter speed accordingly. That would provide considerably more added stability than just stacking IBIS with OIS at long focal lengths.

jerryf128 · Dec 13, 2019

I will consider the 55-200. It would be nice to have the faster speed, however, I like the extra FL on the 50-230. As you said the added weight for me would also be nice. Also maybe a bigger hand grip.

JNR · Dec 13, 2019

Bigger hand grip (generic or Fuji) and a decent monopod will make a huge difference. I love using a monopod - and it gets far more use than the tripod. Try that before switching main equipment, IMO.

--
JNR

Steve Bingham · Dec 13, 2019

Chronic afib also . . . afib for the last 35 years! Warfarin for last 20 years . It works. Self test every 3 weeks. Now use the Fuji X-H1 . . . and 6 lenses. LOVE it. You might want to reconsider? I also use the Fuji 90mm (incredible resolution) so the X-H1 was necessary for me.

--
Steve Bingham

sluggy_warrior · Dec 13, 2019

Steven Seven said:
Jerry, as far as I know, IBIS is usually *less* effective than OIS. I am not sure how good the OIS implementation is on your lenses, but if it's as good as 18-55mm [1], your setup is already as good as it gets.

[1] I regularly get acceptable shots at 1/8 of a second with its OIS on X-T3.

I'm not too old, but getting there. I've practiced various hand-holding techniques (sniping position, breathing, ...) and can easily get sharp 1/8 consistently with the 18-55 @ 55mm, or 1/15 with the 18-135 @135mm. However, without OIS, I still have about 1/3 of the shots slightly blurry at 1/125 with the 56/1.2, and thus now raised the minimum SS for AutoISO to 1/180 instead.

I love these prime lens so much, but without OIS/IBIS, they're missing a lot of shots. If the X-T4 will come out with IBIS, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.

Steve Bingham · Dec 13, 2019

Good point - and the reason I bought the 18-55 along with the T2. However, as my favorite lenses, like the 90mm, do not have OS. I now have the H1 and 6 Fuji lenses. Besides, the X-H1 is one heck of a camera . . . besides IBIS!

JNR said:
Steve Bingham said:

Yes. It can help, especially with long lenses. I was a walk-on for two major university rifle teams so steadiness is something comes easy for me. And yet, I love IBIS. Why? Long lenses and diminishing light. Just get the Fuji X-H1. I did, for exactly the reasons stated. Most pictures are not tack sharp.

Oh, and I am 83 and still don't shake when taking a picture . . . many years as a working pro in photography probably helped.

Click to expand...

Steve, are you referencing only the long lenses that lack OIS?

I completely agree on that. Keep in mind, though, the OP has OIS lenses. He will need IBIS for any long lens he buys in the future that lacks OIS. However, a lot of testing was done by folks with Pentax lenses and bodies to compare the effectiveness of OIS vs. IBIS because that system did not build on combining the two technologies at the same time. The conclusion was that IBIS was superior for wide to normal FoV, but it was less effective than OIS as you go further into the telephoto realm.

I suspect that the same is true for Fuji - and the added impact of IBIS on a longer focal length that already has OIS would be marginal. Other considerations should focus on the source of lacking stability - and in cases where age is the main factor, added weight will typically make matters worse.

--
Steve Bingham

KariP · Dec 13, 2019

jerryf128 said:
Hi KariP Dr. says it is just an age thing ( 79 yrs. ).

Hi

If you have your muscles and some strength left (only 79 !) the heavy X-H1 with a grip and IBIS might help.

rponiarski · Dec 13, 2019

I also have problems with hand tremors and bought the XH-1. The Fuji IBIS is pretty good. I'm getting sharp images at anything above 1/125, which is good for me and sometimes down to 1/80. I have owned Olympus and Panasonic, whose IBIS is better, but I've also owned Sony which is much worse.

JNR · Dec 13, 2019

rponiarski said:
I also have problems with hand tremors and bought the XH-1. The Fuji IBIS is pretty good. I'm getting sharp images at anything above 1/125, which is good for me and sometimes down to 1/80. I have owned Olympus and Panasonic, whose IBIS is better, but I've also owned Sony which is much worse.

I'm getting the love y'all have for the XH-1... and it is very apparent that great care went into all aspects of the design. It is a miracle given that Fuji had no intention to implement IBIS with the very limited image circle non-OIS lenses designed prior. The idea was compactness in a decent-sized format... Something had to give.

Still, for those of us who wanted relief from back aches and the bulk of a larger format set-up (carry a Bronica 645 rig on holiday for a few days to get the idea)... well, the XH-1 just isn't headed in the right direction for some of us.

Still far more appealing compared to where some of us came from in the Pentax system where the K-1 might have been the very best value FF digital ever put out there... But those big, heavy (rebadged) zooms that went with it really confused most of the core users. Yeah, IBIS is great - Pentax was the first to exploit the widest array of its virtues!

Ultimately, I'm in the small gem camp... and came here to sample the f/2 'crons and more-compact zooms... and very happy with the decision. Not looking back - much.

jerryf128 · Dec 13, 2019

I know this is subjective, but curious, what do you think of Panasonic jpegs vs Fuji?

rponiarski · Dec 14, 2019

Both have decent colors, though I like the Fuji's better. They are a bit more natural than the ones from the Panasonic G9 I had. I also think the Fuji does best in Capture One. They are alright in Lightroom or ACDSee, but Capture One seems to really bring the best out of them.

JasonTheBirder · Dec 14, 2019

Yes, I use IBIS. I turned it off once by accident and it made a huge difference. Even when you can handhold fairly steadily, you can then use a slower shutter speed and get cleaner shots in dim light. Totally worth it.

KaanG · Dec 14, 2019

jerryf128 said:
I know this is subjective, but curious, what do you think of Panasonic jpegs vs Fuji?

Question is not directed to me but let me jump in

People love to talk about the fuji film simulations. I also like them and know them by heart, how they react to different scenarios. Recently had a chance to experiment with Panasonic profiles and I think I would pick Panasonic because of the versatility and true to life colors.

Don't get me wrong, fuji colors are very unique and have their own character. But the renderation is usually not true to life. The Classic Chrome is too much muted, the Velvia goes wild with greens, Pro Neg is too boring etc.

With panasonic, vivid is just vidid, natural is just natural, scenary renders true to life colors. L Mono D has great grain which would be in the same ballpark with the Acros

KariP · Dec 14, 2019

KaanG said:
jerryf128 said:

I know this is subjective, but curious, what do you think of Panasonic jpegs vs Fuji?

Click to expand...

Question is not directed to me but let me jump in

People love to talk about the fuji film simulations. I also like them and know them by heart, how they react to different scenarios. Recently had a chance to experiment with Panasonic profiles and I think I would pick Panasonic because of the versatility and true to life colors.

Don't get me wrong, fuji colors are very unique and have their own character. But the renderation is usually not true to life. The Classic Chrome is too much muted, the Velvia goes wild with greens, Pro Neg is too boring etc.

With panasonic, vivid is just vidid, natural is just natural, scenary renders true to life colors. L Mono D has great grain which would be in the same ballpark with the Acros

Fujifilm has their own theory of colors and "remembering " the colors we have seen. They are not meant to be "true" absolutely. Just versions.

At the moment Capture One offers huge packages of well built ways to use the original RAW files - and also Fujifilm film simulations. These Capture One Styles offers really many versions. It is not actually important to compare JPEG differences. Shoot RAW and forget the differences. It is not the camera - it is the software we use....

--

Loading…

www.captureone.com

Kari
I started SLR film photography in 1968, first DSLR was Canon 40D in 2007. Now Fujifilm X-E3 and X-H1 for nature, walking around ,traveling/landscapes - fantastic 5DMkIV for landscapes, macro , BIF ... .

MrALLCAPS · Dec 14, 2019

The IBIS on the X-H1 is very good, I can tell the difference from images from that and the X-Pro2. But it is a much heavier camera, so you have to take that in consideration.

Handlimg is also very good. If you can try one out, don't hesitate to do so.

Il Mostro · Dec 14, 2019

MrALLCAPS said:
The IBIS on the X-H1 is very good, I can tell the difference from images from that and the X-Pro2. But it is a much heavier camera, so you have to take that in consideration.

Handlimg is also very good. If you can try one out, don't hesitate to do so.

In my experience, weight and handling are not always directly corellated. While the X-H1 is larger and heavier than its other X counterparts, it balances well with a wide variety of lenses.

An offbeat analogy would be tennis racquet weights. There is static weight (the weight of the racquet on a scale) and swing weight, which is a combination of the static weight and the balance point of the racquet (the point on the racquet where it achieves perfect balance). Based on this, racquets are described as even balance, head-light or head-heavy. The combined factors determine how the racquet feels in the hand and the perceived ease of swinging it for extended periods of time. There are other resulting elements (like the plow through of the racquet) that do not apply to cameras, but the effect of balance and weight on handling is very much the same.

I own an X-H1, X-T2 and X-E3/1 and throw a variety of different size and weight lenses on them. Unless sticking with small, light primes, the X-H1 simply handles better with a wider variety of lenses for me.

MrSee · Dec 14, 2019

The X-H1 should make a big difference for you. Also, when you get use to the shutter, it’s a great help.

Samuraidog · Dec 14, 2019

I'm in the same boat as you OP. I've got the X-T2 and find that I want/need the stabilization. However, I'm holding off for the next Fujifilm camera with IBIS. The X-H2 or X-T4 (assuming it has IBIS).

MrALLCAPS · Dec 14, 2019

Il Mostro said:
MrALLCAPS said:

The IBIS on the X-H1 is very good, I can tell the difference from images from that and the X-Pro2. But it is a much heavier camera, so you have to take that in consideration.

Handlimg is also very good. If you can try one out, don't hesitate to do so.

Click to expand...

In my experience, weight and handling are not always directly corellated. While the X-H1 is larger and heavier than its other X counterparts, it balances well with a wide variety of lenses.

It does balance well with larger/heavier lenses. The 16mm f/1.4 stays on it and when I was messing wiith the 1616-55mm f/2.8 it balanced quite good.

Il Mostro said:
An offbeat analogy would be tennis racquet weights. There is static weight (the weight of the racquet on a scale) and swing weight, which is a combination of the static weight and the balance point of the racquet (the point on the racquet where it achieves perfect balance). Based on this, racquets are described as even balance, head-light or head-heavy. The combined factors determine how the racquet feels in the hand and the perceived ease of swinging it for extended periods of time. There are other resulting elements (like the plow through of the racquet) that do not apply to cameras, but the effect of balance and weight on handling is very much the same.

I own an X-H1, X-T2 and X-E3/1 and throw a variety of different size and weight lenses on them. Unless sticking with small, light primes, the X-H1 simply handles better with a wider variety of lenses for me.

My smaller lenses stay on either my Xpro2 or XE3.

KaanG · Dec 14, 2019

KariP said:
KaanG said:

jerryf128 said:

I know this is subjective, but curious, what do you think of Panasonic jpegs vs Fuji?

Click to expand...

Question is not directed to me but let me jump in

People love to talk about the fuji film simulations. I also like them and know them by heart, how they react to different scenarios. Recently had a chance to experiment with Panasonic profiles and I think I would pick Panasonic because of the versatility and true to life colors.

Don't get me wrong, fuji colors are very unique and have their own character. But the renderation is usually not true to life. The Classic Chrome is too much muted, the Velvia goes wild with greens, Pro Neg is too boring etc.

With panasonic, vivid is just vidid, natural is just natural, scenary renders true to life colors. L Mono D has great grain which would be in the same ballpark with the Acros

Click to expand...

Fujifilm has their own theory of colors and "remembering " the colors we have seen. They are not meant to be "true" absolutely. Just versions.

I am not old enough and didn't do enough photography in the "good old film days" but I like the film simulations regardless.

KariP said:
At the moment Capture One offers huge packages of well built ways to use the original RAW files - and also Fujifilm film simulations. These Capture One Styles offers really many versions. It is not actually important to compare JPEG differences. Shoot RAW and forget the differences. It is not the camera - it is the software we use....

Once you learn them inside out, it cuts out the post processing time considerably. Plus, this is the beauty of shooting mirrorless in the first place. See the actual result before even pressing the shutter button.

The option of shooting JPG+RAW is the way to go. The only disadvantage is you use more space but that's OK. Both Panasonic and Fuji have in camera RAW converters and you can always change the simulation or profile later when you are resting.\

I like this workflow, frame in camera, select the appropriate profile, do slight edits in camera if needed, upload to phone or tablet and the end.

Old age and IBIS

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

JasonTheBirder

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts