R8-no ibis vs. R6 MKll - Ibis

ZX11 wrote:

Ephemeris wrote:

ZX11 wrote:

SafariBob wrote:

j tokarz wrote:

Years and years ago no cameras had ibis or anything like it. Nothing on the lenses either. Go back in time and look at the fantastic sharp picture. 1940s to 1990.

Well daytime at f8 is not too demanding

IBIS sounds very useful,...for a very very specific shot. Very dark still life where your hand is the best support. Not handy for other shots where the subject might move or the shutter speed is above 1/30sec or you have a monopod.

It's not even handy for long telephoto where every movement is magnified a lot so lens stabilization is needed. The more I read this thread, the more specific and limited IBIS sounds. A gimmick to sell bodies with over hyped "you need IBIS" marketing. I need it as much as I need one of those 1980's zig zag decorative car antennas glued to the camera.

I don't think that's an accurate conclusion. When we had our first R5 we had an R as well. The keeper rate with the R5 improved and the ability to shoot a stop less shutter speed.

That's not a gimmick it's a system that is actively delivering positive results.

You don't run into subject motion problems? Eye blurred at that stop less shutter speed because they are not holding still enough?

No eyes blurred no. Sometimes the ISO is pushed very high to improve shutter speed. That's another tool in the toolbox. So that question is more a case of do photographers ever use a slower shutter speed? Well I think it's a likely yes.

That is for people or animal shots, for landscape and city scene photogs, I'm surprised a tripod or monopod wouldn't be standard in their tool kit anyway. Hence, not seeing the value of IBIS.

So a steady camera is another tool in the toolbox. But carrying one around and setting it up takes time. We have enough situations where that isn't possible.

So this is a question of do photographers ever use a slower relative to focal length without a tripod? I think that's a likely yes.

Admittedly, I did have one time I thought IBIS would be handy where I was at 1/100th and stopped down a bit with the RF 85 f1.2 to get three people in focus together and my trigger finger was sloppy/rushed. Lots of camera shake I had to reposition and think about to eliminate.

If your work is often using that type of lens (focal length and aperture) then you may be less inclined to benefit from IBIS (apart from some corner cases as you have highlighted).

IBIS, or lens IS, would have let me hold the camera unsteadily and roughly snap the shutter button while the results stayed sharp. At least, I think it would.

If your camera has it then I guess you would know but even with it it's tricky to tell as I can't turn it off independent of the lens system. But I think it could well have helped. If that's a corner case to decide between camera bodies then I can see why you may not find it value for money.

For lenses that don't have IS we have an EF 100mm F2.8 and it's helped quite a bit.

It's also worth considering with improvements to the ability to shoot in lower light, high gains that is then linked to the IBIS benefit.

Finally the wider use of improving AI noise/shake/enlargement systems which is also linked.

If they have it to you for free I think most would say yes, but how much it's worth should be carefully thought about.

I suppose that's why we have this large thread about it. Many different views.

-- hide signature --

"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."