How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

Started Feb 13, 2013 | Questions
Alumna Gorp Senior Member • Posts: 1,531
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

I would`nt say the IS in other Pens is bad, its just that you can not see it in operation. I had an E3 and thought the IS was great, pretty sure the IS in these new Pens is any worse, if anything it should be better.

I grew up not using IS as well, there were many occasions when I would leave the camera and tripod at home.

 Alumna Gorp's gear list:Alumna Gorp's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +4 more
Steve_
Steve_ Senior Member • Posts: 2,869
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

I'm not trying to infer the effectiveness of the Pens' IBIS, having owned two. It's just OK at short focal lengths, and like most IBIS, pretty much folds up and blows away at long focal lengths. the OMD's IBIS is not only terrific in the magnitude of the improvement it imparts, but has legs-working essentially as well at long focal lengths as with short ones. Other than the OMD, only the Nikon 70-200/2.8VR that a co-worker let me try impressed me as offering a truly substantial stabilization effect in the telephoto range.

I've not tried an E3, but I think there's every chance its IBIS is better than the Pens. It really can't be worse.

 Steve_'s gear list:Steve_'s gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +13 more
idiotekniQues
idiotekniQues Senior Member • Posts: 1,255
Using IS for motion blur
1

i find it can be creative sometimes, here are a few shots, handheld (all canon 40D & IS lenses). reminds me i need to utilize it more

-- hide signature --

www.pixelsquish.com

 idiotekniQues's gear list:idiotekniQues's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +2 more
inlawbiker Senior Member • Posts: 1,557
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

I've always wondered why nobody builds IS prime lenses. Seems like it would make sense but what do I know.

Oops I'm correcting myself - Nikon makes a few like the 85mm macro VR and 105mm VR.  Also the 200mm f/2 VR, which costs $5000.  So there you go.

G.

 inlawbiker's gear list:inlawbiker's gear list
Nikon D2X Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S +2 more
Clayton Jones Contributing Member • Posts: 866
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?
1

Mike Ronesia wrote:

BingoCharlie wrote:

It potentially limits your use of anything medium- to long-range from Olympus. You don't tend to need IS for shorter focal lengths, so something like the Olympus 12mm or 17mm would probably be fine on a Pany body. I would be more skeptical of the 45mm and 75mm, although I'm sure many use them successfully.

I have and use 3 Panasonic M43's bodies and don't have any issues. The slow shutter speeds that are helped with IBIS is a limited type of photography ie: low light/static objects. Would it be nice to have, sure. Do I need it to get good shots, 97.163% of the time, no.

Same here.  I use the 45mm and 75mm on my GH2, but when I use them I'm most often doing portraits and use a tripod.  If I'm doing hand-held indoor work , which is rare, it would be with the 45mm or the 20mm and I use the wide apertures for higher shutter speeds (and/or boost the ISO).  Outdoors doing hand-held landscape work the shutter speeds are high enough even at f/8, and I tend not to use long telephoto lengths there.  My most often used lens, the 14-45, has IS if I need it, so the lack of IBIS is simply not an issue for me.

I noticed that some others in this thread recited the standard litany re IBIS advantages, all of which is correct in theory.  But it's important to weigh the theory against the practical reality of how you use a camera.  IBIS may or may not be significant depending on how you work.

Regards,
Clayton

Info on black and white digital printing at  
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 3.0   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

 Clayton Jones's gear list:Clayton Jones's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7
robonrome
robonrome Senior Member • Posts: 2,257
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?
1

If in body stabilization is a big deal then it's affecting millions more users than just pany users ...think of all the canon and Nikon dslr users who make do without. Really for wide angle and fast glass it adds little in most situations and in those where it does a tripod is often wanted regardless. For the rest pany offer good selection of IS glass right up there with Olympus. I use the Olympus 60 on my g5 and have never felt limited.

 robonrome's gear list:robonrome's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus E-M1 II Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +14 more
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 3,480
For me, very

I largely use Olympus, 4/3 and legacy lenses, so no in body IS would be a definite disadvantage in low light.

Also, in my tests with the 100-300, the OM-D's IBIS performed better than lens' OIS.

The 100-300 is the only lens with OIS which I still have, but will probably be seling it since I got the 75-300 (much more portable).

I hope that Panasonic does adopt in body IS, because for now it's a deciding argument against their bodies...

Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 3,480
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

I just had to do some interior shots my 7.5 & 9-18: speeds as low as 1/2 sec no tripod available... Yay IBIS!!!

Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 3,480
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

If you know good camera handling technique, then the lack of image stabilization isn't a bother at all. If you don't know it, you can easily learn it.

I shot film for years, so I don't care about image stabilization. I have a couple of Panasonic lenses with it (14-140mm and 100-300mm) and it can be handy when shooting with the 100-300mm, but when the light is good, I simply shut it off.

I have good camera handling technique and shot film for many years (still do). My favorite film cameras were and are those with the least mirror & shutter slap. That said, I find the OM-D's IBIS very useful and leave it on most of the time..

Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 3,480
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

BingoCharlie wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

If you know good camera handling technique, then the lack of image stabilization isn't a bother at all. If you don't know it, you can easily learn it.

If you don't have Jeff or Mike's good technique, IS is really nice to have.

And it's good to have even if you do....

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,348
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?
1

It's useful sometimes and you can solve the problem by buying one GH3 and one OMD body. Seems fairly simple.

Anyone who shot film for ages before IS was a glint in anyone's eye managed to do so and capture some of the most iconic images of all time in the process so I wouldn't really get too hung up on it myself.

OP lsundy New Member • Posts: 8
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?
1

Thanks to all for your responses.

Clearly no consensus here, but lots of interesting replies for me to consider.

Not sure I am any more comfortable than I was before of taking the dive into m43 without IBIS, but based on some of the responses I'm finding it difficult to consider paying double the price of a G5 to get the IBIS of a EM-5.

Len

BingoCharlie Contributing Member • Posts: 849
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

lsundy wrote:

Thanks to all for your responses.

Clearly no consensus here, but lots of interesting replies for me to consider.

Not sure I am any more comfortable than I was before of taking the dive into m43 without IBIS, but based on some of the responses I'm finding it difficult to consider paying double the price of a G5 to get the IBIS of a EM-5.

Len

To each his own.  You also get a better sensor, weather sealing, and a host of other advantages.  But the G5 is certainly an excellent value.  No argument there.

Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 21,468
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

BingoCharlie wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

If you know good camera handling technique, then the lack of image stabilization isn't a bother at all. If you don't know it, you can easily learn it.

If you don't have Jeff or Mike's good technique, IS is really nice to have.

I have it, but find in-body IS really nice anyway.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Alumna Gorp Senior Member • Posts: 1,531
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

lsundy wrote:

Thanks to all for your responses.

Clearly no consensus here, but lots of interesting replies for me to consider.

Not sure I am any more comfortable than I was before of taking the dive into m43 without IBIS, but based on some of the responses I'm finding it difficult to consider paying double the price of a G5 to get the IBIS of a EM-5.

Len

You can get IBIS without paying twice the price of the G5.

All Olympus bodies have inbody IS.

 Alumna Gorp's gear list:Alumna Gorp's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +4 more
BingoCharlie Contributing Member • Posts: 849
Re: How limiting is lack of image stabilization in Pany bodies?

Alumna Gorp wrote:

lsundy wrote:

Thanks to all for your responses.

Clearly no consensus here, but lots of interesting replies for me to consider.

Not sure I am any more comfortable than I was before of taking the dive into m43 without IBIS, but based on some of the responses I'm finding it difficult to consider paying double the price of a G5 to get the IBIS of a EM-5.

Len

You can get IBIS without paying twice the price of the G5.

All Olympus bodies have inbody IS.

True, but the EPL-5/EPM-2 IBIS is 2-axis versus 5-axis in the E-M5.  The E-M5's stabilization is a godsend for those of us with less-than-perfect technique.  Longer shutter speeds, lower ISO, and better results.

mrxak Regular Member • Posts: 218
Old School
4

I guess I'm old school, because all this newfangled stabilization seems fairly superfluous to me. So far my experience has been with Panasonic bodies and I'll leave OIS on if it's available with the lens I'm shooting with, but for lenses without, I don't care one bit. It makes no difference.

When I started with photography, digital wasn't even a thing yet, and when I got some formal training, it was with film. There was certainly no image stabilization involved with any photography I did until I got into M43. Heck, excluding point-and-shoot cameras, M43 is the first time I'm doing color photography.

So, anyway, decisions about shutter speed and such are second nature to me. I've used beanbags before. I've shot on tripods with a mechanical remote shutter release. You know, one of those little pokey-things in a cable. I know how to get pictures without making them all blurry (unless blur is something I want!).

Any shot where image stabilization is going to be a critical factor in the outcome of the picture is probably well outside your typical experience in photography. I'd even bet I can get the same exact shot without image stabilization, too, with a little creativity. Long shutter times can be compensated for easily, cheaply, if you have a bit of experience and enough motivation.

I would also argue that some of the larger Panasonic bodies are more stable, inherently because of their mass, than small light Olympus bodies with IBIS. Any physics teacher could tell you that.

 mrxak's gear list:mrxak's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic GH5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +8 more
idiotekniQues
idiotekniQues Senior Member • Posts: 1,255
Re: Old School

mrxak wrote:

I guess I'm old school, because all this newfangled stabilization seems fairly superfluous to me. So far my experience has been with Panasonic bodies and I'll leave OIS on if it's available with the lens I'm shooting with, but for lenses without, I don't care one bit. It makes no difference.

When I started with photography, digital wasn't even a thing yet, and when I got some formal training, it was with film. There was certainly no image stabilization involved with any photography I did until I got into M43. Heck, excluding point-and-shoot cameras, M43 is the first time I'm doing color photography.

So, anyway, decisions about shutter speed and such are second nature to me. I've used beanbags before. I've shot on tripods with a mechanical remote shutter release. You know, one of those little pokey-things in a cable. I know how to get pictures without making them all blurry (unless blur is something I want!).

Any shot where image stabilization is going to be a critical factor in the outcome of the picture is probably well outside your typical experience in photography. I'd even bet I can get the same exact shot without image stabilization, too, with a little creativity. Long shutter times can be compensated for easily, cheaply, if you have a bit of experience and enough motivation.

I would also argue that some of the larger Panasonic bodies are more stable, inherently because of their mass, than small light Olympus bodies with IBIS. Any physics teacher could tell you that.

clearly, because something was not widely used in your time that means it can't be integral to doing anything.

im sure people remember a time when seatbelts were not around much either.

IS in a camera is not as important as a seatbelt is but the analogy is the same and could be used with a myriad of inventions.

your logic sucks.

-- hide signature --

www.pixelsquish.com

 idiotekniQues's gear list:idiotekniQues's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +2 more
Alumna Gorp Senior Member • Posts: 1,531
Re: Old School

idiotekniQues wrote:

mrxak wrote:

I guess I'm old school, because all this newfangled stabilization seems fairly superfluous to me. So far my experience has been with Panasonic bodies and I'll leave OIS on if it's available with the lens I'm shooting with, but for lenses without, I don't care one bit. It makes no difference.

When I started with photography, digital wasn't even a thing yet, and when I got some formal training, it was with film. There was certainly no image stabilization involved with any photography I did until I got into M43. Heck, excluding point-and-shoot cameras, M43 is the first time I'm doing color photography.

So, anyway, decisions about shutter speed and such are second nature to me. I've used beanbags before. I've shot on tripods with a mechanical remote shutter release. You know, one of those little pokey-things in a cable. I know how to get pictures without making them all blurry (unless blur is something I want!).

Any shot where image stabilization is going to be a critical factor in the outcome of the picture is probably well outside your typical experience in photography. I'd even bet I can get the same exact shot without image stabilization, too, with a little creativity. Long shutter times can be compensated for easily, cheaply, if you have a bit of experience and enough motivation.

I would also argue that some of the larger Panasonic bodies are more stable, inherently because of their mass, than small light Olympus bodies with IBIS. Any physics teacher could tell you that.

clearly, because something was not widely used in your time that means it can't be integral to doing anything.

im sure people remember a time when seatbelts were not around much either.

IS in a camera is not as important as a seatbelt is but the analogy is the same and could be used with a myriad of inventions.

your logic sucks.

-- hide signature --

www.pixelsquish.com

I totally agree with what your saying

The initial poster asked this question.

"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"

I use both Panny and Olympus, my first m4/3 camera was a G2, and coming from an E3 I quickly found Panasonic's way of doing things just sucked, I missed wireless flash and I missed IBIS.

If the poster feels troubled by the lack of IBIS in Panasonic bodies, then Panasonic bodies will not be right for them, end off.

 Alumna Gorp's gear list:Alumna Gorp's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +4 more
mrxak Regular Member • Posts: 218
Re: Old School
5

idiotekniQues wrote:

mrxak wrote:

I guess I'm old school, because all this newfangled stabilization seems fairly superfluous to me. So far my experience has been with Panasonic bodies and I'll leave OIS on if it's available with the lens I'm shooting with, but for lenses without, I don't care one bit. It makes no difference.

When I started with photography, digital wasn't even a thing yet, and when I got some formal training, it was with film. There was certainly no image stabilization involved with any photography I did until I got into M43. Heck, excluding point-and-shoot cameras, M43 is the first time I'm doing color photography.

So, anyway, decisions about shutter speed and such are second nature to me. I've used beanbags before. I've shot on tripods with a mechanical remote shutter release. You know, one of those little pokey-things in a cable. I know how to get pictures without making them all blurry (unless blur is something I want!).

Any shot where image stabilization is going to be a critical factor in the outcome of the picture is probably well outside your typical experience in photography. I'd even bet I can get the same exact shot without image stabilization, too, with a little creativity. Long shutter times can be compensated for easily, cheaply, if you have a bit of experience and enough motivation.

I would also argue that some of the larger Panasonic bodies are more stable, inherently because of their mass, than small light Olympus bodies with IBIS. Any physics teacher could tell you that.

clearly, because something was not widely used in your time that means it can't be integral to doing anything.

im sure people remember a time when seatbelts were not around much either.

IS in a camera is not as important as a seatbelt is but the analogy is the same and could be used with a myriad of inventions.

your logic sucks.

Wow, okay. Did you even read my post? What logic? I'm simply sharing my experience.

 mrxak's gear list:mrxak's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic GH5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +8 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads