Double stabilisation in lense and camera "good"??

[42andreas]

Due to a defect I was "out-of-camera" for nearly 4 weeks. The time I begin starting thinking of a second cam or, going further, making my "old" alpha 6000 the second/backup and buying a new A6500.

Therefore I begin to think if the benefits of the 6500 are worth the bucks and read many of the good threads therefore here.

The open question: Do I have "bigger" benefits of double image stabilisation?

Background: Due to the A6000 (beside one) have only native E-Mount lenses with stabilasition like SEL18105, SEL1018, SEL55210, SEL50F18. Only the 24mm Zeiss is not..

 

[Jacobman]

That is a good question, looks like most of your lenses are already stabilized and you possibly could have just got the 6300. I thought I read that the camera disables the OSS in lens and only uses IBIS but I could be mistaken. I ordered the 6500 and am sure to research all these details once I get it.

 

[dbm61]

Pic is from a7ii, but applies to the a6500.

 

[K E Hoffman]

You never get double stabilization with Sony.

You get improved stabilization.

The camera turns off the axis the lens covers then adds what the camera can do to that.

I just upgraded and will not be able to get the Sigma 30mm F1.4 which is a great unstablized lens (my hands need stabilization)

And that will pay off some of the cost up upgrading.

 

[42andreas]

Pic is from a7ii, but applies to the a6500.

Thanks, good illustration!

So nop double stabilisation but improved...

 

[photo_rb]

Good question and I'm interested in hearing what others say. I can tell you for sure that it does not work well with my Canon 70-300 and Fotodiox adapter. I get the best stabilization using what the lens provides, second best body only and worst with both turned on...even worse than both turned off. I only have the Sony 10-18 that is stabilized and haven't had time to test it.

 

[K E Hoffman]

Good question and I'm interested in hearing what others say. I can tell you for sure that it does not work well with my Canon 70-300 and Fotodiox adapter. I get the best stabilization using what the lens provides, second best body only and worst with both turned on...even worse than both turned off. I only have the Sony 10-18 that is stabilized and haven't had time to test it.

IF you are shooting a Non-e mount lens. I would say choose one. I am not sure there is any protocol for the camera to know if a Canon or Nikon adapter lens is stabilized and what axis etc it is on.

I would only double up with e-mount and maybe even Sony lenses where the cooperation was designed in. My A6500 and SEL18200 and 50mm OSS work great with combined stabilization.

 

[techjedi]

Pic is from a7ii, but applies to the a6500.

Thanks, good illustration!

So nop double stabilisation but improved...

It is improved because a lens will always do Pitch/Yaw stabilization better than the body can, particularly at focal lengths 90mm and longer. Almost none of the FE lenses shorter than 90mm have OSS because the IBIS will be good enough to avoid the bulk and complexity of the OSS in the lens. Longer pretty much requires it and almost all of the FE lenses 90+ have OSS.

In the APS-C world, most E-mount lenses had OSS only because the bodies did not.

 

[OlyPent]

It apparently does work well with new Panasonic gear, but I haven't obtained a Panasonic lens that will allow it yet. Dual stabilization if they work together properly would give you the image view stabilization of the lens I.S. with the regular stabilization within the body. Could be good for 5-6 stops.