Oly IBIS and Pro lens stabilisation

Hi. 
sorry for being uneducated 😄

I’ve search and posted on another thread, but feel my question is slightly different. 
I’m looking to get the EM1 mkiii with a number of lenses. I think I understand the IBIS but not how it works with the pro lens aspect and the real life benefit. 
im looking at the 40-150 pro and the mc-20, but then wonder if the pano 100-400 might be better. I’ve been going round in circles trying to understand it all (in my defence, I following a stroke, my brain doesn’t like to work as well).  
my photography is more general, but looking to do a little bit of sport/animals very limited birding

what I’m trying to find out is the overall benefit of both option, accepting that the mc-20 would increase to 5.6.

is the pano weather proof on the Oly? I’ve heard issues about fit on the mkii.

does the lens stabilisation work with the mc-20

basically the pros and cons of both - yes I’m asking a lot, and appreciate the input members  give

thanks in advance

Wookie65 wrote:

Hi.
sorry for being uneducated 😄

I’ve search and posted on another thread, but feel my question is slightly different.
I’m looking to get the EM1 mkiii with a number of lenses. I think I understand the IBIS but not how it works with the pro lens aspect and the real life benefit.

Olympus IBIS is amazing, really the best in the industry.  With Olympus lenses that have IS (300/4 and 12-100) the dual or sync IS works very well.  I can handhold my 300/4 at very low shutter speeds and get perfectly sharp images.

Just so you know, dual or sync IS only works with same same brand of camera and lens.  You can use it mixing brands.

im looking at the 40-150 pro and the mc-20, but then wonder if the pano 100-400 might be better.

I haven't seen any direct comparisons that I trust between the two lenses.  Just based on what I know about the lenses and using TC's (I use them a lot) I would suspect the Panny is a bit sharper.

I find the IBIS works well at 300mm, so you will be fine with the 40-150 and MC-20.  Just no dual IS like you would have with the 300/4.

I’ve been going round in circles trying to understand it all (in my defence, I following a stroke, my brain doesn’t like to work as well).
my photography is more general, but looking to do a little bit of sport/animals very limited birding

what I’m trying to find out is the overall benefit of both option, accepting that the mc-20 would increase to 5.6.

Olympus is coming out with a 100-400 sometime this summer.  You could always wait and see what the final product is.  Currently we don't know if it will be weather sealed.  But it is an option.

I have seen good results and bad results using the MC-20 with the 40-150.  It does seem that it works better with the 300/4.  I don't own the MC-20 as I don't really need the extra reach and hardly ever use MC-14 with the 300/4.

is the pano weather proof on the Oly? I’ve heard issues about fit on the mkii.

Over on mu-43.com we had a long discussion about this.  I am someone who uses the crap out of weather sealing and I would never trust cross brand weather sealing based on all the info I have seen.

does the lens stabilisation work with the mc-20

Yes but only on lenses that accept the TC's and only on lenses that have lens IS.  The only Olympus lenses with IS are the 300/4 and 12-100.  I know the MC-20 will work with the 300/4 and 40-150 f2.8 but I don't know about 12-100 (don't own it).

basically the pros and cons of both - yes I’m asking a lot, and appreciate the input members give

thanks in advance

Any other questions don't hesitate to ask.

my 2 copper pieces

Phocal

Wookie65 wrote:

Hi.
sorry for being uneducated 😄

I’ve search and posted on another thread, but feel my question is slightly different.
I’m looking to get the EM1 mkiii with a number of lenses. I think I understand the IBIS but not how it works with the pro lens aspect and the real life benefit.
im looking at the 40-150 pro and the mc-20, but then wonder if the pano 100-400 might be better. I’ve been going round in circles trying to understand it all (in my defence, I following a stroke, my brain doesn’t like to work as well).
my photography is more general, but looking to do a little bit of sport/animals very limited birding

what I’m trying to find out is the overall benefit of both option, accepting that the mc-20 would increase to 5.6.

is the pano weather proof on the Oly? I’ve heard issues about fit on the mkii.

does the lens stabilisation work with the mc-20

basically the pros and cons of both - yes I’m asking a lot, and appreciate the input members give

thanks in advance

Olympus IBIS works, period.

Hand held six second exposure at midnight using Olympus 12-50 kit lens shot in JPEG

The IBIS in your M1 III is even better.

Wookie65 wrote:

Hi.
sorry for being uneducated 😄

I’ve search and posted on another thread, but feel my question is slightly different.
I’m looking to get the EM1 mkiii with a number of lenses. I think I understand the IBIS but not how it works with the pro lens aspect and the real life benefit.
im looking at the 40-150 pro and the mc-20, but then wonder if the pano 100-400 might be better. I’ve been going round in circles trying to understand it all (in my defence, I following a stroke, my brain doesn’t like to work as well).

Hi, very sorry to hear about your stroke.
I don't know what it does to you but it can not be nice.

Tips:

Do not buy everything at once. Get the workhorse-lenses now, and the specialties when you know the limitations of the generic lenses.

In body stabilization: It works. Do Not Worry. It is really good. You can make shots without worrying about high shutterspeeds. My advice is: switch it on and forget about it. It works.

For general photography, the 40-150 Pro is very, very good.  
You do very little birding, so I would recommend the 40-150, because it is useful everywhere.
For birding: Accept its limitations for now, buy another lens later.

Postpone specialty-lenses and the teleconverter for now.
Those will be for sale when you want them.

While you are enjoying your incredible system, Olympus will bring out the 100-400 and the 150-400 Pro.  This will give you more options, and it will bring down second hand prices of other lenses.

So get that camera, with couple of useful lenses on it (12-40 + 40-150 or the 12-100), and just enjoy.

Thanks for all that. Really sensible advice. I’ve had the mki for 5 years, and my purchases are a treat 😄🤫  I’ve had the 12-40 pro and plastic fantastic 40-150. 
Also getting the 7-14 pro and probably 60 macro- having seen so much done with it during lockdown. 
I’m just unsure which way for more reach. I really thought the 40-150 pro had IS.

I’m a lucky one in respect of recovery  so I’m happy with where I am, just live with the few limitations.

Humansvillian wrote:

Wookie65 wrote:

Hi.
sorry for being uneducated 😄

I’ve search and posted on another thread, but feel my question is slightly different.
I’m looking to get the EM1 mkiii with a number of lenses. I think I understand the IBIS but not how it works with the pro lens aspect and the real life benefit.
im looking at the 40-150 pro and the mc-20, but then wonder if the pano 100-400 might be better. I’ve been going round in circles trying to understand it all (in my defence, I following a stroke, my brain doesn’t like to work as well).
my photography is more general, but looking to do a little bit of sport/animals very limited birding

what I’m trying to find out is the overall benefit of both option, accepting that the mc-20 would increase to 5.6.

is the pano weather proof on the Oly? I’ve heard issues about fit on the mkii.

does the lens stabilisation work with the mc-20

basically the pros and cons of both - yes I’m asking a lot, and appreciate the input members give

thanks in advance

Olympus IBIS works, period.

Hand held six second exposure at midnight using Olympus 12-50 kit lens shot in JPEG

The IBIS in your M1 III is even better.

The IBIS of Olympus is indeed as good as it gets but most if not all of the very slow shutter speed shots I see look just like yours. Amazing for 6s but not remotely sharp enough on even cursory examination. I don't see the sense in posting images that are complete soft across the frame as an example of IBIS . A tripod or sitting your camera on some convenient wall or garden table or whatever .

I agree totally that it is far far better than you could get with hand holding without stabilisation . But is giving a false impression to infer that "it works period" when the results are so soft so it clearly does not work for 6s assuming you actually want sharp images as opposed to  just trying the process out .

Wookie65 wrote:

Thanks for all that. Really sensible advice. I’ve had the mki for 5 years, and my purchases are a treat 😄🤫 I’ve had the 12-40 pro and plastic fantastic 40-150.
Also getting the 7-14 pro and probably 60 macro- having seen so much done with it during lockdown.

consider the PL 8-18 as well. It is noticeably lighter than the 7-14 Pro, is filter friendly, unlike the 7-14, and it goes out to 18mm. 7mm is nicer, but 18mm is so useful in that it can significantly lessen the number of lens changes, and can be the only lens you need in a city. 18mm coveted 35mm FF FOV, one of the most generally useful focal lengths.

I’m just unsure which way for more reach. I really thought the 40-150 pro had IS.

Another way to go is the Oly 12-100 Pro - handles well on a grippy body like an EM1.I owned the 40-150 Pro, excellent lenses but little used due to size and weight - used mine mostly for shooting flowers at the long end. I sold my 12-40 shortly after getting the 12-100 last year, and two months ago I sold my 40-150 Pro as well and never looked back. I still have the 40-150 plastic fantastic if I want to go light 8-18 and 40-150r, but the truth is I almost never use the little 40-150 at all. My two lens combo now is the 8-18 and 12-100. Perhaps the upcoming 100-400 might compliment this duo but thses days I do not get out to shoot wildlife so 100mm works for my needs. Also 60mm macro. Keep in mind that the 12-100, like the 40-150 Pro is pretty good for close up work, 0.2x at the long end, and 0.3x mag at the wide end. 40-150r is not good for close up work.

I’m a lucky one in respect of recovery so I’m happy with where I am, just live with the few limitations.

Happy is good 😃😃😃

I will second what Phocal said.  The 40-150 f2.8 is a very sharp lens.  However, TCs just magnify the image.  There is always a loss of resolution based on the amount magnification of the TC, only partially compensated by the greater number of pixels compared to an image crop of the lens without TCs.  Images with either the MC14 or MC20 would be better than cropped images without the TCs, but would not be as good as images without the TC when you can move closer to the target.

I would expect the 100-400 to be somewhat better at 300mm than the MC20+40-150 f2.8.  This may not be obvious with uncropped images, but may be noticeable at a 100% view, when the images are very accurately focused.

The Olympus MC14 and MC20 are compatible with only the 40-150 f2.8 and 300mm f4.  Both TCs work very well on the 300mm f4 with dual stabilization.

The Olympus IBIS works very well on the E-M1.2 and E-M1.3.  I posted a thread earlier today where I compared two older FTs lenses at 300mm & 283mm to the 300mm f4.  Those images were shot at shutter speeds of 1/60-1/80 handheld with the older lenses using only IBIS.  I shot several thousand images to be able to get comparison images at the same position and none showed any camera/lens motion blur.

The dual stabilization is exceptional, but would be useful for you for only the 12-100mm f4 lens, unless you got the 300mm f4.

The back story behind the six second exposure shot of my wife’s garden at midnight was that not only was it hand held, it was done in scene mode using “night scene” with the camera handling all settings, including autofocus. It selected six seconds, 200 ISO,  3.5 aperture (max) and -.03 EV.

i cannot imagine how much better the admittedly soft photo would have been if shot in reasonable light with exposure under a second, at ISOs more appropriate for low light photography.
I calculated the stops and came up with about six stops.

The new M1 3 has better IBIS.  Shooting with good glass in daylight, the problem ought to be having the subject stand still long enough to not blur the photo.

The MC-14 and MC-20 only work on the 40-150 PRO and 300 PRO.

Humansvillian wrote:

The back story behind the six second exposure shot of my wife’s garden at midnight

Funnily enough here at my home it is also my "wife's garden" .Though when it comes to the unpleasant side of gardening double digging for potatoes etc it suddenly becomes our garden

was that not only was it hand held, it was done in scene mode using “night scene” with the camera handling all settings, including autofocus. It selected six seconds, 200 ISO, 3.5 aperture (max) and -.03 EV.

i cannot imagine how much better the admittedly soft photo would have been if shot in reasonable light with exposure under a second, at ISOs more appropriate for low light photography.
I calculated the stops and came up with about six stops.

The new M1 3 has better IBIS. Shooting with good glass in daylight, the problem ought to be having the subject stand still long enough to not blur the photo.

I am honestly not intending to be glib Olympus IBIS and the latest Panasonic versions really are superb . For video it is incredible , but as with all tech it has its limitations.

James Stirling wrote:

Humansvillian wrote:

The back story behind the six second exposure shot of my wife’s garden at midnight

Funnily enough here at my home it is also my "wife's garden" .Though when it comes to the unpleasant side of gardening double digging for potatoes etc it suddenly becomes our garden

was that not only was it hand held, it was done in scene mode using “night scene” with the camera handling all settings, including autofocus. It selected six seconds, 200 ISO, 3.5 aperture (max) and -.03 EV.

i cannot imagine how much better the admittedly soft photo would have been if shot in reasonable light with exposure under a second, at ISOs more appropriate for low light photography.
I calculated the stops and came up with about six stops.

The new M1 3 has better IBIS. Shooting with good glass in daylight, the problem ought to be having the subject stand still long enough to not blur the photo.

I am honestly not intending to be glib Olympus IBIS and the latest Panasonic versions really are superb . For video it is incredible , but as with all tech it has its limitations.

In 1983 I worked at an office that had an IBM Selectric printer, that was replaced in 1984 with a daisy wheel printer. The Selectric was a ball with characters on it that would whirl to the right character, strike the page, and retract. The new daisy wheel printer was much more logical to me, as it was a wheel with all the characters on it that spun only on one axis and then struck the page and came back. When I got my own office I used a daisy wheel printer, although I had one Selectric typewriter to address envelopes (it still works today).

Then about 1987 or so I got a letter that had different size fonts on it, and called my friend who sent it to me and asked how he did that, and he replied he had something new called a laser printer. It cost something like two thousand dollars, and it's somewhere in storage today, and might still work. It lasted until laser printers became so cheap my office assistants would buy one about the way you buy another pair of good shoes.

Bubble jet printers came out later, and they are great but not yet letter grade, but plenty good enough for everyday use. The one at home in our home office cost something like $40 and the pair of cartridges tt uses cost more than the printer if I buy the name brand. At the office the new laser jet color printers cost $400 and the cartridges for them cost $400 for four regular sized ones, and twice that for the extra large. Eventually the recyclers will crack the code on the chips and the cartridges will cost a fraction of new.

Black and white laser jets cost a hundred dollars and the recycled cartridges for them are so cheap I don't remember what they cost. The ones we have are over ten years old at least.

Industrial engineers, are some of the smartest people on the planet. The product has to be able to be produced by the millions, work like a crowbar, not require any service, and last so long the customer wants a better one, and be set aside still working the way it did when new.

The first IBIS on a digital camera was on the 2003 Minolta DiMage A1

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/minoltadimagea1

It was good for three stops.

How in the heck, does the mechanism stand up to shaking the sensor as fast as it does, and never break, never mess up, and last the life of the camera?

It's a modern miracle, but not any more miraculous than watching the wheel on an IBM Selectric spin around and strike the paper, perfect every time, and never wearing out or needing any service.

The IBM Selectric, came out in 1961.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Selectric_typewriter

What engineers, hath wrought,,,,