E-M10II IBIS is darn good with 100-400mm

Great insights henry.  Thanks!

The pictures taken inside Yodaboshi makes me smile. I was in Japan a year ago (seems like a decade ago now) and enjoyed an hour in one in Sendai during a rain shower. It was very fun trying out all the brands at the same time without hovering salespeople.

Of course, ever since I've been hankering for the 300mm/F4 and the PL 200mm!!!

CDC

"I was holding the lens and body normally (right hand under the lens)"

I would love to see that method!  

Interceptor121 wrote:

dlevitt wrote:

The 10.2 + 100-400 lens combo might be working the same way as some later models.

While not sync/dual IS [lens OIS + 5 axis in body], both the lens and body are active - the IBIS is providing a single axis [likely rotation] working with the lens optical stabilization.

It is my understanding that the current 10.2 firmware provides this with lenses like the 12-100

Roll stabilisation means nothing really for photo as having the landline straight can be achieved looking at the markers on a single shot

AFAIK, roll stabilization (IBIS Z-axis) does not mean making the landline straight but eliminating shake caused by movement in the Z-axis.

AndyH44 wrote:

"I was holding the lens and body normally (right hand under the lens)"

I would love to see that method!

Maybe I was looking in the mirror when I wrote that.

BG28 wrote:

Based on what Robin Wong explained in one of his videos:

1. When using an Oly lens AND body with SYNC IS (12-100, 300), both body and lens IS work together. Oly's 100-400 does not have this.

2. When using an Oly lens (with IS) on a non-SYNC IS body (ex EM-10 series, E-PLx), the lens IS is working, and the IBIS is turned off. Even though there are menu controls for doing the opposite, only the above is true. Oly doesn't give the user a choice.

3. When using an Oly lens (w/o IS) or any Panasonic lens, IBIS is the default. The menu option to turn off body and use lens IS is there specifically to use with Pany lenses, so that when using a Pany telephoto we can use the more effective lens IS.

If I understand Robin correctly, all the images you took are using the 100-400 lens IS. No matter what menu options you chose, the lens IS is the default system because neither the 100-400 nor the EM-10 has SYNC IS, so the camera turns off IBIS.

In the last photo I had the body IS turned ON and the lens IS turned OFF. I assume that the lens IS when switched to OFF turns it OFF so I think that last photo is with only IBIS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vnZ3jhQolM

I whole-heartedly agree with you on the strengths and versatility of m43. I love this system and its cameras and lenses, even though my GAS tells me "we need more moRE MORE".

I really like the modularity of the E-M10II.  Too bad the E-M10III got so many things removed from the firmware.  The E-M10IV restored some things, but some of the things I use with the E-M10II every time I take it out are still gone.  Same for the E-M5III.

BG28 wrote:

Based on what Robin Wong explained in one of his videos:

1. When using an Oly lens AND body with SYNC IS (12-100, 300), both body and lens IS work together. Oly's 100-400 does not have this.

2. When using an Oly lens (with IS) on a non-SYNC IS body (ex EM-10 series, E-PLx), the lens IS is working, and the IBIS is turned off. Even though there are menu controls for doing the opposite, only the above is true. Oly doesn't give the user a choice.

3. When using an Oly lens (w/o IS) or any Panasonic lens, IBIS is the default. The menu option to turn off body and use lens IS is there specifically to use with Pany lenses, so that when using a Pany telephoto we can use the more effective lens IS.

If I understand Robin correctly, all the images you took are using the 100-400 lens IS. No matter what menu options you chose, the lens IS is the default system because neither the 100-400 nor the EM-10 has SYNC IS, so the camera turns off IBIS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vnZ3jhQolM

I whole-heartedly agree with you on the strengths and versatility of m43. I love this system and its cameras and lenses, even though my GAS tells me "we need more moRE MORE".

Excerpt from:

https://robinwong.blogspot.com/2020/08/olympus-mzuiko-100-400mm-f5-63-is-review.html

"when paired with selected Olympus camera models (...), you get additional rolling axis stabilization from the body."

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Chris DC wrote:

Great insights henry. Thanks!

The pictures taken inside Yodaboshi makes me smile. I was in Japan a year ago (seems like a decade ago now) and enjoyed an hour in one in Sendai during a rain shower. It was very fun trying out all the brands at the same time without hovering salespeople.

Ever since the 1980s I have been going in the big camera stores in Japan.  I don't even bother in the States.  I am totally spoiled.

Of course, ever since I've been hankering for the 300mm/F4 and the PL 200mm!!!

CDC

dlevitt wrote:

The 10.2 + 100-400 lens combo might be working the same way as some later models.

While not sync/dual IS [lens OIS + 5 axis in body], both the lens and body are active - the IBIS is providing a single axis [likely rotation] working with the lens optical stabilization.

It is my understanding that the current 10.2 firmware provides this with lenses like the 12-100

I hadn't heard that, but maybe so.  Note that the last photo was taken with only IBIS.  I turned ILIS off:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64528621

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

It is my impression that manufacturers also think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. Why would they otherwise add OIS to long lenses?

SrMi wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

It is my impression that manufacturers also think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. Why would they otherwise add OIS to long lenses?

I saw what you did there. You constructed a strawman fallacy. Probably unintentionally. Yourewordedwhat I wrote and changed the meaning and then commented on what you wrote rather than what I wrote.

Henry Richardson wrote:

SrMi wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

It is my impression that manufacturers also think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. Why would they otherwise add OIS to long lenses?

I saw what you did there. You constructed a strawman fallacy. Probably unintentionally. Yourewordedwhat I wrote and changed the meaning and then commented on what you wrote rather than what I wrote.

I understand now that one can read it that way, but it was not my intention to construct a strawman fallacy :). I try to rephrase my post.

You write that many people (erroneously?) think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. My point is that most (all?) manufacturers also believe that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses (OIS included in long lenses only).

Note that Petr Bambousek turns OIS off on 100-400 and uses IBIS only. He suggests that everyone try to find their best stabilization setting (OIS/IBIS).

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

One more thing I will note is that these photos were taken at 12:00 noon and earlier I had 2 cups of coffee.   That E-M10II IBIS is pretty awesome, isn't it?

SrMi wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

SrMi wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

Henry Richardson wrote:

I turned on the body's IBIS and had the lens IS turned off:

This photo has IBIS turned ON, ILIS turned OFF. The IBIS works well. With care I get shots using my E-M10II + 75-300mm at 300mm without much problem and this photo is at a much longer FL and 1/30 second.

Lots of people say that IBIS is not all that effective at longer focal lengths. Well, even without extreme care I easily managed 1/30 second at about 800mm-efl using only IBIS using an E-M10II. The E-M10II IBIS is rated lower than the E-M5II, E-M5III, E-M1II, E-M1III, E-M1X, E-M10III, E-M10IV, PEN-F, etc.

It is my impression that manufacturers also think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. Why would they otherwise add OIS to long lenses?

I saw what you did there. You constructed a strawman fallacy. Probably unintentionally. Yourewordedwhat I wrote and changed the meaning and then commented on what you wrote rather than what I wrote.

I hate to be a pedant, but you still seem to be misunderstanding and rewording what I wrote to change the meaning.

I understand now that one can read it that way, but it was not my intention to construct a strawman fallacy :). I try to rephrase my post.

You write that many people (erroneously?) think that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses. My point is that most (all?) manufacturers also believe that IBIS is less effective with longer lenses (OIS included in long lenses only).

No, that isn't what I wrote. Maybe it would be easier if you just use the words I wrote (you can copy and paste them if you don't want to retype them) so that you don't change my meaning. I wrote "not all that effective" which is not at all the same as your rewording where you wrote "less effective."

I said absolutely nothing about whether IBIS is more or less effective than ILIS for long focal lengths. I think ILIS is generally probably more effective for long focal lengths. And that is a totally separate issue than my point that even IBIS works pretty well.

The common definition for a strawman fallacy:

The straw-man fallacy is when a person misrepresents his opponent’s position and then proceeds to refute that misrepresentation rather than what his opponent actually claims.

To be clear, I know you didn't do it intentionally. I am just trying to be precise in what I write and make sure that rewording doesn't significantly alter my meaning.

Note that Petr Bambousek turns OIS off on 100-400 and uses IBIS only. He suggests that everyone try to find their best stabilization setting (OIS/IBIS).

I certainly don't want this to turn into one of those nasty internet quarrels. I am just trying to be clear and I think my words were clear so no need to reword them. So, I think, we can drop this now.