C700 and image stabilization

[Suzy Q15]

If I might make an observation. Some of us take ourselves and our cameras WAY too seriously. They are just a tool that we use to get the result we want. For one reason or another the decision of specific camera is made on the one that best fits out needs (which are not the same by any means). Most of the people on the forum contribute very useful information, even in the form of elementary questions. Spirited debate is enlivening. Personal insults are just demeaning. My two cents worth.

Daniella's caustic response to Jerry Rosen was really uncalled for
but this sort of thing seems to be overlooked where she's
concerned.

English doesn't seem to be Daniella's first language. Perhaps her
style results from a lack of translation skills.

In spite of the fact that multiple people have pointed out her
rudeness to her she either doesn't understand it or chooses to go
on being rude.

Probably best to treat her like one would treat any troll -
purposeful or accidental - and ignor.

--
bob
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
pictures from Thailand, Myanmar(Burma), and Nepal

 

[Daniella68313]

Let me put it this way...i can do it and so other can do it. it is
insanity to think that i alone can do such thing..

I'm sure that others can do what you do but they're in the
minority... not the majority as you propose.

Here we go again...! making me say things that i did not said. I only said that if i can do it, other peoeple can do it. Its up to each person to know if he or she is steady or not. But on the other end..you can make it sound like its almost impossible..and its surely not. it goes both ways.

Before i first decided to buy my camera, i had read many bad comments here in this forum about the c700 because it did not have IS...so i went to the store and bought it at a place that i could try it and i had no problem.

That was misleading..i know it now.

The thing is, that everybody is misleading everybody because everybody has his or her own experience that may be totally different from others. So lets take this for what it is..my own experience and it is valid as any other.

BTW, my mother can handhold it at 1/30s and she is not young..

Good for her. I assume you mean at FULL ZOOM and get EVERY shot
sharp, right? If so, that's wondrous.

Again you are making me say something that i have never said. I never said that i was only getting sharp shots. BTW..with the IS, do you always get sharp shots at 1/10s? You are surely impying that some times.

This subject had been

dormant for over two weeks before you revived it.

.i did not revive the subject..i simply reply to Jerkry here with a little delay, that's all. I see that was a mistake because i was not expecting to wake up the dead in the process.

anyway..i think we went through this again and again...everything as been said.

 

[bryanl]

I have trouble shooting the C700 at full zoom resting the camera on
the open truck window.

psstttt..... turn the engine off ;-)

LOL Funny!
Bryan L

http://www.pbase.com/galleries/bryanl Pbase supporter

oly brio-150, C-700 - Uzi Love that zoom

 

[sweetjane]

when i am in full out zoom, the pic is never clear when i look at it full screen on my pc. if i back out a drop, no problem. stupid, i think. i can't seem to get a good night shot either, like at an outdoor bar.

otherwise, i have never taken better pics.

 

[sweetjane]

well, hi. i just found this site 15 minutes ago, so i must be an expert. (kidding, folks)

anyway, without reading where this all came from, i got a c-700 for my birthday last october. i love most of the pics i take (someone tell me how to post pics, i just went to central america!).

BUT: i cannot take a clear pic at full zoom, either opt or dig. have to back out a smidge. why? i am a novice photog, so i don't think i know how to set it to 1/30.

i also can't seem to take night shots where there is some light. they are dark or blurry or washed out.

cool site.

j

 

[johnd1]

Just think how long Daniella could hold a UZI?

I mean if she can do so well with the little toy sized 700 and no IS she should be able to handhold the UZI for seconds on end.

John

It all depends on what shutter speed you are using and how stable
your hands are. I can do it up to 1/30s without too much problem,
but some older people will have problems at slower shutter speed
then 1/200s.

Have you given any thought to getting into "shooting competition?".
I could hit a bullseye 0ne out of 3 times at 100 yards with a 30/06
lying on the ground or using a bench rest. I used to do 3 outa 5
but old age is getting to me.
I have trouble shooting the C700 at full zoom resting the camera on
the open truck window.

--
George, K2EWL http://wwwbg.tripod.com
Pics at http://www.pbase.com/george_druther
D360L, C3000Z, C2100UZ, C700UZ, E-10, Nikon CP700,
2 crummy vivitar digitals and a whole bunch of antique film
exposing machines

 

[Terry Thorn]

Here we go again...! making me say things that i did not said. I
only said that if i can do it, other peoeple can do it. Its up to
each person to know if he or she is steady or not. But on the
other end..you can make it sound like its almost impossible..and
its surely not. it goes both ways.

You've proposed that IS isn't really necessary and that manual white balance. You've also proposed MANY times that holding the camera and getting sharp shots at full zoom isn't hard. I've NEVER said that getting a sharp, handheld shot with the C700 is almost impossible. I've said that it's difficult for many people to do it with the same shutter speeds you've claimed which have been as low as 1/4 of a second!

Before i first decided to buy my camera, i had read many bad
comments here in this forum about the c700 because it did not have
IS...so i went to the store and bought it at a place that i could
try it and i had no problem.

That was misleading..i know it now.

That was THEIR experience. Yours is apparently different. The MAJORITY of people cannot do what you do. That's not saying that no one else can but there's a LOT more that cannot.

The thing is, that everybody is misleading everybody because
everybody has his or her own experience that may be totally
different from others. So lets take this for what it is..my own
experience and it is valid as any other.

BTW, my mother can handhold it at 1/30s and she is not young..

Good for her. I assume you mean at FULL ZOOM and get EVERY shot
sharp, right? If so, that's wondrous.

Again you are making me say something that i have never said. I
never said that i was only getting sharp shots. BTW..with the IS,
do you always get sharp shots at 1/10s? You are surely impying
that some times.

But you're not really coming forward with that information. No, all my shots aren't sharp either but the majority of them are. I do notice the difference when uisng IS and not using it. I'm not saying that it's the end-all must-have feature but it's nice to have. I've also made it clear that it's not a magic button. People still have to hold the camera fairly steady.

This subject had been

dormant for over two weeks before you revived it.

.i did not revive the subject..i simply reply to Jerkry here with a
little delay, that's all. I see that was a mistake because i was
not expecting to wake up the dead in the process.

anyway..i think we went through this again and again...everything
as been said.

 

[BjarneChr]

when i am in full out zoom, the pic is never clear when i look at
it full screen on my pc. if i back out a drop, no problem. stupid,
i think. i can't seem to get a good night shot either, like at an
outdoor bar.

otherwise, i have never taken better pics.

I have the C-700 and I get tack sharp images at full zoom, but that's using the rule of thump: The shutter speed must be 1/focal-length so using 380mm zoom the shutter speed must be 1/380 sec. However in most cases good results can be achieved at longer exposures, my expirience is 1/125 sec is the limit with full zoom. For longer exposures a tripod is needed. I have a lightweight tripod which gives great results at full zoom.

But this is not a specific C-700 problem with shaken pictures. Its a problem with ALL cameras that have large zoom's. The greater focal length, the greater risk of shaken picturs. I think that a long exposure shot taken at full zoom without IS and a tripod is better than a handheld exposure with same settings and with IS. But since I don't have a camera with IS this is only a gut feeling. But if anyone could try this out it would be great.

--
Bjarne
----------
Olympus C-700UZ - http://www.pbase.com/bjarnechr

 

[BobTrips]

Hi Bjarne -

The rule of thumb that I have heard for IS is that it will give you about 2 additional stops.

This would mean that you could shoot slower shutter speeds with IS than without, but you're still going to reach a 'tripod point'.

But this is not a specific C-700 problem with shaken pictures. Its
a problem with ALL cameras that have large zoom's. The greater
focal length, the greater risk of shaken picturs. I think that a
long exposure shot taken at full zoom without IS and a tripod is
better than a handheld exposure with same settings and with IS. But
since I don't have a camera with IS this is only a gut feeling. But
if anyone could try this out it would be great.

--
Bjarne
----------
Olympus C-700UZ - http://www.pbase.com/bjarnechr

--
bob
http://www.pbase.com/bobtrips
pictures from Thailand, Myanmar(Burma), and Nepal

 

[Ian Yates]

Here's my half second shot!
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=171191
C2100UZ, D600L and that 1.45x teleconverter lens(fits both cameras)

 

[Jimm]

Here's my half second shot!
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=171191
C2100UZ, D600L and that 1.45x teleconverter lens(fits both cameras)

REal photographers don't need IS unless they do a lot of low light shooting. Camera stabilization is what tripods are for.

 

[yogi]

...that's using the rule of thumb: The shutter speed must be
1/focal-length so using 380mm zoom the shutter speed must be 1/380
sec. However in most cases good results can be achieved at longer
exposures, my expirience is 1/125 sec is the limit with full zoom.
..........

--

Bjarne
----------
Olympus C-700UZ - http://www.pbase.com/bjarnechr

But for me, at least, the C-700 is much, much, much easier to handhold steadily at full zoom than my 35mm SLR with a 300mm lens is. The digital camera is much lighter, shorter, and doesn't try to twist out of my grip the way the SLR does. I'm sure that the same would be true of a C-2100 even without the IS turned on (I've handled them in a store). So, I'm agreeing with you that the old rule of thumb is just that, a ROT, and isn't a law of physics or human-camera physiology. I've had good luck taking acceptable documentary photos with settings in the range that Daniella sometimes uses. All I'm claiming here, though, is that the C-700 is a nice camera to hand hold. I recently took some exchange pictures at a family reunion using a relative's Sony 707 at its max optical zoom (5X). For me, it was harder to hold at 5X than my C-700 is at 10X. 10x. Its viewfinder, though, was magnificent!
--
yogi

 

[Adam-T]

REal photographers don't need IS unless they do a lot of low light
shooting. Camera stabilization is what tripods are for.

So someone handholding a D60 or EOS1 with a very expensive IS lens on at a road rally event where it isn't practical to use a tripod isn't a "Real Photographer" then ?..

But then "Real Photographers" don't use autofocus, auto white balance, auto exposure either do they?, in fact I doubt they would touch Digital with a bargepole and are slumming it when stooping as low as 35mm

Sheesh, I'd like to hear your definition of "Real Photographer"!..

Have fun with your Hassleblad, they're a bit out of my price range

--
Olympus E10 +WCON, E100RS +B300, Nikon E950, E900.

 

[Suzy Q15]

Oh, puh-leeze. A real photographer strives to get good results no matter what equipment is used, compensating for limitations. What need it there for snobbish attitudes? We do what we have to. I don't care what I had to do to get the results I want, as long as I get them. Ho, hum.

Here's my half second shot!
http://www.photosig.com/viewphoto.php?id=171191
C2100UZ, D600L and that 1.45x teleconverter lens(fits both cameras)

REal photographers don't need IS unless they do a lot of low light
shooting. Camera stabilization is what tripods are for.

 

[BjarneChr]

REal photographers don't need IS unless they do a lot of low light
shooting. Camera stabilization is what tripods are for.

What kind of comment is that ?

A REAL photographer uses his/her equipment to the outmost limit to get the results he/she wants. And thats regardless if a small P&S camera or a MEGA $$$ PRO SLR is used. The camera is a tool, and the quality of the pictures is only limited to the person behind. Sure there is quality differences and feature differences between equipments used, but if you take god pictures with the camera in hand, then YOU ARE A REAL PHOTOGRAPHER!!!!

If a person shoots much in low light and dont want a tripod, then get a camera with IS. If you don't care bringing the tripod, then dont get IS. As simple as that!

But I don't like that some people say its a design flaw that the C-700/720 is missing IS. It's not, it gives consumers the choice of buying 10x zoom with or without IS (A wire shutter release is a wish though). But having a choice the consumer must consider what they will use their camera for before buying. I have three 35mm SLR bodies and I am used to the tripod so this was right for me. But it might be wrong for my neighbour or you for that sake. It's a matter of personal choice. And I love having a choice.

--
Bjarne
----------
Olympus C-700UZ - http://www.pbase.com/bjarnechr

 

[Terry Thorn]

I don't think anyone is saying that the C700's lack of IS is a "design flaw" or anything like that. The C700 is a fine camera and takes great photos. Image stabilization is just a tool that many of us find useful. What rubs me is whenever someone doesn't LOVE the C700 or find Daniella's statements of getting sharp, handheld images fully zoomed at shutter speeds as low as 1/4 second a little difficult to swallow, they're verbally assaulted. If someone cannot duplicate Daniella's feats, they're either old, nervous, ill, overweight, or have some other malady which explains their inability to do what she and maybe a few others can do. Failing to fall into one of those categories, the camera MUST be defective. In other words, it's not normal to be able to do what she does but she presents it as though it was normal and therefore IS isn't necessary.

 

[Juli Valley]

Points well made.