sebboh
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.4 #8 · Full frame dSLR for manual focus? | |
wfrank wrote:
sebboh wrote:
you mentioned it by saying it was useless for the majority of normal to wide angle photography. which is what i've been disagreeing with. i'm sure the canon will work great for the OP, i just don't like the misinformation that seems to be rampant about IBIS.
Sigh, I have not used a word like "useless". What I thought I did was to talk about my experience (with IS & wides) and I am not into still life. I thought I expressed this fairly well, but either it came out wrong or there's a whole lotta sensitivity here.
it sounded to me like you were speaking from a purely speculative standpoint (due to phrasing) and that you were saying IBIS would not be helpful to anyone except in a few rare situations. in my experience i found IBIS to be helpful in roughly 90% of my photos most of which were of people (though not kids). i'm sure that i come off as over sensitive on the topic because i think it is one of the most important features for a camera to have and always hoped more consumers would demand it forcing canikon to offer it in conjunction with their ILIS (never going to happen now due to video). everybody has their issues though, you always seem hypersensitive to canon bashing to my ear, so i figured you would understand. 
wfrank wrote:
sebboh wrote:
i wasn't aware you shot much (if at all) with that?
if you do, my apologies.
edit: i also have no idea if those are as well stabilized as canikon's better lenses with IS?
Actually the kitlens (18-55) is in, I believe, its fourth generation so IS is very good. Canon quantifies it to 3-4 steps. I dare almost not to say, but for wides I think it's more like 2-3. For the whites I've used it could be true though.
Usage was several years ago if you exclude a brief encounter with the NEX5N kit. But pre-5D2 usage was extensive - and if you like - partly about exploring the limits of various tech incl IS.
The one lens that was glued to my 7D was the fairly recent 15-85 (IS). It's actually a quite good lens, sharp and all. F is limited to 3.5. There is one thing I did a lot where IS was handy, for a while I was into handheld HDR and IS definetly helped the rich exposure on many occasions. F/3.5 was not the limiting factor, I was into long DOF stopped down as much as possible. So the longest time was important. Another thing was new years fireworks. The longer time you can handle the better the shot will be. But if I was to do this today, I would do both things better and I would use tripod. Most likely LiveView too, another no-no for the A900 regardless how good it is in other respects.
i know the kit lenses have advanced IS, i just wan't sure if it worked as well for them – since it requires physical movements and calibration i would expect that cheaper manufacturing might effect it's performance. i have no idea if this is true since i have no interest in such lenses (another big reason i want IBIS).
a tripod would of course always be better, but that certainly doesn't mean it's always possible. for me, i refuse to carry a tripod 99.99% of the time while IBIS shouldn't add more than a few ounces and cubic centimeters.
|
Maybe it's that end-of-the-world thread that whatshisface started? 
