Jman13 wrote:
Yeah, having a stabilized viewfinder and IS this good makes this the first camera I can honestly say I'd rather have this than a bunch of optically stabilized lenses (except perhaps for those that are really long like your 500mm....a compact 1000mm FOV...gotta love it )
That's been my conclusion so far as well. The OIS/IBIS cross over focal length seems to be past the practical limits of what I'd ever handhold in the first place. I tried my 45-200 out at about 175 and OIS and IBIS performed similarly. I suppose the 100-300 would be the only other one to test, but I don't own it! In the end the IBIS is all win, as good as OIS on my zooms and as you've been showing wonderful with primes that have no OIS. I've been doing 1/8 with the 45 quite consistently.
The 500 is so long for this format that even on a not insubstantial tripod the shutter moves the camera enough to cause blur. I've been meaning to try IBIS on a wobbly tripod with the 500 to see if that proves to be an effective use of IBIS. I rarely carry a tripod substantial enough for the 500 to be sharp on my GH2. The E-M5 might make it more practical.
I've honestly never considered a M43 system ever......now that I purchased an E-M5 I'm totally amazed in how incredible a little camera can perform.
Last night I was playing with a 5dmk3 and after handling the OMD I would say the AF is comparable. However on the little camera I can select focus points with my finger in a fraction of a second.
IQ wise I would comment and say I prefer the IQ from this little body to a 40d, 1dmk3. The raw files almost feel similar to my old 50D I owned (LR4.1).
I am so liking this new system. Not creating flame wars but this camera's IQ is neck and neck with many full size Dslr's. I still love my canon system but for something so easy to use in a little E-M5 package I see myself using it alot.
I can't quite read if you don't care how many stops, or if you simply didn't test it yet. In case you feel like it, try making the same shot with IBIS/OIS off, at different shutter speeds from very safe to very blurred, several time each for statistical validity, and then determine the slowest shutter speed where your sharpness is good, with a 90-95% certainty. Then do the same with IBIS on, and you can tell how many stops difference. This is useful information for you, and what I am asking But if you don't want to do this, no problem, someone else will surely come along shortly. These are early days.
Jman13 wrote:
Controlled? No. But I have gone out and taken pictures. I haven't turned IS off yet, and there were no issues at any normal shutter speed. Tack sharp at 1/2000s, and 1/4000s with IS on.
(...)
I might (depending on work) get to try it out with my 50-300L tomorrow. Due to focal length changes, I'll leave it off most of the day, but I'll turn it on at 300mm and let you know how it fares.
Mmm, OK. I asked since I noticed some less than "tack sharp" images taken with the PL25, in daylight, at 1/250 and 1/500. Maybe I have bad enough technique to manage that. I have two samples posted at GetDPI. I also have a couple very sharp images taken at the same conditions (one in the same post, and also one at the top of the page).
As I don't like the idea of having such a bad shooting technique (which may be the problem after having used the tripod for a long period) I wondered if there was a chance I could blame the IBIS...
Really, I hope it was me as the idea of being able to leave IBIS always turned on appeals to me.
As a point of reference I just tried a Canon FDn 300/5.6 with the E-M5 at 1/40, 1/20 and 1/10 with IBIS on and off. Roughly it appears IBIS has about two stops of effectiveness at this focal length. This lens/body combo is actually very easy to brace stably, hence the rather low tested shutter speeds. Also, as focal length goes up it seems IBIS has trouble improving "tack sharp" results but still has a significant impact on "acceptable" shots. By this I mean if you decide to count only tack sharp shots the IBIS effectiveness appears low at long focal length. If you allow slightly soft shots but still reject obvious blurring then IBIS appears more effective.
One more excellent feature of the E-M5 in this application is the high burst rate combined with IBIS. A five shot burst in a fraction of a second with IBIS on gives you good odds on at least one sharp photo at pretty ridiculously low shutter speeds for a telephoto.
My 500/8 can be very awkward to hold without shifting focus if you don't use the hood as a support (I wasn't when I tested) and so I suspect the combination of an extreme focal length and very poor technique overwhelmed the IBIS system when I did that test previously.
Shot around with the 45mm 1.8 this evening. I think i am in love. So much more pleased than i was with NEX 7. Think I will add the hand grip for when i am hand carrying. For hiking the base init with strap will be fine.
Image quality is great so far, although i need to upgrade to LR4 for raw. AF is much more fast and accurate than NEX, and the sensitivity of the proximity sensor works better for me too.
Buttons are soft, but responsive.
This is the camera I've been waiting for-i think it marks the maturity of the mirrorless camera.
Can someone do me a huge favor and shoot a blackframe? Shoot with the lens cap on, in a dark room if possible, at f/8 fastest shutter speed ISO 100, raw. You can share the raw by emailing it to yourself via https://www.transferbigfiles.com/ and then posting the link you get in the email here. Thanks!
carstenw wrote:
I can't quite read if you don't care how many stops, or if you simply didn't test it yet. In case you feel like it, try making the same shot with IBIS/OIS off, at different shutter speeds from very safe to very blurred, several time each for statistical validity, and then determine the slowest shutter speed where your sharpness is good, with a 90-95% certainty. Then do the same with IBIS on, and you can tell how many stops difference. This is useful information for you, and what I am asking But if you don't want to do this, no problem, someone else will surely come along shortly. These are early days....Show more →
I understand and will try and get to this on the weekend.
Shot some test shots outside my house with the FD 50-300 f/4.5L today to test out IS effectiveness with a very long lens. IBIS on 600mm effective is tough.
A few notes:
1) because this lens is so big and heavy, handholding it is a wobbly process at first...small corrections can become big swings due to inertia. This is not super easy on the IS system, which would hold, and then jump when I moved too much. Hopefully it doesn't actually hurt the IS system (since it's electromagnetic, I'm doubting it, but still).
2) IS was quite effective at 300mm. I was getting pretty sharp results down to 1/60s, and very sharp shots, even when not in the steadiest position, at 1/125s. I'd say it's a good 2-3 stop IS with this lens handheld at the long end, which is pretty impressive given the long focal length and the fact that I really wasn't all that steady a lot of the time.
3) At higher shutter speeds I'm getting results far sharper than I've ever gotten with this lens at 300mm. It goes to show you that even minor vibration at these long focal lengths on such pixel dense sensors can affect sharpness. Really excited about this. While results at 1/125s are certainly sharp and good...shots at 1/400s and faster are now absolutely RAZOR sharp. Nice.
Example shot. Handheld standing, 300mm, 1/125s. I did not feel super steady taking this shot (I wobbled when pressing the shutter) and yet I still got a good shot. I typically need 1/800s without IS for this lens handheld to get this level of sharpness.
Full image: http://www.jordansteele.com/2012/300mmIS.jpg
100% crop (note also that the file is nowhere near blown on the reflection. Typically I've noticed that m4/3 cameras can get hot with reflections like this, but the E-M5 has no issues at all.: http://www.jordansteele.com/2012/300mmIS_crop.jpg
Sagar wrote:
Ditto! Thanks to OM-D, 2 years search has now stopped.As of this writing I am eagerly waiting for 20/1.7 delivery to take it for a real spin.
Has anyone tried OM-D with 20mm? What are you experiences?
Have used the 20mm, but that was back with the GF-1. Trying to decide weather to go 20mm or save my pennies for a 25mm to go with the OM-D. Leaning towards the 20mm so it's easier to slip in my jacket pocket.
The 20mm is an excellent lens, especially for the value, but the 25mm is better. The other thing is that, for me at least, there's quite a difference in perspective and look and feel between 20mm and 25mm. It's almost the difference between a 35mm and 50mm lens. Some people love the perspective of the 20mm lens. I just couldn't get along with it. I just sold a tack sharp 20mm and am keeping the 25mm. I don't think the 25mm is any sharper than the 20mm, but it has a very different look and feel, and the difference in autofocus speed is night and day.
Jman13 wrote:
Shot some test shots outside my house with the FD 50-300 f/4.5L today to test out IS effectiveness with a very long lens. IBIS on 600mm effective is tough.
>.. would hold, and then jump when I moved too much.
2) ...very sharp shots, even when not in the steadiest position, at 1/125s. I'd say it's a good 2-3 stop IS with this lens handheld at the long end,
3) At higher shutter speeds I'm getting results far sharper than I've ever gotten with this lens at 300mm. ...shots at 1/400s and faster are now absolutely RAZOR sharp.
thanks for the test, this all sounds very promising! I wonder if it will also help with shots on a tripod. Handholding such long lenses is hard. For a 600 equivalent and longer focus lenghts one would normaly need to use a rather stable tripod. Maybe the IBIS can help stabilize shots so a lighter tripod might suffice? If this is the case this IBIS might be a real bonus for wildlife shooting.
the 25 sounds like a sweet lens, but how much bigger than the 20 is it really? Any images of it on the body available yet? The 20 is tempting since it is so small.
The 25 is A LOT bigger than the 20mm, no question about it. If small size is a premium for you, the 14mm and 20mm are the lenses to get. The 45mm is also relatively small. I love the 14mm in part because of its size. Even though I'm tempted by the 12mm, I prefer the perspective of the 14mm focal length and also much prefer the smaller size.
I sold my 20/1.7 and got a 25/1.4, the focusing speed improvement is significant. Don't see any difference in sharpness (I shoot mostly at f2). But the 25/1.4 does seem to have more pop to its image, could be color/contrast. While the 20/1.7 looks really sharp but a little flat. The hood on 25/1.4 is ridiculously large though, so I use a vented hood instead. Overall I like the 25/1.4 better and think the $200 price difference is justified. I am more of a 50mm person than a 35mm person so that might be why I feel this way.
But if you don't want to do this, no problem, someone else will surely come along shortly. These are early days.
