There's nothing wrong with it. Sony's still the only company with a stabilized FF (and I love it). Oly's is better, though I think the perceived stop advantage may be due in part to relative size and weight. I certainly find it easier to handhold the OMD with a 12/2 than the a99 with a ZA 24/2. However, put the same long tele on both cameras (say a Zeiss 300/4, for example) and I'm betting the gap narrows significantly.
freaklikeme wrote:
However, put the same long tele on both cameras (say a Zeiss 300/4, for example) and I'm betting the gap narrows significantly.
sadly no. olympus does significantly better on telephoto stabilization than sony even when the camera is harder to hold. i recently tried an a77 with with my leica 350mm and still couldn't handhold it as well as my old olympus with the same lens.
sebboh wrote:
sadly no. olympus does significantly better on telephoto stabilization than sony even when the camera is harder to hold. i recently tried an a77 with with my leica 350mm and still couldn't handhold it as well as my old olympus with the same lens.
Interesting. The a900 does better with teles than the EP-2. 180's about the limit I would go with their old IBIS and Pen body. The OMD is significantly better than the 2, but I wouldn't go two stops on a 300 between it and the a99. It is better, but I'd go half a stop at the most in landscape, a stop in portrait.
freaklikeme wrote:
Interesting. The a900 does better with teles than the EP-2. 180's about the limit I would go with their old IBIS and Pen body. The OMD is significantly better than the 2, but I wouldn't go two stops on a 300 between it and the a99. It is better, but I'd go half a stop at the most in landscape, a stop in portrait.
FF probably pulls it down to 1 stop with the same lens since the focal length is half as long. i still haven't really tested a FF sony.
sebboh wrote:
FF probably pulls it down to 1 stop with the same lens since the focal length is half as long. i still haven't really tested a FF sony.
I think I'm gong to rent a beach house for a week again towards the end of September somewhere in Monterey Bay. We'll have to meet up so you can check out the a99.
Nothing is wrong with the Sony IBIS on the 6/7/8/9 series bodies. It's quite good, comparable to the Oly's without 5-Axis.
The low-end Sony's IBIS might as well not be there. Completely useless (Pentax has the same issue with the K-m/K-x/K-r).
The 5-Axis Oly's (E-M5 & E-P5) IBIS is remarkable, and arguably the best IS implementation for wide through medium tele lenses out there (including Optical IS lenses). Optical IS regains its lead with super-tele's.
sebboh wrote:
sadly no. olympus does significantly better on telephoto stabilization than sony even when the camera is harder to hold. i recently tried an a77 with with my leica 350mm and still couldn't handhold it as well as my old olympus with the same lens.
Olympus has had outstanding IBIS back to the E-510, which I owned. Back then there were heated discussion on the boards about lens-based vs sensor based. But clearly, Olympus has pulled away from all stabilization systems todate.
freaklikeme wrote:
I think I'm gong to rent a beach house for a week again towards the end of September somewhere in Monterey Bay. We'll have to meet up so you can check out the a99.
sweet! no idea what my schedule is then, but i'll take any excuse to go to monterey.
Atlasman2 wrote:
Olympus has had outstanding IBIS back to the E-510, which I owned. Back then there were heated discussion on the boards about lens-based vs sensor based. But clearly, Olympus has pulled away from all stabilization systems todate.
agreed, i don't know about the pen series that was supposed to have weaker IBIS, but my aged e-520 had better IBIS than anything i've tried from sony (or pentax).
