I don't really care about the onboard flash or faster AF of the new Panasonic, so I'm wondering how effective the Oly's IS is. Is there any way to quantify it in stops?
I've only used it with the 17 mm pancake, and it works well at very long exposure times. At 1/4 second you can get a fairly sharp image, but at lets say 1/30, sharpness is better without it (if you're normally reasonably steady). I guess it'll work better with longer lenses.
So, I'd say you can gain up to like 3-4 stops with a short lens, but don't expect it to work well for critical sharpness.
Personally I can only get reliably sharp image with the 1/focal length rule, at the wide end of the 14-42 it's about 1/15 s. I have not tried shooting without IS so I can't tell you how many stops it helps. But as a rough guide, I can handhold EF-S 18-55 IS at 1/15 s at the long end. Holding the camera at arm length isn't the most stable position.
I would give it 1.5-2 stops on the wide zoom, Canon really has spoiled me over the years with amazing IS. I have sharp shots at 1/3 of a sec. and lots of sharp 1/10 sec exposures with my 24-105 and the 18-55 kit. But the pen is good enough for many situations.
You made me curious, and snapped about 50 shots with the 14-42. I can't say about your face, but I can say that it works at least as good at the Canon 18-55IS with my face . I could reliably shoot at 1/15s at the long end on the Canon, I'm not sure now since I don't have any Canon cropped body at the moment. With the 14-42 I have good chance getting sharp photo with 1/8s at the long end, and 1/4s at the short end, without my face of course. Not to say that the Olympus is better, my handholding skill could have improved since then. Without IS I can reliably shoot at 1/15s at the wide end. So that's about 2 stops effectiveness.
Hmmm.... This has me leaning toward the Oly instead of the Panasonic if I decide to get one of these little guys.* I would most likely get the fast 20mm pancake and then use various old lenses for the long stuff. (40mm is wide enough for what I'd shot with it.) It would be pretty cool to have an effective 100mm f/1.2 or 170mm f/1.2 with IS.
Thanks for all the input, folks.
*If I can get past having no VF to hold against my face, which is still hard to get past.
Greg Feldman wrote:
I wonder how effective it is compared with putting the EVF on the GF1 and holding it against the original IS system: my face.
It pretty much reliably offsets the less stable hold, and adds a stop or so in addition.
The most effective IS in m43 is the OIS on a G1/GH1 with a stable handheld position (to the face or gutpod). I've been able to get repeatable, sharp shots at over 1/2 second. The advantage to the E-P1 is that you get IS with primes.
If Oly came up with an m43 body equivalent to the G1 but added body-IS I'd switch in a moment. Until then I'll take the more stable shooting position of the G1 over the E-P1's body IS.
mawz wrote:
It pretty much reliably offsets the less stable hold, and adds a stop or so in addition.
Until then I'll take the more stable shooting position of the G1 over the E-P1's body IS.
Mawz - unless I'm misunderstanding something, it seems like the two statements above are somewhat contradictory. On one hand you suggest the E-P1 is "a stop or so" better even after considering the less stable hold, but on the other hand you prefer the "more stable shooting position" of the G1.
If the E-P1 performs better than the G1, why would you prefer the G1 ?
tmark wrote:
Mawz - unless I'm misunderstanding something, it seems like the two statements above are somewhat contradictory. On one hand you suggest the E-P1 is "a stop or so" better even after considering the less stable hold, but on the other hand you prefer the "more stable shooting position" of the G1.
If the E-P1 performs better than the G1, why would you prefer the G1 ?
A stop isn't a heck of a lot, and I can get that and more simply by using the G1's 14-45 OIS, a combo which outperforms the IS of the E-P1. The G1's advantages also apply in situations where IS is useless (macro work for example).
mawz wrote:
A stop isn't a heck of a lot, and I can get that and more simply by using the G1's 14-45 OIS, a combo which outperforms the IS of the E-P1. The G1's advantages also apply in situations where IS is useless (macro work for example).
So what you really prefer is the more stable position of the G1 *combined with* the use of an OIS lens, because that *combination* yields better results over the E-P1 ?
