I was amazed to find I successfully took a good portrait at 1 second shutter speed @ 30 or 50mm. There was no clearly visible camera shake. I don't know how that happened but SSS sure does work. I'm shying away from the GF1 because of its lack of IBIS. At least two stops is worth a lot even with an f/1.4 lens -- or especially -- because usually you're using those large aperture lenses in dark conditions.
kosmoskatten wrote:
700mm at 1/20th with in body IS?!
Eehh, that is good enough for me by a wide margin. Makes Wickerprints defense of in lens IS advantages look both redundant and futile to me. If ever I had a feeling that in lens IS would be superior in reality it is all gone now.
I need to see how low I can go with my 135/1.8, I haven't tried longer shutter speeds than 1/8s but even that is great in my book. As in the case with the bird shot we are down to shutter speeds long enough that hand holding is not as much a problem as movement of subject matter is. From the get go I have always seen IS an alternative or a complement to a monopod for shooting static subjects in poor light. Problem in the beginning was that IS lenses were usually rather slow and thereby the IS advantage was often negated as compared to fast non IS glass.
I like the fact that super fast glass can be used with in body IS.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
Overall, the A900 is a great camera. But, where I feel it does really well is with the built in image stabilization. It works with any lens since it is stabilized at the sensor and not the lens.
Yup! I don't have the nice sensor and lenses but my camera uses the same stabilization system as yours and ooo-ooo-ooo is it sweet! I tried to explain this here a long time ago no one seemed receptive to the information - at the time. It's good enough to freeze the frame at 1/10 100mm shooting out the side window while driving on a bumpy freeway in an inexpensive car.
Someone accused those who question NikCan's choice of lens stabilization of being paranoid. I think it is the opposite. Just the other day I was on a Nikon site and the owner said so and so was part of the inner circle so couldn't be shooting a Sony. If Nikon or Canon had made a RUGGED full frame sensor stabilization camera for under $2000 I would have bought it. I need in body stabilization because I have a tremor and need it for ALL lenses. It works WONDERFULLY and I can shoot with a relatively slow shutter speed (often 1/15 of a sec) with no camera movement blur. Also I read that the 5Dmk2 broke down very often when it was even sightly damp, see Luminous Landscape's report on their Antarctica expedition. Sony's a850 is built like a tank, has an excellent view finder, has good ISO performance up to 1600, has in body stabilization, and you don't have to pay for live view (I have a camera with live view and never used the feature). If someone is a professional bringing in over $100,000 a year then I think a top of the line Nikon would be the best choice. I am an impoverished disabled woman who put herself a couple of years in debt buying a $2000 camera with the Sony Zeiss 24-70. I had been using a Konica Minolta DiMage a2 for the last five years. Before that I used a Minolta x700. There is nothing that could happen to the camera market that would make me buy a new camera in the near future. When my mother dies I may inherit but I doubt I would get a different camera. I might buy a 135mm F/1.8 Sony Zeiss but that would probably be all. The best camera is the camera you have and use.
I actually really really wish A900/A850 had Live View that the other Sony models have... manual focusing with 10X magnification is so much better with it. Manually focusing the CZ 135 1.8 is a pain, at least for me, as my hit accuracy is VERY VERY low when doing MF without Live View.
m_appeal wrote:
I actually really really wish A900/A850 had Live View that the other Sony models have... manual focusing with 10X magnification is so much better with it. Manually focusing the CZ 135 1.8 is a pain, at least for me, as my hit accuracy is VERY VERY low when doing MF without Live View.
Live view would have been an excellent addition to the camera. But are you using the Type M focusing screen, model number FDA-FM1AM? If not read about it on page 10 of this rather nice brochure (PDF file).
m_appeal wrote:
I actually really really wish A900/A850 had Live View that the other Sony models have... manual focusing with 10X magnification is so much better with it. Manually focusing the CZ 135 1.8 is a pain, at least for me, as my hit accuracy is VERY VERY low when doing MF without Live View.
it might be too obvious (it was for me atleast & had to have a friend tell me about it), but have you tried adjusting the diopter?
