Ok, you are right, IS is very useful for still objects and also for panning
car racing or alike. I also own a C*non 28-135 IS, I agree it is quite
useful for some internal shoots where my subjects (peoples) are sit or stand
still.
But I just feel that in many cases they are not so useful, I got some bad
shots in a company party due to ignoring the people are talking/laughing and
expected I can hold at slow speeds with the IS, of course eventually their
faces were blurred, I know it was my problem but it was just not work.
For the Gundam girl photos I took, at the beginning I used the 28-135 IS,
not only the DOF were too much, at 1/30 to 1/60s most of the shots were just
"ok" but not very sharp due to the object and my movement. When I switched
to Zuiko 85/2 the story were re-written, at 1/250s to 1/500s all the shots
with right focus were super sharp.
Unfortunately, the two affordable IS lenses from C*non are too slow, it
limited the application of the lenses.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose"
>
> I agree. Still, a great many common subjects are stationary. Certainly
> the majority of my shots are of at least relatively stationary subjects
> where IS would work.
> Wouldn't it work for people like Stephen and Mike who are expert at
> panning moving objects? Minolta claims it works for horizontal panning.
> Doesn't matter for me, as I almost never try that.
>
> It is interesting that it operates based on motion sensors in the
> camera. Thus, it would work nicely for subjects with both moving images
> that are intentionally blurred and stationary components. An example
> that comes immediatly to mind is my TOPE 10 shot. The water was going to
> blur anyway, but I was stretching to get the background steady in a
> rather shaded little corner, playing the old speed vs. DOF game. Might
> work well for nighttime shots of fireworks, fairs, etc., where the
> moving conponents are generally slightly blurred anyway. The other big
> advantage is for photo ops where setting up a tripod isn't
> possible/practical. Could work wonders in indoor venues where tripods
> aren't allowed.
>
> The advantage of a system that worked based on image movement, rather
> than camera movement, would be compensation for subtle movement of
> subjects like flowers.
>
> I mostly wanted to point out for those who hadn't noticed that IS, of
> whatever kind, can be used, in effect, to improve noise performance in
> digital cameras.
>
> Moose
>
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|