IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

[Phaedrus]

There doesn't seem to be a sub-forum for general E-System (not model-specific) discussions, so I guess here's as good as any place to post this?

My E-410 doesn't have it (no, it's true), but I do hope to upgrade to an Olympus with IS, maybe this year.

Those of you who now have a camera with IS - would you change to an otherwise "better" camera if it didn't have IS?

Those of you without IS - is it a big deal for you? Are you saving frantically to upgrade?

[theMusicMan]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

NO, definitely. Any upgrade would have to have IS, it is awesome and allows you to get shots you simply otherwise would not be able to achieve.

I will at some point I am sure, upgrade to an E-5, but if it didn't have IS, I would not upgrade to it.

[andym]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

I'm of the feeling that it is very useful but I must admit I only use it when I feel it's needed.
As I started with an E500 and E1 without IS, it was a luxury on my later cameras.I supose it's somthing that's down to the individual and don't think its the be all and end all on a camera.

Just my thoughts

[Guest]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

Well, it's worth having, but we probably overestimate that worth as IS only really comes into play near the limits of the lens capabilities (low shutter speed relative to focal length) and when we get near those limits other factors come into play (subject stillness for example). And of course it actually needs to be off for long exposure tripod mounted shots.

Worth having, certainly, and it will on occaisions let you get shots (at least at a lower iso) than would otherwise be possible.

Nick

[snaarman]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

When it works (which is most of the time) the results are remarkable. You have to play your part and hold the camera very carefully, but all in all its well worth having.. Being lazy I tend to leave it switched on.

However I do sometimes get shots from long lenses that have a characteristic "jerked blur" that I suspect is casued by the IS "losing it" during the shot. (I also wonder if it doesn't work for overhead shots).

So, I say its a great invention, but you need to consider that sometimes it goes wrong...

Pete

[Phaedrus]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

So if the replacement/upgrade for your camera comes out and it's better in every aspect, but doesn't have IS (obviously, we'd presume it would, but for the sake of guaging how important IS is to people, let's imagine it doesn't) would you trade up or stick with your current model?

I suppose the main factor is going to be the primary type of photography you do - obviously, if you don't need IS you won't value it, if you do you will.

Personally, one area where I struggle (in addition to all the usual novice areas) is with longer shots - candid family stuff when they're not aware they're being photographed, and recently wildlife. As such, I can't wait to upgrade to an IS camera.

[theMusicMan]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

It is all user dependent.

I use it almost every weekend when I take shots of Heather and her rugby team games. It allows me to get shots in the low light, cold shaking hands conditions of late afternoon winter games.

It also allows me to get shots of the birds on my garden feeders and in the garden generally. Sure, if they move during the longer exposure, then I don't get the shot - but often the light is so low that 1/10th of a second (sometimes less) with the 70-300mm @ 300mm is the order of the day - and as long as the bird doesn't move, I get the shot. This is only achievable with IS.

I strongly disagree with you there Nick and don't think it is overestimated at all.

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

Last night I did a talk to a camera club about using the camera in "Other than
Auto"

Because quite a few of the "beginners" didn't have DSLRs I used the E-PL1 to demonstrate all the "Other" modes. I forgot that I had left the IS switched on, and at one point was demonstrating how the exposure time is increased with reduction of the aperture and took a picture at about 1 second.

There was quite a bit of muttering from the club members as the image that came up on the projector, was clear and sharp with only the movement of the people being noticable.

When I explained that the E-3 would have done that even better as being heavier helps to reduce camera shake, they were very impressed.

The owners of the expensive DSLRs were a little surprised too, at the quality that a little thing like the E-PL1 can produce.

In body IS really is one of the best innovations that Olympus has developed and I would not want to be without the capability it provides.

[David Morison]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

I didn't use to have it but since I have had it I could not conceive being without it. Try handholding a DSLR (E5) with 300mm f2.8 (around 4.3kg!) targeting a bird in flight at a reasonable ISO and the only solution to hundreds of missed shots is IS! Even with it quite a few are discarded.

David

[RogerMac]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

IS was the main reason that I replaced my E500 with a E510 (now supplmented by a P1) about four years ago, and I have never regretted the change. As others above have said, it allows me to take pictures in impossible situations.

Would I upgrade to a body without it? Only if that body was an order of magnitude better, for example if the long rumoured "triad" model comes out I might be tempted but without IS I would not even be considering an E5

Roger

[Bobpatchcott]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

Hi
I have it on my E-3 and I don't think I could live without it now.
I'm getting on a bit and am very shaky these days so it stays on at all times when using the camera hand held.

Regards to all.

[benvendetta]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

No, it is insurance. Must say that I don't even think about it and rarely drop to a SS that really benefits from IS.

[meach]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

It never occurs to me that the function is even available, so I've never really tried it out properly. I experimented with it once but didn't really see any benefit (it probably wasn't needed for the shots I was taking) and even worse I forgot to turn it off again. The next pics I took were on a tripod and turned out really badly so of course I blame the IS

[photo_owl]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

it's going to depend a lot on what you shoot but in my case I wouldn't go out without it.

[tomke]

Re: IS - Those Who Have It, Could You Do Without It? Those Without It, Do You Yearn For It?

IS was one of the main reasons I choose my first Olympus camera, the E510 and now E30. I am so used to it that I would not want to be without it. It surely helps me to make good photos in difficult circumstances.