In-camera IS at long focal lengths

[Loupey]

First of all, I've never used a body-stabilized camera so I don't really qualify saying anything here.

Secondly, I do think that body stabilization makes more sense than a lens stabilized system.


But I did have a question: since the in-body stabilization occurs at the sensor level, you can't see the effects through the viewfinder, right? I shoot a lot with 500mm and 600mm setups and I really enjoy the lens-stabilized images in the viewfinder. Trying to see detail, compose, and focus at those focal lengths is difficult without lens stabilization - especially if the target is fast.

Just a thought.

[Greg McCary]

First of all, I've never used a body-stabilized camera so I don't really qualify saying anything here.

Secondly, I do think that body stabilization makes more sense than a lens stabilized system.


But I did have a question: since the in-body stabilization occurs at the sensor level, you can't see the effects through the viewfinder, right? I shoot a lot with 500mm and 600mm setups and I really enjoy the lens-stabilized images in the viewfinder. Trying to see detail, compose, and focus at those focal lengths is difficult without lens stabilization - especially if the target is fast.

Just a thought.

No Loupey you can't. You can in Live View. I never quite thought of that but it would be nice to see it in the VF. Good point.

[Loupey]

Well then, I guess that would be one small advantage of the in-lens system. Nice to be able to see exactly the effect one is getting before tripping the shutter.

Perhaps not much of an issue at the shorter focal lengths, but at long mm's the viewfinder image is so important. Like using a 10x~12x non-stabilized binoculars at a sporting event and waiting to see when/if one player says something (so you can read his lips). Very tiring to do when the image is jumping around.