This is not an in body vs in lens question. Photography survived over 100 years, but I think we all agree, though not necessary, IS if available is a nice feature.
My question is how effective is it? I see these measures saying that IS in a particular camera or lens can compensate for 2-3 stops in shake allowing use of slower speeds. Really?
I can believe that in a tele lens this can be the case. An f4 tele lens in a situation where you need to shoot at 1/125 to get an exposure, but you feel you need to shoot at 1/500 to hide camera shake, I can see this working.
But at real slow speeds, well the time difference is much larger, I don't see IS saving me shooting at 1/4s vs 1/15s or 1/8s vs 1/30s. Can IS really hold things together for 3/8 of a second? That is a long time, and depending on my caffeine intake, a lot of jitters to control.
I fully prefer IS and won't buy a digi thingy without it, but I am skeptical about the extent of its effectiveness in the situations I often am in.
My question is how effective is it? I see these measures saying that IS in a particular camera or lens can compensate for 2-3 stops in shake allowing use of slower speeds. Really?
I can believe that in a tele lens this can be the case. An f4 tele lens in a situation where you need to shoot at 1/125 to get an exposure, but you feel you need to shoot at 1/500 to hide camera shake, I can see this working.
But at real slow speeds, well the time difference is much larger, I don't see IS saving me shooting at 1/4s vs 1/15s or 1/8s vs 1/30s. Can IS really hold things together for 3/8 of a second? That is a long time, and depending on my caffeine intake, a lot of jitters to control.
I fully prefer IS and won't buy a digi thingy without it, but I am skeptical about the extent of its effectiveness in the situations I often am in.
