From: SMS on
On 24/05/10 7:55 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:

> But the IS in the Canon 70-200/4.0 IS is seriously amazing. Sharp images at
> 1/15th (with a lot of care and elbows supported or locked) at 200mm,
> reliably sharp images at 1/30 and 200mm. I doubt in-camera IS will be
> competing, ever. And, of course, in-camera IS doesn't stabilize the
> viewfinder image.

Yes, that's an incredible lens.

In-camera IS on D-SLRs (and other interchangeable lens cameras) is more
cost effective, but has serious performance disadvantages, as all the
experts agree.

From: John Navas on
On Tue, 25 May 2010 09:29:49 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com>
wrote in <4bfbfafd$0$1642$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>:

>On 24/05/10 7:55 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
>> But the IS in the Canon 70-200/4.0 IS is seriously amazing. Sharp images at
>> 1/15th (with a lot of care and elbows supported or locked) at 200mm,
>> reliably sharp images at 1/30 and 200mm. I doubt in-camera IS will be
>> competing, ever. And, of course, in-camera IS doesn't stabilize the
>> viewfinder image.
>
>Yes, that's an incredible lens.
>
>In-camera IS on D-SLRs (and other interchangeable lens cameras) is more
>cost effective, but has serious performance disadvantages, as all the
>experts agree.

Not true. (What a shock.)
--
Best regards,
John

Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer,
it makes you a dSLR owner.
"The single most important component of a camera
is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: Outing Trolls is FUN! on
On Tue, 25 May 2010 09:29:49 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote:

>On 24/05/10 7:55 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
>
>> But the IS in the Canon 70-200/4.0 IS is seriously amazing. Sharp images at
>> 1/15th (with a lot of care and elbows supported or locked) at 200mm,
>> reliably sharp images at 1/30 and 200mm. I doubt in-camera IS will be
>> competing, ever. And, of course, in-camera IS doesn't stabilize the
>> viewfinder image.
>
>Yes, that's an incredible lens.
>
>In-camera IS on D-SLRs (and other interchangeable lens cameras) is more
>cost effective, but has serious performance disadvantages, as all the
>experts agree.

Point us to "all these experts" that agree to this.

Oh that's right. You can't. They only exist in your imagination. Just like
that computer-controlled geyser that you helped to install in Yellowstone
Nat. Park on one of your imaginary trips.

You really should quit. We all already know you're a delusional
pretend-photographer troll. You prove it with every post you ever make.



From: Chris Malcolm on
In rec.photo.digital nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <mvnlv592n2st82b9f5nja62asm8062mtoj(a)4ax.com>, John Navas
> <jnspam1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote:

>> That's only because it's a cheap VR system.

> a lot of vr systems are cheap. some aren't.

>> A camera system can be more sophisticated and capable,
>> with the extra function buried in on board electronics
>> and amortized over multiple lenses.

> a lens system can be just as sophisticated and capable, if not more so,
> since it can be tuned to the specifics of each lens, not one size fits
> all.

In body IS isn't one size fits all. It reads the necessary parameters
from the lens, the most important being focal length, and adjusts
itself.

--
Chris Malcolm
Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: nospam on
In article <862v3vF3ulU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Chris Malcolm
<cam(a)holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> >> A camera system can be more sophisticated and capable,
> >> with the extra function buried in on board electronics
> >> and amortized over multiple lenses.
>
> > a lens system can be just as sophisticated and capable, if not more so,
> > since it can be tuned to the specifics of each lens, not one size fits
> > all.
>
> In body IS isn't one size fits all.

yes it is

> It reads the necessary parameters
> from the lens, the most important being focal length, and adjusts
> itself.

sure but it's still the *same* system that has to cover everything from
a super-wide to a super-tele and everything in between. the amount of
sensor excursion to properly stabilize a super-telephoto is impossible,
whereas each lens can be individually tuned, as needed.