«

In article <eVA4n.27388$(E-Mail Removed)> , david-
(E-Mail Removed)d says...
>
> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
>
> David
>

I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
to me).

-P.

In rec.photo.digital Peter Huebner <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <eVA4n.27388$(E-Mail Removed)> , david-
> (E-Mail Removed)d says...
>>
>> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
>> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
>>
>> David

> I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
> sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
> based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
> to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
> to me).

Also IS isn't a fixed technology. It keeps improving. So if you want
the extra stop or so of extra IS that's just been developed you either
have to buy a new set of lenses, or just a new body, which you were
probably going to buy anyway. If your lenses are full of
electromechanical technology they're goiong to age a lot faster.

--
Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital Gary Eickmeier <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "Peter Huebner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) t...
>> In article <eVA4n.27388$(E-Mail Removed)> , david-
>> (E-Mail Removed)d says...
>>>
>>> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
>>> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>
>> I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
>> sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
>> based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
>> to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
>> to me).

> The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
> rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.

It doesn't have it all. It doesn't have MLU! :-)

But it does have two excellent new features you didn't mention. The
first is a big bright LCD with adaptive brightness which can easily be
seen in weak sunlight. (The strong sunlight test is still a few months
away in these northern latitudes :-)

The second is that in addition to the secondary sensor live view which
gives you fast AF with live view, you can also switch with one button
press to image sensor live view with magnification up to pixel level
all over the image. Makes critical manual focusing to the millimetre
so easy it's a delight to use!

--
Chris Malcolm

In rec.photo.digital David J Taylor <david-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "Gary Eickmeier" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4b533782$0$20414$(E-Mail Removed) m...
> []
>> The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
>> rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.
>>
>> Gary Eickmeier

> You haven't used a long telephoto lens hand-held with in-lens IS, have
> you?

I certainly haven't, but given all the rumours about how badly
in-camera IS performs with long lenses I was pleasantly surprised to
discover how well it worked with my 500mm.

--
Chris Malcolm

On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:31:37 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>"Chris Malcolm" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>[]
>> Also IS isn't a fixed technology. It keeps improving. So if you want
>> the extra stop or so of extra IS that's just been developed you either
>> have to buy a new set of lenses, or just a new body, which you were
>> probably going to buy anyway. If your lenses are full of
>> electromechanical technology they're goiong to age a lot faster.
>>
>> --
>> Chris Malcolm
>
>Yes, that's one point in favour of in-body IS, but having the viewfinder
>image stabilised is a much more practical benefit in my view. I rather
>suspect that the 3-4 stops we have now is perhaps enough, at least if you
>are photographing moving subjects.
>
>Cheers,
>David

How bizarre. With optical IS switched to "always on" (the worst possible
setting, except in unique situations such as ultra-low-light and video), I
have the image stabilized in my viewfinder too. You mean you can't get this
with your DSLRS? What a pity.

And still they avoid that ugly issue of optical IS imparting random
transverse chromatic aberrations in random shots which cannot be easily
removed by any editing software on earth.

LOL!

In rec.photo.digital Alfred Molon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
> says...
>> It doesn't have it all. It doesn't have MLU! :-)
>
> The lack of MLU in the A350 (the predecessor of the A550) is not really
> a problem in my experience. I do however not use a lot the tele lens.

I do use a 500mm lens quite often, and in my experience it is a
problem. At shutter speeds slower than around 1/300th sec it starts to
show itself, first as a ghost image several pixels displaced
vertically, and then as shutter speeds drop turning into a small
vertical smear. I suspect the shutter speed at which this shows up may
depend on the mass and rotational inertia of the lens fitted. Since my
500mm is a short light reflex lens, that may be what causes it to
start showing up at such an unexpectedly shutter speed.

It is however less of a problem with the A550 than with cameras with
poorer high ISO performance, because good high ISO performance means
it's easier to push the shutter speed up high enough to avoid it.

It should be noted that the size of the smearing due to vibration
caused by mirror slap is very much less than happened with 35mmm film
SLRs.

--
Chris Malcolm

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:29:39 +0100, Alfred Molon <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
>says...
>> It should be noted that the size of the smearing due to vibration
>> caused by mirror slap is very much less than happened with 35mmm film
>> SLRs.
>
>Perhaps because in a full frame camera the mirror is larger than in an
>APS-C camera.
>
>All these problems of course disappear with the new EVIL cameras.

Those problems are already gone, and have been gone for over a decade, in
every P&S camera ever made.

Catch up.