In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

nikon (and canon) put stabilization in the lens because that's the only
way to do it with film cameras. sony and pentax never had stabilized
lenses for film and they chose to do it in the camera body.

You mean it's all a legacy issue?

you make it sound like they should change just for the hell of it.
in-lens stabilization works, and it works well. like everything else,
it has its advantages and disadvantages.

Looks rather that Nikon and Canon want
you to buy their expensive IS lenses.

all manufacturers want you to buy their expensive lenses, bodies and
other accessories. nothing new there.

and stabilized lenses are not necessarily that expensive. for example,
the nikon 55-200 vr is about $50 more than the non-stabilized version
($170 versus $230, usa version, priced today at b&h).