On 10/8/2016 10:05 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-10-08 13:32:56 +0000, Neil said:

On 10/8/2016 8:03 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-10-08 07:39:34 +0000, Alfred Molon
said:

In article 2016100720150925210-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck
says...
Probably

because there are Pro FF shooters having this sort of experience:
http://petapixel.com/2016/10/04/sold-nikon-d5-fujifilm-x-t2/

If Fuji added IBIS to their cameras as Sony did (they just added
IBIS in
their A6xxx series), I'd consider a Fuji.

IBIS is just one solution, and Fuji, like Nikon and Canon provide
IS/VR/OS in lenses which are likely to benefit from it.

For those of us with very good vintage lenses, IBIS is the best
solution. Since IBIS doesn't appear to add significant body weight, it
may be the best all-around solution because it accommodates lighter
lenses.

...and yet the cameras those vintage lenses were originally intended for
film and there was no thought of IBIS, or any other IS/VR/OS. As I said,
it is foolish to base one's choice of equipment on a single factor such
as IBIS, thereby excluding some excellent options.

It is not "foolish" if the final result is more useful than without it.
IMO, the differences in image quality between pro-level digital sensors
does not warrant forgoing other technical benefits of a camera, and IBIS
is one such benefit.

BTW: IBIS or not, mount convertors are available for most MILCs, so not
having IBIS does not exclude using those vintage lenses. Just pretend
you are using them as they were originally intended when you were
shooting in an analog photoworld, and didn't shake as much as you do now.

I have yet to see mount converters that provide even the basic
functionality that the lenses have when used with their original film
cameras. It would take one heck of a wonderful camera to warrant such a
compromise.

--
Best regards,

Neil