Image stabilization in body, camera held by lens?

So I have taken the plunge and ordered the Olympus OM-D E-M5 through a
local camera store. I also ordered the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 zoom lens
used from a highly rated dealer on Amazon (knock on wood). I got a
chance to heft a version of this in the store; it's quite heavy. Hand-
held shooting is going to be problematic with this monster. My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

A brief polemic: I went to Mike's Camera in Boulder to see the latest
Panasonic cameras (the new Olympus, alas, seems to be backordered
*everywhere*) handle the big-ass lens, see how it would mount to a
tripod, and ask questions about stuff the internet doesn't tell me.
I then purchased the camera through the store, so that they would
continue to be there so I *can* see and pick up hardware and ask
questions before I buy it. Support your local brick-and-mortar camera
store, or someday you will be buying everything sight unseen.

I drew the line at buying the zoom lens there though--I would have
if they delt in used gear, but they only sell new, and I have to save
money on this folly *somewhere*.

--
Please reply to: | "We establish no religion in this country, we
pciszek at panix dot com | command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor
Autoreply is disabled | will we ever. Church and state are, and must
| remain, separate." --Ronald Reagan, 10/26/1984

Paul Ciszek wrote:
My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

You are supposed to hold the lens with your left hand anyway.
(If you use both hands, how do you squeeze the trigger?) So why
shouldn't IS work there?

-Wolfgang

(Paul Ciszek) writes:

So I have taken the plunge and ordered the Olympus OM-D E-M5 through a
local camera store. I also ordered the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 zoom lens
used from a highly rated dealer on Amazon (knock on wood). I got a
chance to heft a version of this in the store; it's quite heavy. Hand-
held shooting is going to be problematic with this monster. My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

Unless I'm missing something, that's a Four Thirds lens, not a Micro
Four Thirds. Which means you need the adapter to use in on the OM-D
E-M5, and I think the AF gets somewhat compromised.

On the other hand, yikes, there really *is* a 50-200/2.8-3.5 lens.
That's spectactular, and it's *cheap*!

A brief polemic: I went to Mike's Camera in Boulder to see the latest
Panasonic cameras (the new Olympus, alas, seems to be backordered
*everywhere*) handle the big-ass lens, see how it would mount to a
tripod, and ask questions about stuff the internet doesn't tell me.
I then purchased the camera through the store, so that they would
continue to be there so I *can* see and pick up hardware and ask
questions before I buy it. Support your local brick-and-mortar camera
store, or someday you will be buying everything sight unseen.

Yeah, if fondling the gear is an important part of my process, then I
need to support the places that keep fondleable gear around.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

In article , Paul Ciszek says...
My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

Yes, it makes no difference if you handhold the camera or the lens.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article ,
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

Unless I'm missing something, that's a Four Thirds lens, not a Micro
Four Thirds. Which means you need the adapter to use in on the OM-D
E-M5, and I think the AF gets somewhat compromised.

Supposedly the u4/3 cameras were meant to be usable with 4/3 lenses,
since at first that was all that was available. I have an Olympus
adapter, so it should "play nice" with the Olympus lens and Olympus
camera, when it arrives.

I went with the f/2.8 version so it would still be usable after losing
two stops to a 2x teleconverter (also Olympus).

--
Please reply to: | "We establish no religion in this country, we
pciszek at panix dot com | command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor
Autoreply is disabled | will we ever. Church and state are, and must
| remain, separate." --Ronald Reagan, 10/26/1984

Bruce wrote in
:

(Paul Ciszek) wrote:
In article ,
David Dyer-Bennet wrote:

Unless I'm missing something, that's a Four Thirds lens, not a Micro
Four Thirds. Which means you need the adapter to use in on the OM-D
E-M5, and I think the AF gets somewhat compromised.

Supposedly the u4/3 cameras were meant to be usable with 4/3 lenses,
since at first that was all that was available. I have an Olympus
adapter, so it should "play nice" with the Olympus lens and Olympus
camera, when it arrives.

I went with the f/2.8 version so it would still be usable after losing
two stops to a 2x teleconverter (also Olympus).


As long as you expect *glacially slow autofocus*, you won't be
disappointed.

It's not that bad, about 2x as slow as a regular m4/3rds lens, but it
depends on the lens. Odd thing, the confirmation green rectangle and
beep happen about 2 seconds after AF is achieved. As always, experiment.

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote in news:deiv99-
:

Paul Ciszek wrote:
My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

You are supposed to hold the lens with your left hand anyway.
(If you use both hands, how do you squeeze the trigger?) So why
shouldn't IS work there?

-Wolfgang


You tend to develop stronger left holds with a diminutive body than a
full-sized DSLR with a grip you can use to leverage back on the lens
weight, creating a more balanced package. Sport shooting is still the
purview of the semi-pro and pro DSLR.

Paul Ciszek wrote:

So I have taken the plunge and ordered the Olympus OM-D E-M5 through a
local camera store. I also ordered the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 zoom lens
used from a highly rated dealer on Amazon (knock on wood). I got a
chance to heft a version of this in the store; it's quite heavy. Hand-
held shooting is going to be problematic with this monster. My
question, is sensor-based IS able to do the job when the lens, as
opposed to the camera, is what is being held?

I don't think it cares. I've found it to work (in Sony cameras) even
when the source of the camera shake was the very heavy static friction
breaking hydraulic hum of a hydraulic "cherry picker" platform I was
standing on to get a high viewpoint, and when it's due to
photographing from the windows of a moving vehicle.

--
Chris Malcolm