A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 6th 18, 03:24 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ken Hart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 569
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On 01/05/2018 04:34 PM, RichA wrote:
Until Nikon and Canon match Olympus/Panasonic Dual stabilization, the chances of getting 45mp of resolution with anything but static subjects and very fast shutter speeds is about nil. Linearly, 45mp is about 50% more resolution than 20mp, which means you need to overcome that tighter demand for steadiness. Not easy.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60601583


Back in the film days, the general rule for hand-held was that the
shutter speed should be greater than the focal length. That is: you
should be able to hand hold a 50mm lens at 1/50 second, a 200mm lens at
1/200 second, etc. If you couldn't adequately hand hold that, you should
consider going back to auto-body work.

Now I will grant that there is no way I can hand hold my 1200mm lens at
1/1000 second (or any other speed, simply because of it's weight), but
under the right circumstances, I can (and have) hand held my 500mm
without any image stabilization.

--
Ken Hart

  #2  
Old January 7th 18, 04:00 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
-hh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 838
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

The net result of all of this is that if the stabilization is only good enough
for an "8MP" film equivalent pixel, then the 45MP sensor will smear
five to six pixel data points together to make a virtual 8MP data set.
But only when the shake disallows the higher 45MP grain.

-hh
  #3  
Old January 7th 18, 04:04 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On Jan 6, 2018, hh wrote
(in ):

The net result of all of this is that if the stabilization is only good enough
for an "8MP" film equivalent pixel, then the 45MP sensor will smear
five to six pixel data points together to make a virtual 8MP data set.
But only when the shake disallows the higher 45MP grain.

-hh


I believe my photography will survive without IBIS, at 24 MP.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #4  
Old January 7th 18, 08:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On 2018-01-07 03:00:52 +0000, -hh said:

The net result of all of this is that if the stabilization is only good enough
for an "8MP" film equivalent pixel, then the 45MP sensor will smear
five to six pixel data points together to make a virtual 8MP data set.
But only when the shake disallows the higher 45MP grain.

-hh


In reality you would need some 40MP sensor to measure up to a film like
Kodak T-Max 400 hundred but you could easily adapt the "x mm1/x s"
rule to 1/2x or whatever you think is necessary for your skills. If
you're going on a safari planing on sitting on the roof of a tourist
buss in the Serengeti at noon then you could probably make do without
IS or legs but waiting in a hide in Lappland at dusk ain't the same
thing...
--
teleportation kills

  #5  
Old January 7th 18, 12:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

In article .com,
Savageduck says...

I believe my photography will survive without IBIS, at 24 MP.


Yes of course, but you can't do things which others can do with
stabilisation.
--
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
  #6  
Old January 7th 18, 12:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On Jan 7, 2018, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck says...

I believe my photography will survive without IBIS, at 24 MP.


Yes of course, but you can't do things which others can do with
stabilisation.


Perhaps. However, you are making the assumption that not having IBIS is not
having stabilization.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #7  
Old January 7th 18, 02:37 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

In article .com,
Savageduck says...

Perhaps. However, you are making the assumption that not having IBIS is not
having stabilization.


Well, it's the OIS you get from the Fuji lenses vs. the stabilisation
from the combination of IBIS and OIS.

The latter is far superior and allows you to do things you can't do if
you only have OIS.

For sure Fuji cameras are good or even very good. It's just that in this
specific area (stabilisation), they are falling behind the competition.

And especially if you are using a 45MP camera you appreciate any
additional stabilisation you can get.
--
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
  #8  
Old January 7th 18, 02:58 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On Jan 7, 2018, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck says...

Perhaps. However, you are making the assumption that not having IBIS is not
having stabilization.


Well, it's the OIS you get from the Fuji lenses vs. the stabilisation
from the combination of IBIS and OIS.

The latter is far superior and allows you to do things you can't do if
you only have OIS.


Perhaps. However, never make assumptions when it comes to the skills an old
fart photographer might have developed over some 55 years of shooting.

For sure Fuji cameras are good or even very good.


So you have noticed. They also have some pretty good lenses.

It's just that in this
specific area (stabilisation), they are falling behind the competition.


Not necessarily. You need to keep up with developments in the Fujifilm World.

And especially if you are using a 45MP camera you appreciate any
additional stabilisation you can get.


I am not using a 45MP camera. Are you?

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #9  
Old January 8th 18, 02:28 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ken Hart[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 569
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On 01/07/2018 08:58 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 7, 2018, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck says...

Perhaps. However, you are making the assumption that not having IBIS is not
having stabilization.


Well, it's the OIS you get from the Fuji lenses vs. the stabilisation
from the combination of IBIS and OIS.

The latter is far superior and allows you to do things you can't do if
you only have OIS.


Perhaps. However, never make assumptions when it comes to the skills an old
fart photographer might have developed over some 55 years of shooting.

And particularly in your case, where "shooting" did not always involve a
camera!
The techniques for shooting a camera are quite similar.

Ken Hart

  #10  
Old January 8th 18, 03:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default The cold, hard reality of 45mp and no in-body stabilization

On Jan 7, 2018, Ken Hart wrote
(in article ):

On 01/07/2018 08:58 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jan 7, 2018, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.com,
Savageduck says...

Perhaps. However, you are making the assumption that not having IBIS is
not
having stabilization.

Well, it's the OIS you get from the Fuji lenses vs. the stabilisation
from the combination of IBIS and OIS.

The latter is far superior and allows you to do things you can't do if
you only have OIS.


Perhaps. However, never make assumptions when it comes to the skills an old
fart photographer might have developed over some 55 years of shooting.

And particularly in your case, where "shooting" did not always involve a
camera!
The techniques for shooting a camera are quite similar.


They are quite similar indeed. One might say the art of the Zen Archer,
applies to the photographer, and the target shooter.

For me photography came first starting with my father’s C3 some 63 years
ago, and my Brownie. A few years on my father and I got involved in target
shooting, and both photography, and shooting have been part of my life ever
since.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/21w9l2lb766x55g/Target-Aw.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Superb in body image stabilization Me Digital Photography 20 November 19th 16 06:46 PM
Image stabilization in body, camera held by lens? Paul Ciszek Digital Photography 7 June 8th 12 06:02 AM
Image stabilization: better in the lens or in the body? David[_9_] Digital SLR Cameras 16 March 20th 09 11:09 AM
Olympus in-body Image Stabilization misrepresentation Orange[_2_] Digital Photography 19 November 20th 07 05:09 AM
Olympus in-body Image Stabilization misrepresentation Orange[_2_] Digital SLR Cameras 28 November 19th 07 09:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.