Ep2 versus 14x140mm IS

Number 8 looks to my eye like the winner, but I'm not divining your brew choice from it. Must be missing something. Interesting that the lens seems so much better at stabilization than the Oly body. Did you happen to try this with the IS enabled for both body and lens?

Cheers (literally)

Gordon

 

I wonder which works better for video.

 

1/10th SS at 140mm

Not really sure what the point is here? Really, 1/10th shutter speed at 140mm handheld? This might actually mean something if you had used a tripod but the random handheld shot at these speeds and focal length, you couldn't possibly get repeatable results. Maybe I am missing something.

 

Ok but your results really aren't indicative of what either the camera IS or lens IS can do, nor are they repeatable. Handholding the camera at this shutter speed is the factor that you can't control from one shot to the next. Use of a tripod would eliminate one variable and may alter your results.

 

I think the point is to admit that in everyday shooting, the variable of handheld motion will always be there.. while embracing that, the test was to see if there actually were fairly consistent differences between the two systems. And to me there is. As I would have expected, the lens system seems superior.

This backs up what I've experienced when I mounted a Leica Elmarit 135/2.8 on my E-P2. With the Olympus IS, I was still noticing fairly obvious blur, even at 1/500. I was mentally comparing that to the results I used to get with my old Lumix FZ30, which was exceptionally crisp at the longest focal length (435mm, I think). I have been very disappointed with the in-body IS of the E-P2. But I figure if I pick up a stabilized lens like the 14-140, it won't matter.

So I really appreciate this test, as it was something I was wondering about lately.

 

I think he's right in the ballpark actually. Let's break it down: 140mm is 280mm equivalent. So using the old rule of thumb without IS a person should be able to hand hold at 1/250 second. IS supposedly offers as much as a 3-stop advantage, meaning 1/30 is attainable. So at 1/10 sec he's only pushing the limits by about a stop. I don't see that as unreasonable for an informal stress test. His shots seem to bare that out. The Oly IS is consistently sharper than hand held, and the Panny IS is sharper still. Using IS is never really repeatable anyway, it's only meant to improve the percentage of sharp shots at slow shutter speeds. A tripod would be useless for this test, as the idea is to determine the benefit for hand held shots. And IS is supposed to be turned OFF when a tripod is used anyway.

Regards,
Gordon

 

the tests are saying, if u have a lens with IS, turn it ON. if the lens doesnt have IS, turn the IS in the camera ON. either way you cant go wrong! what a beautiful life!

 

I recently picked up a 14-140 Panny for my PL1. I'm finding that in general it's fine to operate with IBIS ONLY. At times at the long end the OIS can be more effective alone. As for video, there is little question the OIS rules. In fact with the PL1 set to continuous focus and the OIS on it works just like my Sony Camcorder does. It is instant to follow the subject with NO jumping around in focus and follows your subject you're trying to shoot perfectly. It's a great combo. The 14-140 is darn sharp all over as well which frankly I didn't expect. I'm a happy camper. View attachment 147543