Hi all, I know there have been threads comparing the OMD IBIS with OIS lenses before, but I've just picked up an OMD and frankly I expected to be a lot more impressed with the IBIS system. I'm finding nowhere near the claimed 4-5 stops improvement at 50mm (100mm equiv) with the kit lens. I wasn't expecting to get near 4-5 in truth - i recognise this was marketing bumph - however, what's bothering me is i'm not seeing a huge difference with the system turned on or off for stills work. With the kit lens, I'm finding 1/25s (or perhaps 1/20s) to be the threshold @ 50mm, beyond which shake afflicts a lot of shots. Now, I wouldn't have a problem with this - seems to be a 2 stop improvement over what you'd expect (1/equivalent focal length). However, I turned IS off in the interests of doing a direct comparison, and found i could get similar numbers of sharp shots at the shutter speeds in question. This doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, since i don't consider my handheld technique to be that great. I've repeated the following test a few times: stand about 2 meters from something with text on it - a stack of CDs in my case. Take 2 bursts of 2 -3 shots with ibis on/off. I'm finding maybe 2/5 are tac sharp with ibis off, and about 3/5 with ibis on. But to be frank, sometimes it's the other way around. To me these results are in the noise. At first i thought there might be a fault with the camera - either ibis is stuck on, or not working at all. So i tried recording some short video clips at the tele end, since camera shake is abundantly clear in video and the effect of IBIS is quite pronounced in the sample clips i've seen. Sure enough, with ibis on the clip looks a LOT smoother. So, what's going on? IBIS over-hyped for stills work? Something wrong with my camera? Much less noticable at even mild tele ranges? I'm going to do another quick test at the wide end now, so lets see if i notice more of a difference. For comparison, I did a few quick tests with my nikon 70-200 f2.8 VRII. In that case, I can shoot reliably at 1/20s with VR turned on and get every shot sharp. Now, this lens cost a lot more than the oly and its kit lens combined, but even so, i expected based on everything i had read to get relatively close to this sort of performance, at least at shorter equivalent focal lengths. I can get sharper shots at 200mm with the nikon lens, at slower shutters, than i can at 100mm equivalent with the oly! Should probably also mention for reference that the camera i tested the nikon on is a d3s, so only 12mp compared with the 16 on the oly, which will reduce the visibility of camera shake somewhat. More than a stop different though? Thanks for any insight you owners out there can offer. I'm not having a whine, honest I love the camera! I'm just concerned i might have a fault.