All this talk of IS

VK wrote:
 > Looking at all the talk of IS here, you'd think that photography was
 > impossible before the invention of this wonder-technology. Virtually
 > every camera recommendation espouses "IS" as the must-have solution.
 >
 > And before people jump on me, I have 2 IS teles for my DSLR rig (and
 > will be getting a 500/4 IS within the next month as well), so I
 > appreciate the benefit of IS. Love it, in fact.
 >
 > But I find the overwhelming "IS or bust" consensus here to be a little
 > overkill. There are other factors to consider, and some of them may
 > be more important. Just an alternate POV for all those considering
 > ZLRs. My 2 cents.

You are lucky in your DSLR having the larger sensor size, meaning that you
can use ISO 800 without worrying about noise. ZLRs (today) have smaller
sensors, requiring you to work at ISO 100 or less for a similar noise
level in the image. This lower ISO makes the required shutter opening
time longer, which increases the importance of having IS for a ZLR camera
compared to a DSLR.

Cheers,
David<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

On 6 Jan 2005 06:31:34 -0800, "VK" <vtb666 RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
 >But I find the overwhelming "IS or bust" consensus here to be a little
 >overkill. There are other factors to consider, and some of them may be
 >more important. Just an alternate POV for all those considering ZLRs.
 >My 2 cents.

What I find more disturbing than the search for the IS grail is the fascination
with the size and weight of digital cameras. I've been reading these DC
newsgroups for a while now and I've seen several posts from DC shoppers
that listed among their considerations the "advantages" of one camera being
6.5oz (example) lighter than another camera. When the hell did photo enthusiasts
get so weak and frail that the difference between the weight of a Pano FZ3 and
FZ20 was a major consideration? These have to be people that are new to
photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and sent
out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone, that trip would have required
them to hire Sherpas to carry their camera for them....
/end rant<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

VK wrote:
[]
 > FWIW, I bought my G6 after seriously considering an S1. Ultimately, I
 > decided I'd rather live with a shorter focal length if that meant a
 > more responsive camera. Just an example.

Yes, as I got a Nikon Coolpix because it had the 24mm wide-angle and
faster picture taking. This after finding out that many of my shots with
the Nikon Coolpix 5700 were at the 35mm end of the zoom. I'll be keeping
the 5700 as well, though. Only my wife actually owns an IS camera!

Cheers,
David<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

In article <94tqt058u06k7690j8pcfvdjtn9jdejdhn.DeleteThis@4ax.com>, drk_gently.DeleteThis@yahoo.com says...
 > When the hell did photo enthusiasts
 > get so weak and frail that the difference between the weight of a Pano FZ3 and
 > FZ20 was a major consideration?
 >
LOL, I've been thinking the same for a while now.

When I bought my FZ10 most reviewers commented on the bulk of the thing. When I actually got
it I compared it to an Oly OM10 that I still have. It's almost the same size. When the OM10
was new one of it's 'faures' was that it was very small and ight.

Times do indeed change..

T.
--
Please Tony, NO!! You'd look dreadful in a basque and fishnets..<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

VK <vtb666 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
 > I guess my suggestion to beginners planning to get a ZLR would be: yes,
 > IS is useful, but so is a tripod, which will generally yield better
 > results than IS.

....and a tripod *and* a remote control would be better still. Yes, I use
a tripod occasionally, if I've gone out specifically with photography in
mind, but if I'm just out and about and happen to have my camera, I
don't want the weight and bulk of a tripod with me.

 > FWIW, I bought my G6 after seriously considering an S1. Ultimately, I
 > decided I'd rather live with a shorter focal length if that meant a
 > more responsive camera. Just an example.

IS on my FZ-10 has certainly meant that "opportunity" shots without a
tripod in poor light or at very long focal length are more likely to
result in decent images. I tried an Olympus C770 without IS, and despite
it being a smaller and neater camera than the FZ-10 I would've needed to
take my tripod out with me most of the time.... Swings and roundabouts,
I guess

pete
--
pete DeleteThis @fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

Hi Dirk, you said,

 > What I find more disturbing than the search
 > for the IS grail is the fascination with the
 > size and weight of digital cameras.

Size & weight, or portability, rather than a "fascination", is a
reasonable concern with regard to any kind of camera. That's why medium
format, small format, and even APS cameras were invented in the first
place - otherwise everyone would still be shooting large format on all
occasions.

 > When the hell did photo enthusiasts get so weak
 > and frail that the difference between the weight
 > of a Pano FZ3 and FZ20 was a major consideration?

True photo enthusiasts carry at least one camera most of their time. These
people are concerned with portability. People who think of themselves as
"photo enthusiasts" but almost never carry a camera, and thus are not
aware of portability issues, are not photo enthusiasts but merely gear
enthusiasts.

 > These have to be people that are new to photography
 > or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon
 > F and sent out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone,

It is reasonable to judge of the convenience of photographic gear
according to its size & weight. It is reasonable to judge of a
photographer's merit according to his or her skill in making focus,
exposition and composition. But to judge of a photographer's merit
according to the size & weight of his (as someone remarked, always *his")
gear is near to comic.

To sum up, for a photo enthusiast even a toy camera can become a serious
tool, whereas for a gear enthusiast even a serious camera is just a
childish toy - the bigger the better.

Julio.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

"Dirk Gently" <drk_gently DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:94tqt058u06k7690j8pcfvdjtn9jdejdhn@4ax.com...
 > These have to be people that are new to
 > photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and
sent
 > out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone

Nikon F is a lightweight. You need to strap on a view camera and photograph
your trip through Yosemite before you get bragging rights.

Sheesh. You weaklings never had to carry your equipment around in a wagon,
chased by wild Indians and bandits, hunt your own food and carry two hundred
pounds of camera, copper plates, tripod and chemicals to the top of Pike's
Peak just to get a three minute exposure of the valley in bright daylight.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 14:45:22 -0800, "C J Campbell"
<christophercampbellNOSPAM RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
 >"Dirk Gently" <drk_gently RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
 >news:94tqt058u06k7690j8pcfvdjtn9jdejdhn@4ax.com...
  >> These have to be people that are new to
  >> photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and
 >sent
  >> out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone
 >
 >Nikon F is a lightweight. You need to strap on a view camera and photograph
 >your trip through Yosemite before you get bragging rights.

Now you're straining a bit.....nobody straps on a view camera, but I have lugged
a Crown Graphic around enough to know that my Mamiya TLR was a lightweight.

 >Sheesh. You weaklings never had to carry your equipment around in a wagon,
 >chased by wild Indians and bandits, hunt your own food and carry two hundred
 >pounds of camera, copper plates, tripod and chemicals to the top of Pike's
 >Peak just to get a three minute exposure of the valley in bright daylight.

No, I'm sane, but you won't find me complaining that one digital camera is
6oz heavier than another, but I have read such fromsome people here.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

C J Campbell <christophercampbellNOSPAM.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote:
 >
 > "Dirk Gently" <drk_gently.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
 > news:94tqt058u06k7690j8pcfvdjtn9jdejdhn@4ax.com...
  >> These have to be people that are new to
  >> photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and
 > sent
  >> out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone
 >
 > Nikon F is a lightweight. You need to strap on a view camera and photograph
 > your trip through Yosemite before you get bragging rights.
 >
 > Sheesh. You weaklings never had to carry your equipment around in a wagon,
 > chased by wild Indians and bandits, hunt your own food and carry two hundred
 > pounds of camera, copper plates, tripod and chemicals to the top of Pike's
 > Peak just to get a three minute exposure of the valley in bright daylight.
 >

"Luxury..... We used to *dream* of living in t'corridor".

pete
--
pete.TakeThisOut@fenelon.com "there's no room for enigmas in built-up areas"<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

Dirk Gently wrote:
 >
 > On 6 Jan 2005 06:31:34 -0800, "VK" <vtb666.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
  > >But I find the overwhelming "IS or bust" consensus here to be a little
  > >overkill. There are other factors to consider, and some of them may be
  > >more important. Just an alternate POV for all those considering ZLRs.
  > >My 2 cents.
 >
 > What I find more disturbing than the search for the IS grail is the fascination
 > with the size and weight of digital cameras. I've been reading these DC
 > newsgroups for a while now and I've seen several posts from DC shoppers
 > that listed among their considerations the "advantages" of one camera being
 > 6.5oz (example) lighter than another camera. When the hell did photo enthusiasts
 > get so weak and frail that the difference between the weight of a Pano FZ3 and
 > FZ20 was a major consideration? These have to be people that are new to
 > photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and sent
 > out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone, that trip would have required
 > them to hire Sherpas to carry their camera for them....
 > /end rant

When I'm working, or doing serious personal work, I carry a 15-20 lb
camera bag. When I'm not working and/or not serious, I want small and
light. I very much appreciate the small size & weight of the S1 IS
compared to the SLRs.

Lisa<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS 

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 10:31:40 -0700, Dirk Gently <drk_gently DeleteThis @yahoo.com>
wrote:

 >On 6 Jan 2005 06:31:34 -0800, "VK" <vtb666 DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
  >>But I find the overwhelming "IS or bust" consensus here to be a little
  >>overkill. There are other factors to consider, and some of them may be
  >>more important. Just an alternate POV for all those considering ZLRs.
  >>My 2 cents.
 >
 >What I find more disturbing than the search for the IS grail is the fascination
 >with the size and weight of digital cameras. I've been reading these DC
 >newsgroups for a while now and I've seen several posts from DC shoppers
 >that listed among their considerations the "advantages" of one camera being
 >6.5oz (example) lighter than another camera. When the hell did photo enthusiasts
 >get so weak and frail that the difference between the weight of a Pano FZ3 and
 >FZ20 was a major consideration? These have to be people that are new to
 >photography or something, obviously they never strapped on a Nikon F and sent
 >out to photograph their trip through Yellowstone, that trip would have required
 >them to hire Sherpas to carry their camera for them....
 >/end rant

I prefer using a digital camera which leans towards being larger and
heavier. Which is in part why I decided to buy a Panasonic FZ20.

With many of the various brands/models that I tried their low weight
made the camera feel like they were too delicate, and the small camera
body size seemed more suited to hands which were smaller than mine.
When holding one of these I was left speculating about whether I'd
need to carry around a PDA stylus as a camera accessory to push the
little buttons because in some cases the buttons were so small and
grouped together in a way that I couldn't press one button without
accidentially pushing another next to it.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: All this talk of IS