File :-(, x, )
M?e?e?s?e??? !iZn5BCIpug
Body IS + Lens IS = divide by zero?
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
You can do this with Olympus and it just fucks things up.
>> Anonymous
FUCK YES SUPER STABLE IMAGES!
>> Anonymous
>>241614
what happens? cancell each other out?
>> Anonymous
>>241623
i think they both work different ways which makes them come out fucked? i remember seeing an explanation and pictures but my memory isnt great
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>241623
No, they interfere with each other to create SUPER UNSTABLE IMAGES
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
You can see it freak out on the Olympus screen too, if you get a chance to try it.

The two different methods interfere with each other. A sort of feedback loop (IIRC) and it ends up at least as bad as no IS at all. Needless to say, it doesn't do any good. It's one or the other, but not body and lens IS.
>> Anonymous
There is also the possibility of using both Lens and body stabilization during operation the the "Live View" mode. In that mode there could be feedback from the sensor which could be used to add stability via sensor-shift, though the issue would be complicated by that fact that the feedback element (the sensor) would be moving. Live View isn't a "normal" mode of operating right now, though it is popular with photographers upgrading from P&S digicams and is becoming a "must have" feature on all new DSLRs.

Of course a gyro-based sensor-shift stability system would also be required, since it's likely to be the best way to do sensor-shift stabilization when operating without an IS lens on the camera.

The advantage of such a dual systems wouldn't be just technical. Canon (and Nikon) are presumably very reluctant to use sensor-shift stabilization because it would eat into sales of their image stabilized lenses. However if they could offer a system which gave more stability than by the use of either lens or body based stabilization alone, they'd actually have a marketing and performance advantage! The technology required is challenging, but so were AF cameras, DSLRs and both body and lens based IS systems. I think it could possibly be done, though it would certainly not be easy.
>> Anonymous
>>242046

Shitty copypasta is shitty.

0/10
>> Anonymous
>>242049

fail for butthurt pentax/olympus/sony user jealous faggot
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>242049
fail truth is fail?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
I'd love gyro stabilised cameras and lenses but they would probably be huge and hard to hold.
>> Anonymous
>>242081

ugh, what the fuck you fucking idiot?

are you a fucking idiot?