MF In-Body Image Stabilization at Last!

[dougpeterson]

Doug - ok you ask why are you dissembling?

You are a Phase dealer. You sell XF cameras, not Fuji. It is to your business' advantage for people not to want Fuji with it's IBIS, as Phase doesn't have it, and if it is in fact a great feature, that will directly affect your bottom line, your company's sales, possibly quite seriously. Then you make the above statement, which I take with a pinch of salt. Hence 'dissembling'...

Gaining an extra stop, (or TWO!), of hand-holdability means you can have a lower ISO for any given handheld lighting situation. I.e. an XF vs a Fuji w IBIS, either the XF would need to be one or two stops higher ISO to allow a faster shutter speed and prevent camera shake, or conversely, the Fuji can use one or two steps lower ISO, with a slower shutter speed, and still be sharp, because it has IBIS, when the XF would be blurred! That's what IBIS allows: you get the advantages - lower ISO for a given exposure combo, or, at a fixed ISO, sharper images where you would have had camera shake in borderline lighting. To use an overused term... it's Win:Win!

There's a lot of helpful dealer input here, and we all appreciate it. On occasions it's colored by what y'all sell/represent, but mostly not. I truly value your time and input, but like everything reserve the right to have a healthy skepticism, when my brain and photo knowledge tells me otherwise.

No fight here, just airing another viewpoint. Thanks.

Okay, but then you mean I'm biased. "Dissembling" (at least my understanding of the word) means you think I'm lying.

I agree 100% I'm biased. I try to give accurate and useful information, but I neither hide nor ignore that my job influences my opinion.

My point about ISO was comparing to the option of gaining a "free" stop of ISO (more sensitivity without more noise), but of course your point is well taken and is the core benefit of IBIS. As I've said several times, and in each of my posts here, IBIS is a quite useful feature, namely in "borderline lighting" as you say.

 

[Steve Hendrix]

What an absurd defense of a camera lacking features. Desperation?

Oh, c'mon, Faberryman, lighten up! I am anxiously looking forward to Holodeck focusing. I mean, isn't everyone?


Steve Hendrix/CI

 

[sog1927]

Better than that would be a camera you don't need to focus .

Heck, I can get you one of those right now. All I need is a box, a pin, and some film

 

[DB5]

Over the last several years one of the camera types that has seen the most growth amongst my clients and friends is film bodies like the Mamiya RZ, Mamiya 7, and Leica M (film models). Many of these bodies don't even have autofocus, let alone features like IBIS. I guess you can call them "dinosaurs" but if someone likes shooting them and it works in the shooting scenarios they need it to work in: they should saddle up those dinosaurs and ride!

i do agree with this. But I will add that film makes it different. The reason to shoot digital is for what it offers and 100% coverage with PDAF, IBIS etc etc and at a fraction of the cost is an extraordinarily welcomed feature. But I am keeping an RZ system for, well, decades, and it is a great system and I love it. I can shoot both film and digital on the one platform and it's wonderful. Film M too, I'm all over it. But the digital luxuries are not only very nice to have, they make a shoot more efficient and you get a lot more peace of mind shooting with equipment that creates an easier, faster environment and head space to shoot in.

I hope that in Phase One becoming more and more niche they will resurrect a film and digital platform. That is a long and distant dream though, I suspect.

 

[JeRuFo]

It has been the same story for about a decade. There is a lot of criticizing the lack of features on the Phase One and Hasselblad bodies and soon this or that digital camera will take over, but the fact of the matter remains that if you want the highest resolution from a digital system, Phase One (and a little later down the road Hasselblad usually) is the way to go, and even with the new Fuji offerings it still will be. If your shooting style prevents you from using all of that resolution or you don't need the best of the best then other systems might be a better option for you. Sure with a faster/lighter/cheaper solution Phase One would have sold more cameras, but they have been steady sellers and will continue to be for a while longer. It is inevitable that sensors become so good at a point in the near future that they no longer make the difference, but for now, if you want the best of the best from a single shot, a digital back is the way to go.

For me, my shooting styles don't permit me the use of a GFX/X1d for most of my shots, I need movements for my landscapes and in the studio for product shots and the XF for the rest of the studio stuff. For my personal work I use LF film (can't afford a digital system with similar resolution) and in the studio I use the Alpa/Phase One system owned by the studio.