I can't remember where I read it, but it was a comparison of the IBIS on an Olympus 4/3 camera against the lens IS of Canon, and the claim was that the IBIS system was superior for wide angles and the IS system was superior for long lengths..... That was about 5 or 6 years ago and both IS and IBIS have improved since then....Orangutan said:candc said:neuroanatomist said:candc said:They haven't yet but most likely will. Its the most feasible way to achieve "is" with non stabilized lenses.
Canon has explained the benefits of lens-based IS over IBIS several times, pointing out several weaknesses of the latter.
Of course, if Nikon can reverse course and use fluorite elements after pointing out their potential flaws, why not Canon?
I agree with that myself. The lenses with stabilization built into them seems to offer more benefit than ibis for the time being but I think developing ibis which is in the early stages is the best overall solution for getting some stabilization in lenses that don't have it built in.
How would that work for long focal lengths? Wouldn't the IBIS travel distance be prohibitive?