«

On 11/24/2012 8:21 PM, Peter Jason wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:13:40 -0500, PeterN
> <> wrote:
>
>> On 11/24/2012 4:43 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
>>> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:17:42 -0500, PeterN
>>> <> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/24/2012 12:47 AM, otter wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 22, 6:29 pm, Peter Jason <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I have an Olympus E5.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The manual says to turn off the image stabilizer
>>>>>> when using a tripod.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why? Does the I.S. use camera resources that
>>>>>> detract from image quality?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> A few other points, in addition to what others have said:
>>>>> - Some lenses are able to detect that they are on a tripod (i guess by
>>>>> lack of shake) and don't need to have IS turned off. This may not
>>>>> apply to the Olympus E5, but it does to some Canon IS lenses, at
>>>>> least.
>>>>> - If you have a mediocre tripod, or if it is windy to the point that
>>>>> your lens vibrates despite being on a tripod, you may be better off
>>>>> leaving IS on.
>>>>> - If your lens is on a good tripod and isn't vibrating, and the lens
>>>>> was not designed to automatically detect this, it may hunt for
>>>>> movement, which could cause poorer results than if IS were switched
>>>>> off. This is where the advice comes from to switch off IS while on a
>>>>> tripod. But as I mentioned above, it is not always necessary or even
>>>>> advisable.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure our engineer friends here will correct me but, I think
>>>> everything has some degree of oscillation. The only issue is whether the
>>>> oscillations are sufficient to move the lens outside the circle of
>>>> confusion.
>>>
>>> The point is that the IS actually moves the circle of confusion.
>>>
>>
>> I understand that. But, it is my understanding that you cannot eliminate
>> oscillation. It is likely that VR, and/or IS do in fact move the circle
>> of confusion, hopefully in synch with the oscillations.
>
> Thanks for the replies. I'm doing some tripod
> tests with a 600mm (4/3) lens and will report
> back.
>

Enjoy.

--
Peter

On Nov 24, 8:22*pm, Peter Jason <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:13:40 -0500, PeterN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <peter....@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
> >On 11/24/2012 4:43 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
> >> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:17:42 -0500, PeterN
> >> <peter....@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>> On 11/24/2012 12:47 AM, otter wrote:
> >>>> On Nov 22, 6:29 pm, Peter Jason <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
> >>>>> I have an Olympus E5.
>
> >>>>> The manual says to turn off the image stabilizer
> >>>>> when using a tripod.
>
> >>>>> Why? *Does the I.S. use camera resources that
> >>>>> detract from image quality?
>
> >>>>> Peter
>
> >>>> A few other points, in addition to what others have said:
> >>>> - Some lenses are able to detect that they are on a tripod (i guess by
> >>>> lack of shake) and don't need to have IS turned off. *This may not
> >>>> apply to the Olympus E5, but it does to some Canon IS lenses, at
> >>>> least.
> >>>> - If you have a mediocre tripod, or if it is windy to the point that
> >>>> your lens vibrates despite being on a tripod, you may be better off
> >>>> leaving IS on.
> >>>> - If your lens is on a good tripod and isn't vibrating, and the lens
> >>>> was not designed to automatically detect this, it may hunt for
> >>>> movement, which could cause poorer results than if IS were switched
> >>>> off. *This is where the advice comes from to switch off IS while on a
> >>>> tripod. *But as I mentioned above, it is not always necessary or even
> >>>> advisable.
>
> >>> I'm sure our engineer friends here will correct me but, I think
> >>> everything has some degree of oscillation. The only issue is whether the
> >>> oscillations are sufficient to move the lens outside the circle of
> >>> confusion.
>
> >> The point is that the IS actually moves the circle of confusion.
>
> >I understand that. But, it is my understanding that you cannot eliminate
> >oscillation. It is likely that VR, and/or IS do in fact move the circle
> >of confusion, hopefully in synch with the oscillations.
>
> Thanks for the replies. *I'm doing some tripod
> tests with a 600mm (4/3) lens and will report
> back.

There are no 600mm 4/3 rd lenses, unless you are talking about some
Sigma zoom that might have appeared. Likely you mean 300mm because
Olympus is still pretending that 4/3rds 2x equivalence still matters.
Which is doesn't, once you have an APS or FF sensor with more pixels
than the 18MP Panasonic m4/3rd sensor.

RichA <> wrote:

>There are no 600mm 4/3 rd lenses, unless you are talking about some
>Sigma zoom that might have appeared. Likely you mean 300mm because
>Olympus is still pretending that 4/3rds 2x equivalence still matters.
>Which is doesn't, once you have an APS or FF sensor with more pixels
>than the 18MP Panasonic m4/3rd sensor.


Don't be ridiculous. The 2X focal length multiplier is critically
important because of the effect sensor size has on angle of view.

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 21:24:33 -0800 (PST), RichA
<> wrote:

>On Nov 24, 8:22*pm, Peter Jason <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 19:13:40 -0500, PeterN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <peter....@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>> >On 11/24/2012 4:43 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:17:42 -0500, PeterN
>> >> <peter....@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>> On 11/24/2012 12:47 AM, otter wrote:
>> >>>> On Nov 22, 6:29 pm, Peter Jason <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> I have an Olympus E5.
>>
>> >>>>> The manual says to turn off the image stabilizer
>> >>>>> when using a tripod.
>>
>> >>>>> Why? *Does the I.S. use camera resources that
>> >>>>> detract from image quality?
>>
>> >>>>> Peter
>>
>> >>>> A few other points, in addition to what others have said:
>> >>>> - Some lenses are able to detect that they are on a tripod (i guess by
>> >>>> lack of shake) and don't need to have IS turned off. *This may not
>> >>>> apply to the Olympus E5, but it does to some Canon IS lenses, at
>> >>>> least.
>> >>>> - If you have a mediocre tripod, or if it is windy to the point that
>> >>>> your lens vibrates despite being on a tripod, you may be better off
>> >>>> leaving IS on.
>> >>>> - If your lens is on a good tripod and isn't vibrating, and the lens
>> >>>> was not designed to automatically detect this, it may hunt for
>> >>>> movement, which could cause poorer results than if IS were switched
>> >>>> off. *This is where the advice comes from to switch off IS while on a
>> >>>> tripod. *But as I mentioned above, it is not always necessary or even
>> >>>> advisable.
>>
>> >>> I'm sure our engineer friends here will correct me but, I think
>> >>> everything has some degree of oscillation. The only issue is whether the
>> >>> oscillations are sufficient to move the lens outside the circle of
>> >>> confusion.
>>
>> >> The point is that the IS actually moves the circle of confusion.
>>
>> >I understand that. But, it is my understanding that you cannot eliminate
>> >oscillation. It is likely that VR, and/or IS do in fact move the circle
>> >of confusion, hopefully in synch with the oscillations.
>>
>> Thanks for the replies. *I'm doing some tripod
>> tests with a 600mm (4/3) lens and will report
>> back.
>
>There are no 600mm 4/3 rd lenses, unless you are talking about some
>Sigma zoom that might have appeared. Likely you mean 300mm because
>Olympus is still pretending that 4/3rds 2x equivalence still matters.
>Which is doesn't, once you have an APS or FF sensor with more pixels
>than the 18MP Panasonic m4/3rd sensor.

Gee, I dunno. It says 600 on the side of the
lens...
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zuiko_ED.html

and I use this gadget for time lapse
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...e_Control.html
(that came with a faulty LED screen requiring a
change over.)

Peter Jason <> wrote:
>Gee, I dunno. It says 600 on the side of the
>lens...
>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zuiko_ED.html


Why would it say "600" on the side of a 70-300mm lens?

On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:47:54 +0000, Anthony Polson
<> wrote:

>Peter Jason <> wrote:
>>Gee, I dunno. It says 600 on the side of the
>>lens...
>>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zuiko_ED.html
>
>
>Why would it say "600" on the side of a 70-300mm lens?

Well it does. Maybe it's because it's eq to 600mm
in the 4/3rd system, that allows smaller lenses
generally.

Eric Stevens <> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:47:54 +0000, Anthony Polson
><> wrote:
>
>>Peter Jason <> wrote:
>>>Gee, I dunno. It says 600 on the side of the
>>>lens...
>>>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zuiko_ED.html
>>
>>
>>Why would it say "600" on the side of a 70-300mm lens?
>
>Actually it says 140 - 600. Do I see a pattern?


I have no idea what you see, Eric, but there does seem to be a common
thread linking those two focal length ranges.

I'll sleep on it and let you know tomorrow!

(It's 00:51 here).

On Monday, November 26, 2012 12:36:44 AM UTC, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-11-25 15:10:43 -0800, Eric Stevens <> said:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 21:47:54 +0000, Anthony Polson
>
> > <> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> Peter Jason <> wrote:
>
> >>> Gee, I dunno. It says 600 on the side of the
>
> >>> lens...
>
> >>> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Zuiko_ED.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Why
>
> >>>
>
> >> would it say "600" on the side of a 70-300mm lens?
>
> >
>
> > Actually it says 140 - 600. Do I see a pattern?
>
>
>
> Boy! Is Olympus desperate to highlight 35mm equivalents on a lens?
>
> The lens is a 70-300mm.
>

Maybe why some think that specifying the angle of view would be a better figure.

In article <>,
Peter Jason <> wrote:

> I have an Olympus E5.
>
> The manual says to turn off the image stabilizer
> when using a tripod.
>
> Why? Does the I.S. use camera resources that
> detract from image quality?
>
> Peter

IS is tuned to compensate for large movements from hands. It jitters
and drifts by a small amount due to electrical noise, thermal drift, and
motor pulsing. A ballpark number would be 1 or 2 pixels at 1/8 second
and tens of pixels for exposures over a second. A solid tripod with a
remote shutter control is far more steady.
--
I will not see posts from Google because I must filter them as spam