Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
I'm not certain wether this function could be activated in camera or in the lens. I know I read something about the different efficiency (which was hightest when the OS didn't have to stabilize the finder view). Or was that with Fuji lenses? I'm somehow confused now.
Do you know how popular stabilized binoculars are? I could not tell. I guess if they are less popular then because these types mostly are more expensive and in higher grade binoculars which themselvs are more expensive - and if you're watching birds with them, you either use a tripod or a longer FL - and then a monocular.
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
To complete your information: Zeiss, Nikon, Steiner, Svarovski, Leica, and more also have this stabilisation feature. And all of them are not cheap.
Posts: 8,000
Threads: 1,850
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
02-05-2018, 12:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-05-2018, 12:40 PM by Klaus.)
I've just noticed that you can actually customize the OS behaviour beyond the standard settings using the C1/C2 custom switches. You have to use the USB dock for this.
I just did so and noticed a very marginal stabilization in the viewfinder - maybe. Will have to verify this tomorrow.
I did sample images and I noticed more blurred images than usual. If that thing is working, it can't be that effective in any case (and I'm not talking about 1/30s at 400mm here).
IMHO.....there's an untapped market for an enterprising Chinese company to make an affordable pair of OS binoculars...after all they make some very decent ordinary ones. A birdwatching naturist friend kept a pair on every window-sill......he had Steiners, Zeiss and many others........I tried them all and frankly apart from the magnification and exit diameter, I could find much between them.......
My humble brand X Chinese ones that I bought for €30 twenty years ago still look good to me, bright and well aligned (often a problem with low cost bins)....if they were coupled with OS? they would sell like hot cakes!
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
Funky.
Must be one of these Australian versions...
:lol:
Seriously: I'm not the biggest fan of OS in dynamic view mode. Finder view is more stable, yes, but depeding on the OS/VR, the whole stuff jumps if I'm shooting in continuous mode, so here I do prefer no VR or only in the moment of the actual picture.
Because: There a re limits of maximum shale to correct. If I release in "finder stabilisation mode" when one of the Gyros is just at it's limit, in the worst case that will add a bit of unwanted shake. It's a trade-off to make and in some occassions I decide consciously not to have the full benefit of maximum optical stabilisation, but a calmer finder view.
Posts: 8,000
Threads: 1,850
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
I can follow that argument till 200mm. Beyond I want to have a substantially stabilized viewfinder.
At 400mm the viewfinder stabilization is worse than on the 150-600mm at 600mm.
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation:
22
You convinced me. I tried my only Sigma OS lens (24-105 Art) and it was calming down the finder view. With the dock, I could not adjust more than AF-points, the rest was in grey.
I think, your copy of the 100-400 is out of order. I also can follow your reasoning about necessity of OS beyond 200mm, but I see the finder image jumping, so I'm not sure what happens and if the picture will be sharp and within the chosen frame.
