[wtlwdwgn]

Pros like a set of zooms from wide to medium long so the 15-30, 24-70, and 70-200 match the pro lineup from canikon. The Pentax lenses from Tamron do not have VC like the canikon versions.

[micromacro]

I'll share what I've read from users of other companies' long lenses who also use Pentax. IBIS is superior for FL less than a certain threshold - maybe around 200mm. ILIS is superior for FL above a threshold - maybe around 400mm. In the overlap area neither is preferable on a performance basis.

It makes sense.
I don't have a valid comparison, but I noticed that using Canon zoom on 250mm with ILIS hand held is easier than using 300mm Pentax hand held with IBIS to avoid shaking, but I always thought it's because of size and weight. Although the in focus/out of focus ratio is pretty much the same, I need more efforts to stabilize my body with Pentax. Not like I'm complaining, I still prefer Pentax, but I see the room for improvement now.

All I'd like to have is 70-200mm, or 80-250mm star of ltd grade lens, not fast (f4), and therefore affordable. I can't afford new 70-200mm f.2.8 for hobby, and need to wait with some old option for FF which I did not find yet. It's kind of irritating to have that gap. In some situations like sitting in audience primes are a pain.

[pathdoc]

Sure feels like a trolling post.

I agree.

I would like to thank those who quoted the OP either in entirety or large slabs thereof, becuase I have had OP on my Boriscleto list for some time, and to read what was quoted confirms my wisdom in having them there.

[ffking]

At the end of the day the best advice with any SR is to act as if it's not turned on and take the precautions we used to take before it existed - otherwise we just expect too much of it

[micromacro]

otherwise we just expect too much of it

To me it does make difference with MF lenses compare to the same MF lenses on Canon without SR. I do see the difference. Perhaps because I'm not young and not big, and SR is obviously helps.

[ffking]

To me it does make difference with MF lenses compare to the same MF lenses on Canon without SR. I do see the difference. Perhaps because I'm not young and not big, and SR is obviously helps.

Not saying it doesn't help - just saying if you act like you haven't got it then you won't get into bad shooting habits

[pathdoc]

I tend to stretch my SR to the limits (and often beyond), and while I see where the "behave as if it weren't there" school of thought is coming from, the results I get are generally good enough for my purposes.

[micromacro]

if you act like you haven't got it then you won't get into bad shooting habits

On the top of acting like I don't have it. Do you think I shake my camera when SR is on?

[ffking]

Do you think I shake my camera when SR is on?

OK, smiley - I get that - but what I'm talking about is shooting at 1/4s instead of 1/60s because you've got 4 stops of SR - if 1/60s is on the limit, so is 1/4 - in fact more so:if you shoot at 1/60, then you've got SR to pick up the pieces if you can't hold the lens steady enough - at 1/4s, you haven't

[biz-engineer]

or give the user the option, or figure out how to make them work together

Yes, that's what I was thinking. But why do the tamron rebadged lenses don't offer VC? Maybe a few dollar of cost reduction. Worth it? Not so sure.

[Timd]

OK, smiley - I get that - but what I'm talking about is shooting at 1/4s instead of 1/60s because you've got 4 stops of SR - if 1/60s is on the limit, so is 1/4 - in fact more so:if you shoot at 1/60, then you've got SR to pick up the pieces if you can't hold the lens steady enough - at 1/4s, you haven't

On top of that, no SR, IBIS or ILIS helps much for motion blur.... It's all well and good that you can get 4stops slower shutter speed if the damn bird can't keep still!

[Digitalis]

Sure feels like a trolling post.

And those posting in this thread and debating the merits of the Pentax lens line up as it is, are being played like cheap harpsichords.

[micromacro]

cheap harpsichords.

I strongly disagree with cheap in your statement.

---------- Post added 03-05-16 at 09:26 AM ----------

I'm talking about is shooting at 1/4s instead of 1/60s because you've got 4 stops of SR - if 1/60s is on the limit

For anything lower than speed limit I use tripod. Nothing ever came good when I tried to do that hand held.

[JimmyDranox]

Can someone tell me, if the camera has SR, why lens needs build in stabilization? Is not conflicting to have two shake reduction options, one in the camera, and another in lens?

For long focal lens, sometime the SR is not the best solution. Think that you want to shot a bird or a plane in flight, and you can't use a tripod, and your hands are shaking because of the weight of the system, and the position. And if your target is small, you will clearly see how it's ''dancing'' in the viewfinder. This movement can confuse both the focusing, and the exposure. That is why, the OS system is better for long lenses than SR, because the image transmitted by the lens is already steady, in the viewfinder, and also on the focusing and exposure sensors.

[biz-engineer]

For long focal lens, sometime the SR is not the best solution. Think that you want to shot a bird or a plane in flight, and you can't use a tripod, and your hands are shaking because of the weight of the system, and the position. And if your target is small, you will clearly see how it's ''dancing'' in the viewfinder. This movement can confuse both the focusing, and the exposure. That is why, the OS system is better for long lenses than SR, because the image transmitted by the lens is already steady, in the viewfinder, and also on the focusing and exposure sensors.

Exactly

But if you want to use a $400 long manual prime (such as A 400 f5.6 or the like), you can still use sensor stabilization; Canon can't. Even Canon have a 400 f5.6 affordable but not stabilized. Canon optically stabilized long lenses are twice more expensive as non stabilized lenses.