Originally posted by reh321 Why have in-lens stabilization when the body already provides stabilization??
Because having both is a really big thing. Believe me.
I had a "Sigma 150-500 HSM OS" mounted on my K-3. i switched on both stabilizers and man, it worked like a charm.
I guess this is the reason, that sigma still puts the OS in the Pentax-mount lenses.
They would not build the pentax lenses with OS, if this would deliver bad results or would be a problem.
And if you somehow solve the very difficult task to freak out the combo-Stabilization by shivering like having a latent parkinson or something alike, your are allowed to switch it off.
IMHO COMBO-OS or COMBO-SR if you wish so, is a very big thing. Some Bridge-Cameras with a very long zoom range also have both. And I really would not go so far to say, those Bridge-Cam-Engineers did wrong(and studied for ZIP), rather i would say having both is very innovative and desirable. Like i pointed out already, its really a magnificent feeling to have a K-3 with Sigmas stabilized "long gun" and speaking for my self it not only stabilzes the lens.
If you see how calm and still the picture is when you look through your K-3's viewfinder with the stabilized long Sigma lens mounted plus SR switched ON; I swear you will feel as cool as captain cold.
Ice cold.
I mean this is not only cool. It is really awesome.
1st) the OS does a really good job
2nd) having in camera SR in addition that already stabilizes a bit makes you feel much more calm
3rd) when you look through the viewfinder you can feel the stillness and this not only stabilizes the picture.
I swear to GOD: It stabilzes yourself!!! I felt solid like f...... Mount Everest with this combo in my hands, but i just couldnt effort it so i had to send it back.
(Car Repairs and such... this is always a big ouch...)
It would be progress that does not hurt anybody. Because you could switch of the stabilizer you dont like. If you have some kind of "Superhero-Feeling" you could turn of both stabilizers... I dont see a problem in this.
And if the 150-450 would have had an ILS or OS or "whatsoever" built in, i would consider to buy it.
But as it seems i will rather buy a 150-500 Sigma or a 150-600 HSM OS Sigma Sports(which i am pretty sure they will build when PENTAX FF sales start to roll... :P ) somewhen in the near future...
But if there would be a Q-S2 with EVF and such a stabilized "Superzoom Q-Lens" i would rather buy that solution, because it would be:
1st) cheaper
2nd) lighter
3rd) smaller
etc.
And i really prefer the Q solution, because i dont have the feeling that i will ever have my wildlife photography published in some magazine or so. Nope. This is only for my private joy, and considering that, a used sigma will have to do or like i explained such a superzoom solution for the Q System.
And even if some paper or mag would show interest in my wildlife-photography, the resolution and IQ of the images that for instance the Q-S1 delivers would be sufficient for that.
Just look at the following picture. Crisp clear awesome pix without the slightest photoshopping...straight out of your Q with a Q standard zoom...
I only imagine how good such a dedicated Q-Superzoom for 400-600 bucks would deliver... WOW.