>>4014799>dude ibis isn't gonna let you shoot f16 at night>just bring a tripod with you and use that, ibis is literally le uselessYou type so much but say so little and just to refuse to engage with the question.
Your photos explain why you think the way you do though lol. If you're smearing denoise to the point where the entire image is banding and broken I guess you might not care about in camera exposure settings.
I now see clearly and can't blame you. We are just fundamentally different. I seek to understand, you seek to throw words at the wall and see what sticks.
I offer you a peaceful takeaway: IBIS is useful for most people. This is why the market has moved to the point we are now, where now IBIS is bog standard in most of the market's recent offerings. IBIS is, whether deserved or not, a large part of the modern mirror less camera's value proposition.
Arguing it's not useful because it's not sufficiently advanced for your taste is such an utterly autistic thing to sperg out about, I can't believe you don't have more an argument for that. I suspect your position is an emotional one rather one based in logic, for you've already said "if the performance of it was massively increased it'd be worth it". It will never develop to the point you're waiting for if its not implemented on cameras and developed year after year.
'It's not worth it because I don't think it's worth the money for the performance yet' is a valid arguement. 'IBIS is not useful because it wouldn't help me for my photography' is not.
