# How important is having an IBIS camera if you use already use IS lenses?



## David Kay (Feb 8, 2020)

I am newer to digital photography, so I would appreciate your patience with me and my questions. My hands shake a little bit when holding objects.  I am wondering if, considering my situation, I should rule out the x-T30, even if I use it with Fuji Lenses with Image Stabilization built into them.  Is that enough for me or do you feel I really must have a camera with it also built into the camera itself? For me and my slight shake, is in in-camera image stabilization, nice to have or a must have?   I can currently afford the X-T30 and would like to get it, but if you advise me that, because of my minor shaking, I really should wait until I can afford the likes of the X-T4, that would be good to know.  Thank you, in advance for sharing your time and expertise.


----------



## Grandpa Ron (Feb 8, 2020)

Have you tried a monopole or a tripod?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 8, 2020)

Either type of stabilization would be nice. If I had my druthers, I would prefer it in the body, But that is not possible with many brands.


----------



## Designer (Feb 8, 2020)

David Kay said:


> Is that enough for me or do you feel I really must have a camera with it also built into the camera itself?


You really don't want both in the same setup.  The lens stabilization will be working against the body stabilization.  

Just get the system you are most comfortable with.  Also, practice some good hand-holding techniques.  

Also, whenever you mount the camera on a tripod, you need to switch off the stabilization mechanism.  Turn it back on for hand holding.


----------



## TWX (Feb 9, 2020)

Honestly before you go crazy on one type versus the other type of image stabilization and eliminating brands or cameras based on it, you should probably handle some cameras in a store.  The weight, size, and general ergonomics of a camera and lens will have a lot to do with comfort and ease using it, and you might find that the physical size and weight affects hand shake, and the particular ergonomics of the body itself affect how tightly you can comfortably grip the camera.

Just comparing the two modern cameras I own, the Canon 77D and the M100, one has a very large right-hand grip that I wrap my fingers around with lots of swoopy curves, while the other is basically flat and hard-edged.  For me, I much prefer the 77D, as the combination of size, shape, and weight makes for a good experience lining up the camera.  The M100 is great as a pocket camera with the pancake 22mm lens, but it's not exactly a joy to handle.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 9, 2020)

There are plenty of stabilized lenses...the 70-200, 70-300, and 80-400 and 150-500, 150-600 Are probably the lenses that benefit the most From stabilization.The longer focal lengths are where stabilization makes a regular impact.


----------



## ac12 (Feb 9, 2020)

Designer said:


> David Kay said:
> 
> 
> > Is that enough for me or do you feel I really must have a camera with it also built into the camera itself?
> ...



Not if they are designed together.
Panasonic and Olympus both have dual IS (IBIS + OIS), and they work together.


----------



## dunfly (Feb 9, 2020)

I have had tremors also so camera shake can be a real issue with me.  I don't think whether the IS is in the body or in the lens really matters as long has you have an effective one.  More important is proper holding techniques and shutter speed.  I usually have to shoot slightly higher shutter speed when hand held, but have learned to hold the camera properly and brace myself against something most of the time.  Also, a monopod is no help unless you brace it against something stable and keep your hands off of it.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 9, 2020)

You only need one or two stabilized lenses...but if your system has IBIS, then any lens you mount is stabilized...So there's that...newer system also use stabilization to help shoot better video.


----------



## ac12 (Feb 9, 2020)

I recall reading "someplace" that IBIS is generally good, but for LONG lenses in-lens OIS is better.
But I have no reference to back up this memory in the back of my head.  So treat as an unconfirmed comment.

The neat thing about what @Derrel said, is with IBIS, you can stabilize OLD lenses.
Example the Nikon 500/8 mirror lens from the 1970s, does NOT have stabilization.  But put it on a camera with IBIS, and it is now a stabilized lens.  

I agree with @dunfly , technique and brace.
It also depends on HOW you shake.  The monopod will stabilize on the vertical axis (up/down), but it will do nothing for either horizontal axis (front/back and left/right).  
Back to technique.  In fact, if you are not careful in how you use the monopod, a monopod can make the horizontal shaking worse, because you are balancing everything on a single point.  Been there, done that.


----------



## ac12 (Feb 9, 2020)

ac12 said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > David Kay said:
> ...



To clarify this statement.
The IS of the camera and lens of the dual IS has to be designed to work together.
Example, while Olympus and Panasonic share the same m4/3 mount, dual IS (Panasonic) and Sync IS (Olympus), will ONLY work when the SAME brand camera+lens is used.  IOW dual/sync IS will NOT work with a Panasonic lens on an Olympus camera.  Too bad the m4/3 standard did not extend to IS.

So will the VR on a Tamron VR lens work on a Z6 with IBIS, and provide dual IS?
I doubt it.  First the camera has to have dual IS capability, which the Z6 does not have, yet.  So I think you have to choose one or the other, OIS or IBIS.


----------



## Solarflare (Feb 10, 2020)

I dont have IBIS in my camera.

I dont have OIS in my lenses.

I still can photograph just fine. Some people act as if you cannot actually photograph without IBIS, and I'm making fun of those.

Good pictures are made in good light. Either you do them during the day, or you bring a flash (which often is useful during the day, too), or you bring a tripod (which again doesnt hurt during the day or while using flash).

Frankly people are just getting _unbelievably lazy_.

IBIS, meanwhile:
- can actually cost you IQ (so can OIS), if used inproperly
- will make your camera more expensive and bigger
- will be another thing that can break in your camera and will make it more complex and less reliable
- cannot actually be switched off (if its set to "off", it just holds the sensor actively in place, but its still active and wastes current)

So yeah, thats why I dont need IBIS, thank you very much.

Oh, and its great if you do handheld video. Not knocking that one at all. But I rarely if ever do video.


----------



## TWX (Feb 10, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> Good pictures are made in good light. Either you do them during the day, or you bring a flash (which often is useful during the day, too), or you bring a tripod (which again doesnt hurt during the day or while using flash).



What if you do not have any of these luxuries?  When I took pictures of my newborn daughter in Labor and Delivery and later in the Maternity Ward I had no control over anything except the camera itself.

When I went to Organ Stop Pizza and took pictures of my family and of the place, I had no control over the lighting.





Canon EOS 77D, 35mm f/4.6 1/10th second ISO1600.  Shot handheld, cropped and scaled for forum.

I'm kind of glad I took this picture, as the organist died a few months later, and I very much enjoyed his playing over the years.  As the place was *packed* I could barely control where I got to sit, let alone the lighting, the subject, or the woman that wouldn't get out of the bloody way.  If I had used flash I would have lost the ambiance of the setting plus I probably would've been told to put the camera away or leave.

For slow-moving or non-moving subjects in low light I like IS a lot.  That doesn't mean it fixes horrible practices, but it does mean I can get just a little more out of the camera and lens than I might have been able to get.  The above shot was 1/10th of a second, which was needed because the lens I had at the time wasn't particularly fast, and even if I'd had a fast lens I probably would have had to stop-down to get the rest of the scene into decent enough focus as well.  Shooting handheld this was the only way to get the shot.

IS is also a way to sell equipment, especially if cameras or lenses have better IS than cell phones.  If a complete novice not interested in "learning" photography can pick up a G9X Mk II or an RX100 VA and instantly get better pictures than with their phone then that's another sale, that's another bit of revenue for the company to use to develop their photographic technology in-general, such that they can continue to develop DSLRs, Mirrorless, lenses, etc.  And anyone that wants to learn to take photos without it doesn't have to leave it enabled.


----------



## BrentC (Feb 10, 2020)

My advice go to a camera store and hold cameras and take pictures.  Olympus probably has the best in camera IS.   Look at the EM5 or EM10


----------



## ac12 (Feb 10, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> I dont have IBIS in my camera.
> 
> I dont have OIS in my lenses.
> 
> ...



So I presume then that you only manually focus your lens (no auto focus), shoot only in manual exposure mode (no PSA), only use prime lenses (no zooms), and only shoot single shots (never use the continuous shutter)?

BTW, did you read the OP?
My hands shake a little bit when holding objects.​When a person has a physical/medical condition, ignoring it won't make it go away.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 10, 2020)

Real photographers shoot on glass plates coated with emulsion they have mixed themselves. 

 "If it ain't wet plate, you're a lazy pretender."


----------



## photoflyer (Feb 10, 2020)

ac12 said:


> The neat thing about what @Derrel said, is with IBIS, you can stabilize OLD lenses.



This is what I have been thinking.  All of my lenses except the 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 have IS.  The 300 F 4 L has early generation IS and the new Tamron super zoom 18-400 has IS but it is not very good.  I will hold off a while before getting a new body but when I do I will get one with IBIS.  Perhaps this will get a little more performance out of these lenses. 

Having said that, were I making a buying decision today and all my lenses already had IS I would purchase a body without IBIS unless the added cost was inconsequential.


----------



## ac12 (Feb 10, 2020)

photoflyer said:


> ac12 said:
> 
> 
> > The neat thing about what @Derrel said, is with IBIS, you can stabilize OLD lenses.
> ...



Depending on the system, you do not have a choice.  You are stuck with whatever the manufacturer has decided upon.

If Canon dSLR, they do not have IBIS.
If Canon mirrorless, the APS-C M50 and FF R do not have IBIS.
Future generation may have IBIS.


If Nikon dSLR, they do not have IBIS.

If Nikon mirrorless FX, the Z6 and Z7 both have IBIS.
If Nikon mirroless DX, the Z50 does not have IBIS.
Future generation my have IBIS.


Olympus m4/3, all cameras have IBIS.
At present, only TWO lenses have OIS.


Panasonic m4/3, some cameras have IBIS and some do not.
So *Panasonic is the only manufacturer, that I know of, where you have the choice of IBIS or no IBIS in the camera*.

I have no knowledge of Sony or Fuji gear.

_You mention a 300/4 L, so I presume you have Canon gear.  If so, at the present, none of the Canon dSLR or mirrorless cameras, that I know of, have IBIS.  So you have to wait to see if Canon puts IBIS in a future generation of cameras.
_
Note, some legacy dSLR lenses can be used on other manufacturer's mirrorless cameras.
*However, it is not as universal as some say it is.*  Example:
I think Canon EF lenses will autofocus on an Olympus camera.  
But a Nikon lens will NOT communicate with an Olympus camera.  
So, No autofocus, No aperture control from the camera, No IS/VR, No auto open aperture.  
It is auto-NOTHING, full manual.  You effectively have a 1950s era manual lens.​So cross-manufacturer compatibility is on a brand by brand basis, for each brand combination.


----------



## Solarflare (Feb 11, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Real photographers shoot on glass plates coated with emulsion they have mixed themselves.
> 
> "If it ain't wet plate, you're a lazy pretender."



I've already mentioned a huge heap of reasons why IBIS is a bad idea.

Your response is a joke that ignores all my arguments.

You might be a real photographer you talk about there - but you're clearly piss poor when it comes to discussing things.


----------



## petrochemist (Feb 11, 2020)

David Kay said:


> I am newer to digital photography, so I would appreciate your patience with me and my questions. My hands shake a little bit when holding objects.  I am wondering if, considering my situation, I should rule out the x-T30, even if I use it with Fuji Lenses with Image Stabilization built into them.  Is that enough for me or do you feel I really must have a camera with it also built into the camera itself? For me and my slight shake, is in in-camera image stabilization, nice to have or a must have?   I can currently afford the X-T30 and would like to get it, but if you advise me that, because of my minor shaking, I really should wait until I can afford the likes of the X-T4, that would be good to know.  Thank you, in advance for sharing your time and expertise.


If all your lenses have IS then IBIS doesn't have a huge benefit. If the camera can combine both systems IBIS might give you 1 or 2 stops more stabilization, on those lenses its supported by. If only a fraction of your lenses are stabilized, and the system can't use the two together you need to turn one of the stabilization systems off when shooting. Something I've occasionally forgotten with my Bigmos on my Pentax DSLRs (or I've forgotten to turn it back on). This is the only stabilized lens I have for my DSLRs, I've not come across the same issue on my mirrorless cameras.

If you only shoot in bright light or can arrange something like a tripod again the usefulness of stabilisation is minimised. However many venues don't allow tripods/monopods or additional lighting, and quite a few of those are also rather gloomy - in such circumstances stabilisation is a godsend.


----------



## petrochemist (Feb 11, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> I dont have IBIS in my camera.
> 
> I dont have OIS in my lenses.
> 
> ...



Good light does NOT equal bright light. It's usually actually found more in the 'golden hour' as brightness drops off.
Adding flash to these scenes or a pub/music gig would kill the atmosphere. tripods are generally not permitted in the latter two situations & would often get kicked/knocked if you did use one. Then there are sporting events requiring long lens & fast reactions in relatively low light situations.

There are many situations where stabilization is a big bonus. I've never read any comments from people who consider IS in any form essential but think those who 'make fun' of it are sadly lacking in imagination & shoot a rather restricted range of shots.


----------



## TWX (Feb 11, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> I've already mentioned a huge heap of reasons why IBIS is a bad idea.





Solarflare said:


> IBIS, meanwhile:
> - can actually cost you IQ (so can OIS), if used inproperly
> - will make your camera more expensive and bigger
> - will be another thing that can break in your camera and will make it more complex and less reliable
> - cannot actually be switched off (if its set to "off", it just holds the sensor actively in place, but its still active and wastes current)



Obviously I'm not Derrel, but some of the points you mentioned, *I* disagree with.

_- can actually cost you IQ (so can OIS), if used inproperly_ - So can choosing the wrong shutter speed, choosing the wrong ISO, choosing the wrong aperture, choosing the wrong white balance, choosing the wrong focus point.  Any tool can be used *wrong*, look at all those people that use the side of an adjustable wrench as a hammer (and I don't mean the kind where manufacturers gave up and integrated a hammerhead!) and get lousy results.

_- will make your camera more expensive and bigger_ - Don't the fairly tiny Pansonic Micro 4/3 cameras have IBIS?  Fujifilm has one for under $1000, and Sony's A6500 is both small and relatively inexpensive too.

_- will be another thing that can break in your camera and will make it more complex and less reliable_ - Perhaps, but when I search the Internet for people commenting that their IBIS broke, it doesn't look like it's a particularly widespread phenomenon.  As for complexity in general, having just examined my old EOS Rebel K2 film camera yesterday, I'm not sure that a lack of complexity is really a good thing.

_- cannot actually be switched off (if its set to "off", it just holds the sensor actively in place, but its still active and wastes current)_ - My assumption is that depending on the power options one chooses, already a requirement for mirrorless cameras anyway, IBIS will shut off and let the sensor go limp or to its parking position when the camera isn't otherwise ready to take pictures.  After all, camera manufacturers are already painfully aware that their mirrorless cameras have much shorter battery lives, they have every incentive to attempt to curtail that.  On top of that, all these lovely people that review cameras are happy to publish all the runtime performance information they collect, you can find out about how long the camera will go on a given charge of the battery and decide before you buy it if that's right for you.


----------



## BrentC (Feb 11, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Real photographers shoot on glass plates coated with emulsion they have mixed themselves.
> ...



For my wildlife shooting IBIS is fantastic and not sure I could live without it anymore.  To be able to stabilize an effective 1200mm lens is awesome.  Also I have done handheld long exposures 1-5min long without the need of a tripod, which is great because I hate lugging one around on my hikes.
IBIS has never ever affected IQ.
And IBIS is so good right now in the Olympus cameras we can do Hi-res shots handheld without the need of a tripod.


----------



## dunfly (Feb 11, 2020)

Solarflare said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Real photographers shoot on glass plates coated with emulsion they have mixed themselves.
> ...



I have no problem with your opinion of whether IBIS is good or bad.  You can shoot with any camera you feel like.  What I have a problem with is your condescending attitude toward anyone who dares to disagree with you.  This, by definition, is a troll.  I need IS due to my hand tremors.  Are you making fun of me and calling me unbelievably lazy?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 11, 2020)

Solar: you categorizing people who use stabilization as being incredibly lazy is what I would call piss-poor in discussing things. In this thread, I have even provided three photos, which were all made with a stabilized lens: from a boat in two cases and from Shore with a handheld one second exposure at night. 

My joke was making fun of your inability to see beyond your own narrow and limited view of this issue. I have been using a stabilized lens for roughly eighteen years now, and have given you examples of three situations in which stabilization is better than any tripod or other support system , and yet you continue in your condescending arrogance.

I know how to discuss. Yet it seems that you are the one who, to use your own expression, is " piss-poor at discussing things". Why don't you directly address the three situations, which I have pointed out , in which stabilization is better than a traditional tripod? You apparently have not paid much attention over the past two decades as this argument about  stabilization has been carried on all over the internet.

Once again, I will say it plainly: a stabilized platform is much better than any other system yet devised when shooting from a moving platform ,be that platform a helicopter,a boat ,a tour bus,a car,or a motorcycle or a bicycle. I would love to see you and your work ethic, as you attempt to set up a tripod in a cramped sport fishing boat while salmon fishing on the open ocean. Apparently you also do not understand what it means to have a camera that can be stabilized against the buffeting effects of wind.  Perhaps, you have never shot long telephoto photos in a truly windy area such as the wind surfing areas at Hood River along the Columbia Gorge,where gusts of up to 45 mile per hour wind create some of the best windsurfing in the world. Perhaps you have no idea what it is like to shoot slow speed 1/2 second to 1/6 second panning shots. 

Again, let me state unequivocally: image stabilization is better than a tripod in the above three situations 1) moving platform ,2)wind and 3) slow speed panning. We could add 4) people who have hand tremor.And yet you cling to your imagined superiority by using a tripod. Hubris is so unattractive in a real discussion, and so is the use of phrases like piss-poor and I would suggest that a giant mirror be held in front of your face before you utter that phrase again and direct it at me.

We are now twenty years into the 21st century. I am glad that you are proud of yourself. You seem to me to be on the backside of technology. You can cling to your tripod all you want. I am sure it will serve you well. Others of us have stepped beyond our foundations in photography and have branched out ,and have embraced a new technology. Just as we did with things like electronic flash with high-speed synchronization, automatic ISO setting, and autofocus. Image stabilization is perhaps,in my opinion,the single greatest advancement in photography in the past 30 years. If you Solarflare are of a different opinion, then that is your right.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 11, 2020)

A huge heap of reasons IBIS is a bad idea... That reminds me of all the anti-autofocus arguments from the early 1990's. And all the arguments against automatic ISO setting, by people who do not understand fully and from their own actual experience what these two technologies can offer.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 11, 2020)

If in body image stabilisation (IBIS) is such a bad idea,why have several manufacturers decided to include it as a feature on their cameras?


----------



## ac12 (Feb 11, 2020)

dunfly said:


> I have no problem with your opinion of whether IBIS is good or bad.  You can shoot with any camera you feel like.  What I have a problem with is your condescending attitude toward anyone who dares to disagree with you.  This, by definition, is a troll.  I need IS due to my hand tremors.  Are you making fun of me and calling me unbelievably lazy?



Easy fix, I just added "Solarflare" to my ignore list.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 11, 2020)

OP, To answer your question quite simply: If you have an image stabilized lens, you do not need a body which has IBIS. One form of stabilization is quite sufficient.


----------



## ac12 (Feb 11, 2020)

Derrel said:


> A huge heap of reasons IBIS is a bad idea... That reminds me of all the anti-autofocus arguments from the early 1990's. And all the arguments against automatic ISO setting, by people who do not understand fully and from their own actual experience what these two technologies can offer.



+1

I grew up with MANUAL focus, and now having used AUTO focus, I will not willingly go back to manual focus.  
Shooting sports is soooooo much easier with AF.
And as my eyes get older, AF becomes even more valuable.

Being an old foggie, and being overwhelmed by all the stuff that modern cameras can do, I had not used auto-ISO on my dSLR until quite recently.  But dang, that is neat stuff     It is now a tool in my tool box.  
I think one of you guys opened my eyes to it.


----------



## TWX (Feb 11, 2020)

ac12 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > A huge heap of reasons IBIS is a bad idea... That reminds me of all the anti-autofocus arguments from the early 1990's. And all the arguments against automatic ISO setting, by people who do not understand fully and from their own actual experience what these two technologies can offer.
> ...



I like manual focus when I will control the horizontal. When I will control the vertical. When I can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity.  In short, in an artificial, controlled setting.  When something isn't entirely within my control I like autofocus even if I then override it once the automatic part has done its job.  Even if the camera doesn't get it perfectly right, it'll get close to right very quickly, allowing for fine-tuning to be done quickly as well, and for particularly fast moving subjects it will probably do a better job than I will, especially wide-open where narrow depth of field really limits the area of focus.

I like auto-ISO because I can get down to the business of aperture and shutter speed without now further having to worry about ISO.  My relatively modern camera delivers good results even with high ISO, I don't need to overly concern myself with manually picking ISO.


----------



## CherylL (Feb 12, 2020)

Derrel said:


> OP, To answer your question quite simply: If you have an image stabilized lens, you do not need a body which has IBIS. One form of stabilization is quite sufficient.



Does this hold true for video?  I was thinking about upgrading from the XT-2 to the XT-4 if it had IBIS.    Thanks


----------



## TWX (Feb 12, 2020)

CherylL said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > OP, To answer your question quite simply: If you have an image stabilized lens, you do not need a body which has IBIS. One form of stabilization is quite sufficient.
> ...



I have a feeling that with lens IS and possibly IBIS to a smaller extent, video will very much depend on when the system was designed and what it was designed to do.

In some review videos that I've watched, it's clear that with Canon's oldest EF and EFS lenses, the IS does not really allow for pan/tilt because the lens was designed for still photography, and any pan or tilt could be interpreted as unwanted shake.  Newer lenses designed after video was a feature might not suffer this or might suffer it less.  Canon in particular sells a line of cinema cameras that use EF/EFS lenses, so it's possible they want modern versions of those lenses to do IS.  Then again, it's also possible that they expect the videographer or camera operator to have their own external means of stabilizing the rig, such that IS or not isn't a concern.

If other camera manufacturers have popular lenses with IS that aren't really video-oriented, then IBIS and disabling the lens IS might make the most sense.


----------



## petrochemist (Feb 13, 2020)

TWX said:


> If other camera manufacturers have popular lenses with IS that aren't really video-oriented, then IBIS and disabling the lens IS might make the most sense.


I've not heard of lens IS having to be designed for video (after all they have to stabilize the image in the viewfinder till the shutter is operated, so have to work for extended periods), but I know many earlier IBIS systems did not work for video at all - this is the case for all my Pentax DSLRs.


----------



## TWX (Feb 13, 2020)

petrochemist said:


> TWX said:
> 
> 
> > If other camera manufacturers have popular lenses with IS that aren't really video-oriented, then IBIS and disabling the lens IS might make the most sense.
> ...


Some of the video reviews of lenses that I've watched show jerky operation when used for video during pan/tilt.  Basically the IS is on and trying to compensate for intentional movements.


----------



## SquarePeg (Feb 13, 2020)

Combine the xt30 with the Fuji 16-80 and you’ll be good to go.  The in lens OIS is incredible on this lens.  I normally shoot at 1/500 or faster due to my own inability to hold steady but the 16-80 really does have the advertised 6 stops of stabilization.  I’ve taken slow shutter waterfall shots without a tripod.


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Feb 20, 2020)

FergusRed said:


> Also, whenever you mount the camera on a tripod, you need to switch off the stabilization mechanism. Turn it back on for hand holding.



That's not always true but it is mostly true if you own a Nikon or possibly other brands.
With Canon lenses, except for a very few(maybe 3 lenses) very old first generation IS lenses, you can leave the IS ON when mounted to a tripod and they will automatically start sensing tripod vibrations and eliminating the tripod vibrations. No, they will NOT get confused!
This always having to turn off IS on Canon lenses is just a rumor, or maybe tantamount to a conspiracy theory!!! LoL
It's best to know the limits of the equipment WE own and use so that we can use it to it's full potential!
SS


----------



## petrochemist (Feb 20, 2020)

Sharpshooterr said:


> FergusRed said:
> 
> 
> > Also, whenever you mount the camera on a tripod, you need to switch off the stabilization mechanism. Turn it back on for hand holding.
> ...



It was the general advise given with stabilized cameras over a dozen years ago. When I forgot the affect wasn't ever noticeable, but possibly could have been seen with close enough inspection. I doubt it was more than a few pixels worth of blur right back then.


----------

