[toni-a]

At lest this is what olympus claims  : "he in-body stabilisation itself gives 5.5 steps, and the Sync IS gives 6.5 steps with OIS lenses. 6.5 stops is actually a theoretical limitation at the moment due to rotation of the earth interfering with gyro sensors."

 

http://www.43rumors.com/not-a-joke-the-r...-65-stops/

[popo]

Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to correct for that also. Assuming the camera has GPS you know the latitude and altitude and thus how the camera is moving due to the Earth. The correction then needs to consider the direction in which the camera is pointed relative to the motion. Give some engineer good at maths a large mug of coffee and you're done.

 

I might have simplified things a bit there, as I don't know what level of precision is needed to be effective. The sensors like those in smartphones are crude and there will likely need to be extra filtering to eliminate short term interference. 

[Guest]

Dang just our luck; we're stuck on a planet that spins too fast.

[JJ_SO]

I only take pictures in total darkness and am now up to 300 f-stops with no visible shake!  B)

 

If there really has to be some light involved, sticky tape and some pounds of superglue is sufficient.

[josa]

Phew! Ican stop spinning the whole planet just like the Superman!!! However my head is spinning all the time...

[Rover]

We gotta find a flat Earth instead.

[Brightcolours]

A flat eart would not move?

[JJ_SO]

Don't you know, disc-world is carried by 4 elephants standing on the back of a big turtle, floating through space. And when it's sun went down, it goes between the elephants and start all over again for the next day. Oh, and the cameras are little boxes witha fast painting gnome (?) inside, who occassionally runs out of color.

 

Okay, you don't know. Pity, it's about fantasy and humour...

 

[Rover]

So Canon haven't fed theirs quite as well as the other producers, hence the limited dynamic range of their cameras (that everybody and their grandmothers have been talking about). 

[stoppingdown]

Honestly, I didn't understand why the thing matters... Do they suppose that, while taking the exposure, the camera moves independently of the planet rotation, because the photographer's body compensate for it?