A few years ago, there were a lot of people suggesting that in-body motion stabilization was tempting to them to allow use of older lenses and still have stabilization. Our Own Bob Atkins wrote an essay on stabilization, apparently around 2008 ( http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/image_stabilization.html ). In it he asked So Where is Image Stabilization in 2008?I dimly remember his saying that he was one who was tempted in in-body stabilization and might shift which platform he was shooting on. Now it's 2012, and I don't see much discussion of the choice between one or the other. Is in-lens stabilization now so easy (and inexpensive) to implement, that it reduces the attractiveness of in-body stabilization? Does in-body stablization work as well as in-lens, or vice versa? Just curious, really, not trying to start something, but would like if there are people who have used both, to tell us how they feel now. Or does no one really give a rat's ass anymore?