Maybe I didn't make the point well in the article. It is very limited to special cases when they limit the IBIS pixel shift to in-camera processing with only a JPEG output.

The camera should take pictures with the IBIS fractional picture shift and save the RAW files. They should give the option of how many "cycles" (go through all the shift orientations more than once) of pictures to take. With that level of information, smart software will be able to figure out and deal with at least small hand motions and considerable motion in the subject.

Smartphones are already using computational photography, combining multiple photos for things like panning and taking pictures in the dark. For a dedicated camera like the R5 mk ii, I would want the camera to save RAW images that can be put together later by "smart" software on a computer with greater processing and memory resources.

I’ve heard it’s actually quite useful for the slightly unusual use case which is film scanning, particularly for formats larger than 35mm. Then you’ve actually got the raw resolution and the controlled environment for it to matter. Otherwise, yeah, pretty much a gimmick.

Film scanning, document scanning, poster digitization, architecture, scientific work. It's genuinely useful, but for technical applications. That's why it gets flack from portrait photogs, casual users, youtubers.

It works well for art reproduction and still macro on a tripod. The 80MP one on my Panasonic G9 works very well for that. Everything else, no.

Gimmick for the very loud - and amateur in their footage - influencers who cry a river if their use case is not supported in a camera.