it's a no-brainer really, assuming it only adds $50-100 to the cost of the camera, you would be crazy to forego it if you had the choice - whatever you believe about which is better, unless you have optical IS on ALL your lenses, then sensor based IS makes very good sense.
for legacy MF lenses on Olympus bodies, you just dial in the actual focal length that is on the lens, not the 2x crop value, and it works for all lenses 8mm-1000mm even mirror lenses, macros, fisheyes and tilt-shift.
more versatile and cost-effective
can automatically activate it in mirrorless cameras during magnified view to make manual focus much easier
can still use an optical IS lens if you wish and there is one available, and with newer cameras and lenses can utilise both at same time for even more effectiveness “dual IS”
cheaper
it is much cheaper to replace a IS camera body than a whole kit of IS lenses in order to upgrade the performance as new technology is introduced.
most optical IS give 2 - 4 stops reduction in camera shake while newer sensor shift IS technology is giving 3-5 stops.
Olympus and Pentax allow IS to work on ANY lens - if it is not a digital lens, user can select a focal length manually
can be utilised for a range of other functions if camera allows it such as:
automatic horizon rotation
star trail eradication for short exposures
anti-alias effect without needing a filter
-