Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

[Ian]

I'm curious to know how everyone values the different options for anti-shake (aka vibration reduction or steadys shot, shake reduction, etc.) or image stabilisation in DSLRs. To go with this I have included a simple poll - please have a look and vote.

Basically, the options are the stabilisation of individual lenses or the use of a moving sensor to compensate for camera movement at relatively long shutter speeds or when using telephoto lenses.

The pros and cons I see include:

In-lens stabilisation:

Pros:

• Possibly a greater latitude for shake reduction
• Will work on whatever body the lens is attached to

Cons:

• Optical compromise (wiggling lens elements can't be good for optical quality?)
• Expensive
• Limited choice of stabilised lenses available

Moving sensor stabilisation:

Pros:

• Compatible with practically any lens attached to the camera body
• No optical compromise
• Inexpensive

Cons:

• Possibly less latitude for compensating for camera shake
• Limited choice bodies fitted with this solution

Let me know if you have any pros or cons for me to add.

Ian

[Stephen]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Whilst I realise that in camera IS may be a superior concept I've had to go with the stabilised lens option. This is because I have a commitment to a Canon system that can only take advantage of the concept through the lens. At present however I don't own one, though I have in the past and have to say they work very well. I really wish I could have afforded the 70-200 f2.8L IS lens but unfortunately I had to go with the non IS version.

[Pol]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

I could only vote for "don't know" because

a) I've never used image stabilisation
b) There aren't any IS Pentax lenses available

However - I'll be delighted to be trying it out in-camera when I eventually go for a K10D.

Pol

[Stephen]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

I could only vote for "don't know" because

a) I've never used image stabilisation
b) There aren't any IS Pentax lenses available

However - I'll be delighted to be trying it out in-camera when I eventually go for a K10D.

Pol

Whilst I see where you are coming from, surely in answer to the question the second option would have been the one to vote for We all know you'll buy it in the end Pol LOL

[Pol]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Whilst I see where you are coming from, surely in answer to the question the second option would have been the one to vote for We all know you'll buy it in the end Pol LOL

Well yeah - I almost voted for the second one but 'Gert' sometimes lurks in here and I don't to sound too much like a grasping old tart ....... LOL

I'm waiting until after Christmas .. at least that's the plan!

Pol

[lumix]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Sorry Ian I can't vote on this one. My camera has an optical stabilizer built in to the fixed lens. All I can say is it works fantastically and try as I may I have not been able to detect any image quality loss when its in use. I have tested tripod shots with it off and handheld with it on (same subject) and can't see any difference. Only bad thing is that I have become a bit lazy and don't bother with the tripod very often now. I think from a DSLR users point the in camera version does lets you use it with any lens and in turn the lenses must therefore be cheaper. As I'm knocking on in years I can't see myself ever going over to a DSLR, but it's interesting to see which system gets the most votes.

[Patrick]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

I'm curious to know how everyone values the different options for anti-shake (aka vibration reduction or steadys shot, shake reduction, etc.) or image stabilisation in DSLRs. To go with this I have included a simple poll - please have a look and vote.

Basically, the options are the stabilisation of individual lenses or the use of a moving sensor to compensate for camera movement at relatively long shutter speeds or when using telephoto lenses.

The pros and cons I see include:

In-lens stabilisation:

Pros:

• Possibly a greater latitude for shake reduction
• Will work on whatever body the lens is attached to

Cons:

• Optical compromise (wiggling lens elements can't be good for optical quality?)
• Expensive
• Limited choice of stabilised lenses available

Moving sensor stabilisation:

Pros:

• Compatible with practically any lens attached to the camera body
• No optical compromise
• Inexpensive

Cons:

• Possibly less latitude for compensating for camera shake
• Limited choice bodies fitted with this solution

Let me know if you have any pros or cons for me to add.

Ian

[DTD]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

A tripod :-)

[Autumn]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

As you know I am not very technical.

I don't know whether the Anti blur function on the Mode dial on my Fuji S9500, is what you are talking about, but if I use this mode, it selects a fast shutter speed that reduces camera shake and moving-subject blurring.

I have tried it when on a cruiseship, photographing land. I have compared it with using the P and Aperture priority mode and it works well.

[Autumn]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Sorry, I am in the wrong forum. I hadn't seen that it was DSLR. The S9600 isn't quite that.

[Patrick]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

I'm curious to know how everyone values the different options for anti-shake (aka vibration reduction or steadys shot, shake reduction, etc.) or image stabilisation in DSLRs. To go with this I have included a simple poll - please have a look and vote.

Basically, the options are the stabilisation of individual lenses or the use of a moving sensor to compensate for camera movement at relatively long shutter speeds or when using telephoto lenses.

The pros and cons I see include:

In-lens stabilisation:

Pros:

• Possibly a greater latitude for shake reduction
• Will work on whatever body the lens is attached to

Cons:

• Optical compromise (wiggling lens elements can't be good for optical quality?)
• Expensive
• Limited choice of stabilised lenses available

Moving sensor stabilisation:

Pros:

• Compatible with practically any lens attached to the camera body
• No optical compromise
• Inexpensive

Cons:

• Possibly less latitude for compensating for camera shake
• Limited choice bodies fitted with this solution

Let me know if you have any pros or cons for me to add.

Ian

Hi Ian logged my vote with my reply it didn't register, and the voting window no longer shows to vote again.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Hi Ian logged my vote with my reply it didn't register, and the voting window no longer shows to vote again.

Patrick

Sorry about that Patrick, the only thing I can think of is that you might have accidentally voted but I've had a look at the admin panel on the poll and your account is not listed as having voted.

Try logging out and logging back in or doing a refresh (CTRL+F5 on Internet Explorer) and see if that does the job.

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Sorry about that Patrick, the only thing I can think of is that you might have accidentally voted but I've had a look at the admin panel on the poll and your account is not listed as having voted.

Try logging out and logging back in or doing a refresh (CTRL+F5 on Internet Explorer) and see if that does the job.

Ian

Sorry Ian the voting panel will not show


Patrick

[devilgas]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

like stephen and patrick, i'm with the canon system although i'd prefer the IS to be on the sensor rather than the lens. i only have the 28-135 in IS (focus is playing up so it doesn't get used). i contemplated the 70-200 IS but went for the non IS version as typically it's used for rugby where a fater shutter speed is desired most of the time. for rallying it's not an issue as the lens will be panned anyway.
one thing's for sure though, IS is great!

[Archangel]

Re: Image stabilisation - what's your preference?

Even though in DSLRs, offering high ISO sensitivities and lower noise than non-DSLrs and able to shoot at higher ISO speeds without any significant image blurring or excessive noise increase even in the absence of a stabilization system, I would personaly prefer the "moving sensor stabilized bodies" for the simple reason that the stabilization system is there no matter what kind of lens is attached every time to the camera.