Comments on: A look at image stabilization http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork... Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:19:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-hemorrhage hourly 1 By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-325989 tychay Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:36:27 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-325989 @Me Good points. The first sounds like a myth. The second, while true, is not quite true. As resolutions increase and when sensors are smaller (APS-C) then camera shake will kick in sooner. A question of need is a subjective one. Let’s say that anti-shake is more advantageous at larger focal lengths. The third is also correct, but not correct. However, having image stabilization in the optics does mean what the eye sees is what the camera records whereas sensor shift stabilization means that the image may be offset. @Me Good points.

The first sounds like a myth.

The second, while true, is not quite true. As resolutions increase and when sensors are smaller (APS-C) then camera shake will kick in sooner. A question of need is a subjective one. Let’s say that anti-shake is more advantageous at larger focal lengths.

The third is also correct, but not correct. However, having image stabilization in the optics does mean what the eye sees is what the camera records whereas sensor shift stabilization means that the image may be offset.

]]> By: Me http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-325908 Me Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:25:46 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-325908 There may be good reasons that Leica, Nikon and Canon are leaving in-camera anti-vibration to others: they make full-frame pro equipment and the mass of the sensor and the magnets needed to move a full-frame sensor around will likely slow its performance unless plugged into a car battery. The anti-shake in camera solution is only implemented on consumer-grade equipment. Secondly, is ant-shake really needed below 100mm focal lengths in most shooting situations. Sure, it's nice to get an extra stop, when the sun is setting, but if you need anti-shake help when you're shooting with an APS-C lens set to 20 mm when everything after three feet is on infinity, you've got to cut out the coffee. Either that or turn on the flash. Thirdly, including the anti-wiggle in the lens may prove more responsive as the you're doing the correction before the light exits the pupil at the back of the lens. Finally, and who can say except the engineers who tested these things: in lens may be more robust but who knows? There may be good reasons that Leica, Nikon and Canon are leaving in-camera anti-vibration to others: they make full-frame pro equipment and the mass of the sensor and the magnets needed to move a full-frame sensor around will likely slow its performance unless plugged into a car battery. The anti-shake in camera solution is only implemented on consumer-grade equipment.

Secondly, is ant-shake really needed below 100mm focal lengths in most shooting situations. Sure, it’s nice to get an extra stop, when the sun is setting, but if you need anti-shake help when you’re shooting with an APS-C lens set to 20 mm when everything after three feet is on infinity, you’ve got to cut out the coffee. Either that or turn on the flash.

Thirdly, including the anti-wiggle in the lens may prove more responsive as the you’re doing the correction before the light exits the pupil at the back of the lens. Finally, and who can say except the engineers who tested these things: in lens may be more robust but who knows?

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The Wedding Lens Song http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-100089 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » The Wedding Lens Song Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:55:07 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-100089 [...] focus but everything in front and behind is out of focus. If you notice I was very dependent on the vibration reduction built into this lens: 1/60sec “180mm” shot is way passed the shake limit. Also notice [...] [...] focus but everything in front and behind is out of focus. If you notice I was very dependent on the vibration reduction built into this lens: 1/60sec “180mm” shot is way passed the shake limit. Also notice [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Live preview http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-78876 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Live preview Mon, 14 May 2007 07:49:06 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-78876 [...] when it is idle. The auto-focus is going to be doing most of that drain in a camera without optical image stabilization (with image stabilization, obviously the keeping those image lens elements stable is going to be [...] [...] when it is idle. The auto-focus is going to be doing most of that drain in a camera without optical image stabilization (with image stabilization, obviously the keeping those image lens elements stable is going to be [...]

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » More foot in mouth. http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-38776 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » More foot in mouth. Tue, 06 Mar 2007 03:13:41 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-38776 [...] Image stabilization, whether sensor-shifting in-camera or optically in-lens is the single greatest thing to have come to SLR photography. [...] [...] Image stabilization, whether sensor-shifting in-camera or optically in-lens is the single greatest thing to have come to SLR photography. [...]

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-18824 tychay Fri, 05 Jan 2007 21:56:21 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-18824 Phil Askey <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07010501notimagestabilization.asp" rel="nofollow">speaks out against misleading image stabilization claims</a>. I agree with it, though I’m willing to make some exceptions for anti-shake DSP. Phil Askey speaks out against misleading image stabilization claims. I agree with it, though I’m willing to make some exceptions for anti-shake DSP.

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-14981 tychay Sun, 24 Dec 2006 02:17:21 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-14981 <a href="http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/12/weese-on-anti-shake_22.html" rel="nofollow">Carl Weese weighs in on image stabilization</a>. Note that he mentions something that I noted in the article: the affects of image stabilization is wildly inconsistent from person-to-person and shot-to-shot. He concludes that you can’t conclude how many “stops anti-shake gives you.” I concur. Carl Weese weighs in on image stabilization. Note that he mentions something that I noted in the article: the affects of image stabilization is wildly inconsistent from person-to-person and shot-to-shot. He concludes that you can’t conclude how many “stops anti-shake gives you.”

I concur.

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5782 tychay Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:13:32 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5782 @Tracer. Oh that makes a lot of sense and is a good point! You’d have to shift less to create an effect. But still the amount of shift is determined by the amount of shake, not the mechanism. @Tracer. Oh that makes a lot of sense and is a good point! You’d have to shift less to create an effect. But still the amount of shift is determined by the amount of shake, not the mechanism.

]]> By: Tracer http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5770 Tracer Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:25:31 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5770 Doesn't Optical IS have an advantage over sensor based though? (other than having the VF work). I thought it was seomething about having the stabalization as close to the axis as possible. Doesn’t Optical IS have an advantage over sensor based though? (other than having the VF work).

I thought it was seomething about having the stabalization as close to the axis as possible.

]]> By: The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Nikon’s compact digital (S)uccessor http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5755 The Woodwork » Blog Archive » Nikon’s compact digital (S)uccessor Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:14:07 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-look-at-image-stabilization.shtml#comment-5755 [...] Huh? Nikon using sensor shift instead of optical vibration reduction? That’s got to be a shot across someone’s bow (reason here). I don’t know who. But it seems to me all the valid reasons (i.e. not the “get photographers to waste money on IS/VR/OIS lenses” justification) for using optical image stabilization and not using sensor shift just died an ignominious death with this camera. [...] [...] Huh? Nikon using sensor shift instead of optical vibration reduction? That’s got to be a shot across someone’s bow (reason here). I don’t know who. But it seems to me all the valid reasons (i.e. not the “get photographers to waste money on IS/VR/OIS lenses” justification) for using optical image stabilization and not using sensor shift just died an ignominious death with this camera. [...]

]]>