image stabilization

jorf

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 21, 2009
2
0
I'm shopping for a DSLR. Image stabilization is the first thing I need to think about since I have a tremor. Nothing else about a camera would make much sense if I don't consider this first. So, I've read that in-body IS is superior to lens (especially if consideration of use of old lenses). True? I've also read that only Pentax and Sony have this. True? I'm coming down to the Pentax k-x. So much talk everywhere about Canon and Nikon (a friend would sell me her xs canon)...

Appreciate any input at all.

Also, assuming that all of the above are fine with macs....

Thanks
 

romanaz

macrumors regular
Aug 24, 2008
214
0
NJ
I'm shopping for a DSLR. Image stabilization is the first thing I need to think about since I have a tremor. Nothing else about a camera would make much sense if I don't consider this first. So, I've read that in-body IS is superior to lens (especially if consideration of use of old lenses). True? I've also read that only Pentax and Sony have this. True? I'm coming down to the Pentax k-x. So much talk everywhere about Canon and Nikon (a friend would sell me her xs canon)...

Appreciate any input at all.

Also, assuming that all of the above are fine with macs....

Thanks
the logic that canon use's with their IS is that each individual lens requires different types of stabilization then the next. Example, would you use the same IS system in a 70-200 lens as you would an 17-55? IMO I would doubt the catch-all of a sensor stabilization provides as much stablization as in-lens. The higher levels of IS on canon lens' get 3 or more stops of stabilization, something I doubt the Sony or Pentax can claim.
 

jampat

macrumors 6502a
Mar 17, 2008
682
0
So, I've read that in-body IS is superior to lens (especially if consideration of use of old lenses). True? I've also read that only Pentax and Sony have this. True?
I have hear exactly the opposite (I have heard in-lens offers superior performance). Canon's newest version of IS is 4 stops of vibration reduction. Sony is normally around 2 stops (see http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/Sony-Alpha-A350-Compared-to-Nikon-D80-pg1.shtml#VR ) Another advantage to in-lens IS is that it stabilizes the image in the viewfinder. In-body stabilizes the captured image, but does nothing for the viewfinder.

In body does have the advantage that every lens can use IS and the lenses should be cheaper, but in Sony's case at least that is false. Sony's 70-200 2.8 is way more than the non-IS Canon, normally it is close to the price of the Canon IS.

How bad is your shake? IS can't work miracles, you may do better to invest in a good tripod and release cable. That way all of your shots are perfectly shake free. Just another option.
 

compuwar

macrumors 601
Oct 5, 2006
4,717
2
Northern/Central VA
So, I've read that in-body IS is superior to lens (especially if consideration of use of old lenses). True?
Not true the times independent testing has been done. Lens stabilization has improved over time significantly but it's been at least a couple of years since I've seen independent tests and those showed that then-newer lens systems had about a 1.5 stop advantage on average and up to about 2.5 stops at best- this is especially true of longer focal lengths where shake has more impact on the image. Remember that each f-stop is halving or doubling the light, so a one stop difference allows you to shoot in half the light and a two stop difference means the poorer system needs 4x the light.

The advantage of in-body stabilization is that it's always there, no matter which lens you put on the camera- and although shake is less of an issue with wide-angle lenses you'd probably be best-served to go to a store that stocks both kinds of systems and do some test shots to see which works best for you- and what focal lengths you'll prefer to shoot, as IS generally isn't added to wide-angle lenses.

Paul
 

flosseR

macrumors 6502a
Jan 1, 2009
746
0
the cold dark north
Actually Olympus also has IS built into the bodies.

To be quite honest I have used Olympus's and Nikon's VR and I think they both perform well but I couldn't say that either is "better" than the other. Different approaches, same result.

//F
 

Designer Dale

macrumors 68040
Mar 25, 2009
3,950
100
Folding space
Pentax gives you IS with any lens because it is in-body as you noted in your OP. Canon is not limited to only Canon IS lenses, Tamron makes some good IS lenses for Canon and Nikon. They call them VR (Vibration Reduction). I don't have a full-blown tremor but I am more than a bit shaky being 62 and a strong coffee junkie. I rely on a monopod and a Tamron VR lens. The monopod is indispensable.

Dale
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.