The sense and nonsense of image stabilisation in a camera or lens

martinphili wrote on Monday 5 October 2020 at 22:38  | reply

You can do something yourself too, you know.

Pressing the shutter button in a controlled manner already helps a lot. Don't bash that thing as if it has to go halfway into the camera body. I know, your enthusiasm sometimes gets the better of your self-control but it's a good technique.

And sometimes photography is a bit zen. Calmly breathe in and out. Don't hold your breath and click during an exhalation.

A good posture is also very useful. Stand firmly, legs slightly apart and so on. It's in every photography booklet. Support the lens with one hand.

But I am still very happy with my IS

Sloppy article.

Image stabilization on a "bucket list"?

"When you go by the rule that you can hold a camera still with a shutter speed equal to ?? divided by the focal length (which first has to be multiplied by the crop factor), then you can calculate what shutter speed that is." ?????????????????????????

"..... because the weight also plays a role. The heavier your lens, the more difficult it is to keep it still."

The opposite is true. Vibrations occur much earlier with a very small weight.

In portrait photography, where the moment is so important, you need maximum certainty that the photo is as sharp as possible. I have often had photos with motion blur when shots were taken indoors with natural light. I feel much more reassured since I started using a lens with IS.

Is it true that with a full-frame camera with a 48-megapixel sensor, there is a chance of motion blur?

Maurice wrote on Tuesday 6 October 2020 at 15:14  | reply

I recently got a Nikon Z7 with built-in stabilization, but I also have several lenses with image stabilization. Could you explain how the two work together, or do they actually work against each other?

I always enjoy reading Nando's articles, because I always pick up something useful from them. His e-book "Catching Light" is very thorough and informative! Still, I did notice a few things in this article that surprised me somewhat. In low light (e.g. at sunset), a landscape photographer or nature photographer or street photographer can, in my opinion, benefit greatly from stabilisation when shooting handheld. And not only with lenses with a long telephoto range. I felt that was missing a bit. And this article does not address stabilisation in the lens instead of in the body at all.

Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 6 October 2020 at 16:25  | reply

@Nando, thanks for your response. I was already planning to use the tripod much more. But first I still need to look for a better, but also affordable, ball head that also has a universal Arca clamp. The ball head that came with the tripod is not up to the task.

Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 6 October 2020 at 16:55  | reply

@Hans, a good tip. I use one of the legs of the tripod as a Monopod. I unscrew it and then put the ball head on it.

As a hobby photographer, I take a lot of macro photos with a 100mm Canon lens with image stabilization. You do get the sharpest photos by using a tripod, but in most cases such a tripod is an obstacle, setting it up takes too long and you have much less freedom of movement, moreover you disturb the surroundings with the legs of the tripod and the insects you want to capture have long since disappeared. If you work with natural light and it is not blowing too hard, then image stabilization is ideal for macro.

Hello Nando, I'm curious about your response to René Verschuren's point that transporting with image stabilization set to "on" can have negative consequences for your lens.........This is completely unknown to me.

I think that in the future all brands that respect themselves will all have IS and IBIS combined. In any case in thin top line.
Two years ago I was put on a vibrating plate at the OLYMPUS stand at the PROFESSIONAL IMAGING trade show to have demonstrated firsthand what they can do in that regard. I was thrust an OM-D E-M1X with a 300mm F/4.0 IS ED PRO into my hand and asked if I wanted to shoot something. I was sick as a dog when I stepped off the vibrating plate, but the photo was sharp.
UN-BE-LIE-VABLE!

Nando knows what he's talking about.
Great article.
In my opinion, too much is brought up that the article isn't about.

Then: Telephoto lens 500 mm Nikon.....
Just try it, handheld.
I did.
I'm pretty strong in the arms.
Despite stabilisation.....almost impossible.
There are (swing) tripods for a reason.

Once forgot to turn off image stabilization when I was shooting with an 8mm fisheye: all the photos were blurry!

Yes, image stabilization does not help with a moving subject and on a tripod you have to turn it off. That was known.

For most people, image stabilization is still lens stabilization. By definition, this only works on 2 axes. A DSLR cannot be built any other way either.
Then I can imagine that you are not really impressed.
An IBIS stabilizes over 5 axes and thereby compensates for 3 additional movements.

When these people have switched to mirrorless cameras with IBIS, they will do two things: First, they will be very impressed by the stabilization and tell all their friends about it.
After that, they will forget that it is there. You simply take yet another photo in evening light at half a second, without even stopping to think that this is not possible at all.
That is THE characteristic of good technology: it happens unnoticed in the background.
IBIS is truly amazing.

Donald Willemsen wrote on Sunday 11 October 2020 at 13:37  | reply

@André, then I'm afraid you'll have to stop photographing before too long. A few more years and there won't be a camera for sale without IBIS.

PixelDude Raoul wrote on Monday 12 October 2020 at 17:49  | reply

In my opinion, this is also one of Nando's less accurate articles. Not particularly precise in several passages, in my opinion. E.g. "So if you photograph people, that image stabilization is of hardly any added value, because maybe you can photograph handheld at 1/4 second, but your subject won't stand still for that long."
Why wouldn't 1/4" be interesting for street photography, among other things? It would ... precisely to create the desired mobility in the photo through the blurring of the moving people. Not enough out-of-the-box thinking.
But admittedly, Nando usually hits the nail right on the head.

Guido Bellens wrote on Friday 16 October 2020 at 09:18  | reply

Hello Nando, thank you for this very clear explanation indeed. I do think, however, that a distinction should be made between camera shake and motion blur. The former is caused by yourself because you cannot keep your camera perfectly still and the second depends on your subject moving.

I am now the happy owner of an EOS R6 and can say that its built-in IBIS works very nicely (fortunately) for handheld photography. But it is an aid and of course does not replace a sturdy tripod.

Regards,

Guido