Uzi Stabilizer on-off Comparisons, Tripod 4 Sale

Daniella68313 · Jan 10, 2002

hmm..i usually old the camera, rest it on my nose and eyebrow? and then hold my breath and shoot.

no big deal or fancy technique. When i think that i am at the most stable position i very gently press the shutter button. that,s about it.

I will try to find that thread back...but in this forum its hard to search for anything.

Terry Thorn said:
Daniella3d said:

Hi John,

I my case i have less problem holding a small camera than a big. I
had lots of problem getting sharp shots at 200mm with my film SLR.

As for the C700, i can take it up to 1/10 but at this i get some
blurred too.

safe zone for me is 1/25. I think the bigger the camera, the most
it need to have IS. I also think IS is very usefull between 1/30
and 1/2.

I was really surprised that he had such blurred image without IS,
as i tried the C2100 and had no way such result, with or without
IS. I guess that mean that some people really do need the IS
absolutly. I hope i will keep my steady hands for couple of more
year..at least until the c700 still working

Click to expand...

--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi 'The things you own will only endup owning you'

Inigo Montoya · Jan 10, 2002

It's not just consensus. It's on page 97 of the manual!

Quote 1:

Under some conditions IS may not work effectively.

When the camera angle is changed very quickly
Night-scene recording
Overexposure
When the battery indicator is blinking

Quote 2:
THIS MODE IS NOT SUITABLE IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:

When using a tripod
When using a cinepanhead
When using a conversion lens

Of course manuals aren't always 100% correct. I mean they
also say only use Oly smartcards, Oly batteries, etc. and the
E-100RS literature says microdrives not recommended, but people
seem to be using those all the time.

Inigo Montoya · Jan 10, 2002

Daniella3d said:
thanks for your comments, i feel like i have a brave knight
protecting me ))

You're welcome, but I think you're more than capable of
"protecting" yourself. Not that any one should need "protecting"
here at all.

The other thing I think people miss, or misunderstand, when
they see one person making the same point over and over, it's
probably because they are reading almost every single thread posted.
I for one, don't assume the someone who asks a question has
read every single previous post, especially with the volume here.
I read too many as it is, and I probably only get through a fraction of
them.

Sometimes it's easier to reply with the same information to
a repeated question than it is to locate a specific older thread
that had the answer. And as I've stated before, I find
replies of "search the archives" hardly useful. If I know there's
an applicable thread, I figure I will be able to "search the archives"
and find the exact response that will answer the user's question
far easier than they will. And isn't that the point of responding
to get them a useful answer? Besides, the search function here
isn't always working, and even then the results have been "iffy"
at times for things I was looking for myself when I knew what
I was looking for.

Daniella68313 · Jan 10, 2002

Here is one that is not true...i don,t get to the garbage any of my shot taken at 1/200, they are quite sharp no problem, so this is absolutly not true and judging at other c700 owners, this is not true for them also. I am refering to the part about the garbage can for 50% of the shot taken by the C700 at shutter speed longer than 1/200

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1788758

I cannot find the other one and it would take me hours i guess to find this back in this forum, and beside..it is something i wouuld rather forget. I think you will understand why.

Terry Thorn said:
Daniella3d said:

well, this all thing started when i had read a thread in this forum
which was saying something like the c700 was practically useless
since it had no IS and so you could not use the full zoom without
tripod...

Click to expand...

Would you mind pointing that thread out, please?

--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi 'The things you own will only endup owning you'

Leo · Jan 10, 2002

Hi John,

Thank you for a very impressive sample-comparison. The 2100 IS has motivated me toward UZI even with it being too bulky to carry it on club bicycle rides. I also ran a similar test but with multiple repetitions and found that is not that simple. From your example some may conclude that all images with IS at X10 are always sharp and without IS are not sharp. I saw many sharp C700 images made with X10 zoom. I performed the following test photographing a text page with X10 zoom from 20 feet distance. The test was performed with IS ON and IS OFF for shutter speeds 1/20, 1/50s and 1/100s. I took many photos for each setting with IS ON and OFF. The results are shown below expressing the percentage of sharp images for each setting.

For IS ON- 1/20s 40% sharp; 1/50s 46% sharp; 1/100s 89% sharp
For IS OFF 1/20s 13% sharp; 1/50s 23% sharp; 1/100s 51% sharp

You can see that in my test I received from tree to two times better chance to have a sharp image with IS than without it. I would consider it very significant. There is another factor. These results are applied to me. I was holding the camera and pressed the shutter. Other people may do better or worse but the tendency is obvious.
Leo

John Curtis said:
See why C2100UZ owners are selling their tripods!

I have two composite photos showing the benefit of the Oly C2100UZ
stabilized lens. Now if we can only keep our subjects still.

http://www.pbase.com/johncurtis/c2100uz

Happy Snaps,

John Curtis
http://www.pbase.com/johncurtis/yosemite
--
John C

Terry Thorn · Jan 10, 2002

I did a search using the words you said were used "C700" and "useless" and here's what I came up with...
It appears you had similar discussions with others before me:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1890650

Here we find you reading people's minds and BELIEVING they think the C700's zoom is useless for handheld shots. Nobody SAID it though: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1884465

Here, the poster appears to be referring to the 10x zoom itself and not a particular camera and this discussion as well as the ones being referred to happened before you became a member of this forum: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1343271

I don't believe anyone has made the statement that spurred you but you may have perceived it somehow.

Daniella3d said:
hmm..i usually old the camera, rest it on my nose and eyebrow? and
then hold my breath and shoot.

no big deal or fancy technique. When i think that i am at the most
stable position i very gently press the shutter button. that,s
about it.

I will try to find that thread back...but in this forum its hard to
search for anything.

Daniella68313 · Jan 10, 2002

is is my impression or the Mythread only goes back 2 months as a limit?

You're right...the search here is less then effective, i just spent 2 hours searching for a thread and i cannot find it.

Inigo Montoya said:
Daniella3d said:

thanks for your comments, i feel like i have a brave knight
protecting me ))

Click to expand...

You're welcome, but I think you're more than capable of
"protecting" yourself. Not that any one should need "protecting"
here at all.

The other thing I think people miss, or misunderstand, when
they see one person making the same point over and over, it's
probably because they are reading almost every single thread posted.
I for one, don't assume the someone who asks a question has
read every single previous post, especially with the volume here.
I read too many as it is, and I probably only get through a
fraction of
them.

Sometimes it's easier to reply with the same information to
a repeated question than it is to locate a specific older thread
that had the answer. And as I've stated before, I find
replies of "search the archives" hardly useful. If I know there's
an applicable thread, I figure I will be able to "search the archives"
and find the exact response that will answer the user's question
far easier than they will. And isn't that the point of responding
to get them a useful answer? Besides, the search function here
isn't always working, and even then the results have been "iffy"
at times for things I was looking for myself when I knew what
I was looking for.

--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi 'The things you own will only endup owning you'

Michelle Widell · Jan 10, 2002

In defense of this, a friend of mine pointed out that often people "jab" at the shutter release rather than gently pressing it. One should ease on the release slowly, which will minimize shake. Sometimes I take a dozen pics of one thing if I am using the zoom. Just practicing..

Oh.. bit a trivia (if anyone is reading this).. what other digital camera manufacturer, besides Canon, offered a camera with an even BIGGER zoom that also had a stabilizer?

Michelle

Daniella3d said:
hmm..i usually old the camera, rest it on my nose and eyebrow? and
then hold my breath and shoot.

no big deal or fancy technique. When i think that i am at the most
stable position i very gently press the shutter button. that,s
about it.

Mofongo · Jan 10, 2002

fmoore said:
Fred wrote:
That is a nice shot. What brand monopod? How much $? How far off
the ground was it? Is that as low as it goes?

Thanks Fred, Dickh and John D1.

He was a cute little bugger, probably shot about 30 frames of him in all different poses, liked this one one the best with his chubby cheecks. I use a Slick EZ Pod, got it at Ritz for about $40 if I remember right. It goes maybe 16 inches low but you can angle it toward you to have it lower.

Bob

-- http://www.pbase.com/mofongo 'Freedom of speech is wonderful - right up there with the freedom not to listen.'

Terry Thorn · Jan 10, 2002

Here again your facts are distorted, Daniella. Leo said "BELOW 1/200th" at full zoom and at least one other C700 owner agreed with the fact that taking fully zoomed shots at slow shutter speeds was extremely difficult. No one else agreed with your assertion that most anybody can take sharp handheld shots with a C700 at slow shutter speeds. Leo didn't dispute your claims though. Apparently, you're practically in a class by yourself. You should be flattered. I can't get sharp images reliably on my 3040 (which is about the same size and weight as your C700) fully zoomed (only 3x as opposed to 10x) handheld at shutter speeds that you're using. If I do, it's on a rare occasion. It's like Leo said, most of 'em can go straight to the garbage can. Looking at your messages, it's amazing how your spelling and grammer changes so drastically. Totally inconsistent.

Daniella3d said:
Here is one that is not true...i don,t get to the garbage any of my
shot taken at 1/200, they are quite sharp no problem, so this is
absolutly not true and judging at other c700 owners, this is not
true for them also. I am refering to the part about the garbage can
for 50% of the shot taken by the C700 at shutter speed longer than
1/200

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1788758

I cannot find the other one and it would take me hours i guess to
find this back in this forum, and beside..it is something i wouuld
rather forget. I think you will understand why.

Mofongo · Jan 10, 2002

Daniella68313 said:
Daniella3d wrote:
Hi Bob...i am still droowling ? over your wonderfull IR images!

I got my R72 filter today and i surely need to use a tripod as i
cannot take them with exposure shorter than 1/2 seconds.

They came out not so bad, considering that i was expecting a total
desaster from the C700 and IR. I will post them as soon as i can
ul to pbase. They are no way near your quality of composition but
its a valid test for the c700 and IR.

How long shutter speed can you use with the IS and the R72 filter
before it start to become blurry?

Thanks Daniella, I'm glad you enjoy them so much. Glad you are able to take IR with your 700, it is like looking at a wonderland ;> )

Can't wait to see some of yours. Late in the day with the sun getting low behind you will give the best result. Of course the best result is when there is leaves on the trees to turn them white. I prefer to convert to black and white but some people like the pink/red hue.

Seeing these are usually shot in wide angle, I can get sharp shots down to 1/10 with IS but my percentage is much higher up at 1/25, 1/30. I usually use F2.8 also to get the fastest shutter speed I can and DOF still sems OK.

Bob-- http://www.pbase.com/mofongo 'Freedom of speech is wonderful - right up there with the freedom not to listen.'

Gene Miller77510 · Jan 10, 2002

Inigo, I do agree with you. IS on both the C-2100 and the E-100rs are nice, however both of those cameras have been discontinued. I have the C-700 and there are times I wished it had a IS, but it doesn't. I will practice to hold it as steady as possible but when all fails I use a small tripod. I tried shooting pictures with the C-2100 at Wal-Mart and CompUSA and was not that impressed. I like the feel of the C-700 better. What I consider a major fault was that the C-700 did not have the remote for shooting on a tripod to capture shots without touching the camera. I do that now with the self timer which is fine if your not trying to capture wildlife or something where timing is important. But the size and the quality of the C-700 is excellent One day I will buy another digicam, either the C-4040 or the G2. But Terry your work is beautiful and I enjoy your postings. I would post some pictures, but I haven't figured out how to do it yet.

Inigo Montoya said:
I've read a lot of her posts too, and noticed that sharpness is very
important to her in her pictures. If she wasn't getting that with
her 700,
why would she like it so much? She tried the Uzi with IS, but
found the
700 was better for her.

Also, please remember that English is not Daniella's native language,
and while she expresses herself very well, the tone and intent of
people's
words don't always come across as intended in writing -- even for
those
whose only language is English.

I simply see her expressing her opinion no different than anyone
else here, and it's a welcome (and I think needed) balance.
Please, continue to discuss the point (IS, or not to IS), but
also be careful of the tone in which you express your opinions.

In this particular case, regardless of your intent, your comments
could very easily be seen as a personal attack. The 700 and 2100
have many similarities, and a few key differences. If IS isn't
important
to someone due to having good skill/talent/technique the manual
white balance does become one of the most important discriminators.

...and before anyone gets in a huff, I consider myself to be
first in line in the "impatient with poor technique" crowd.
Probably too much caffeine too.

Terry Thorn said:

john D1 said:

Daniella,
Do you think that is why Oly supposedly discontinued the UZI
because Image Stabilization isn't really necessary? And you don't
have any problem holding it steady at full zoom on 1/10 sec? Wow!!
Simply amazing! I always thought the heavier camera would be more
stable. JD

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Leo · Jan 10, 2002

Terry, Daniella, all,

There is a typo in the pointed message - MY TYPO. It should be 1/20s instead of 1/200s. I have run the test up to 1/100s. which was the highest shutter speed for the test. You can find the IS ON/OFF test results in my one hour old post in this thread. I am very sorry for the typo mentioned above typo. Consider this message as ECN (Engineering Change Note) ;-).

One time I tried to hit a target with a handgun from 20 feet. I could not fine one hit on the target (pretty large piece of paper) after 10 shots. It is true. ;-( But some of my friend hit 10 out of 10. In my opinion they would not need a camera with IS
Leo

Terry Thorn said:
Daniella3d said:

Here is one that is not true...i don,t get to the garbage any of my
shot taken at 1/200, they are quite sharp no problem, so this is
absolutly not true and judging at other c700 owners, this is not
true for them also. I am refering to the part about the garbage can
for 50% of the shot taken by the C700 at shutter speed longer than
1/200

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1008&message=1788758

I cannot find the other one and it would take me hours i guess to
find this back in this forum, and beside..it is something i wouuld
rather forget. I think you will understand why.

Click to expand...

Gerry Gray · Jan 10, 2002

It takes a great deal of talent to compose a picture and take it at slow shutter speeds.

Just for info, I drink minimum 25 cups of coffee per day. I am 67 years old and my hands don't. shake. With a handgun shooting one hand at 35 yards I can put all 10 on paper and 5 will be in black. I can change the dressings on my wifes operation and not a tremour. But...I do like the IS on my rs100
Gerry

Leo said:
Terry, Daniella, all,

Leo said:
One time I tried to hit a target with a handgun from 20 feet. I
could not fine one hit on the target (pretty large piece of paper)
after 10 shots. It is true. ;-( But some of my friend hit 10 out
of 10. In my opinion they would not need a camera with IS
Leo

--Gerry

johnd1 · Jan 10, 2002

Thats the one I have Bob.(Slik EZ Pod) It's light, strong, and very compact. I love it. JD

Bob S said:
Mofongo said:

Fred wrote:
That is a nice shot. What brand monopod? How much $? How far off
the ground was it? Is that as low as it goes?

Click to expand...

Thanks Fred, Dickh and John D1.
He was a cute little bugger, probably shot about 30 frames of him
in all different poses, liked this one one the best with his chubby
cheecks. I use a Slick EZ Pod, got it at Ritz for about $40 if I
remember right. It goes maybe 16 inches low but you can angle it
toward you to have it lower.

Bob

--
http://www.pbase.com/mofongo

'Freedom of speech is wonderful - right up there with the
freedom not to listen.'

Daniella68313 · Jan 10, 2002

wow, do you have time to waste that much? i will not spend more time on this as i think i have already had enough of this nonsense..i will not reply to any of your messages anymore.

Terry Thorn said:
Daniella3d said:

hmm..i usually old the camera, rest it on my nose and eyebrow? and
then hold my breath and shoot.

no big deal or fancy technique. When i think that i am at the most
stable position i very gently press the shutter button. that,s
about it.

I will try to find that thread back...but in this forum its hard to
search for anything.

Click to expand...

--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi 'The things you own will only endup owning you'

Daniella68313 · Jan 10, 2002

Hi Bob,

Yes your photos really inspire me!

I am not sure i can get enough light in the time you mention, as the C700 is far less sensitive than the c2100 for IR, but i will try it tomorrow.

Also the proble here is that recently we are getting clouds in early morning and later afternoon.

I have also noticed that the pink/blue tint is less apparent with the c700, probably of the longer exposure require or because if the less sensitivity to IR, or both.

I do get some reddish photos and then desature them. Are your photos straight from the camera or do you do some post processing? mine have a much more red cast on them than yours, so i need to remove saturation or convert to grayscale.

here is the link to the gallery, but they are very bad for esthetic or composition:

http://www.pbase.com/c700/infrared_photos

Bob S said:
Mofongo said:

Daniella3d wrote:
Hi Bob...i am still droowling ? over your wonderfull IR images!

I got my R72 filter today and i surely need to use a tripod as i
cannot take them with exposure shorter than 1/2 seconds.

They came out not so bad, considering that i was expecting a total
desaster from the C700 and IR. I will post them as soon as i can
ul to pbase. They are no way near your quality of composition but
its a valid test for the c700 and IR.

How long shutter speed can you use with the IS and the R72 filter
before it start to become blurry?

Click to expand...

Thanks Daniella, I'm glad you enjoy them so much. Glad you are able
to take IR with your 700, it is like looking at a wonderland ;> )

Can't wait to see some of yours. Late in the day with the sun
getting low behind you will give the best result. Of course the
best result is when there is leaves on the trees to turn them
white. I prefer to convert to black and white but some people like
the pink/red hue.

Seeing these are usually shot in wide angle, I can get sharp shots
down to 1/10 with IS but my percentage is much higher up at 1/25,
1/30. I usually use F2.8 also to get the fastest shutter speed I
can and DOF still sems OK.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/mofongo

'Freedom of speech is wonderful - right up there with the
freedom not to listen.'

--Daniella http://www.pbase.com/zylenC7OO discussion group: http://www.homepet.com/cgi-bin/c700/UltraBoard.cgi 'The things you own will only endup owning you'

myp · Jan 10, 2002

Member said:
The wider the angle used, the less camera shake will affect the
image so the IS is even more effective at wide angle.

The general rule of thumb of photography is to use a speed that is the inverse of the focal length. Thus at 380 mm, one should use at least 1/380 sec. For a focal length of 38, one only need to use 1/38 sec. So, in general, you can use a slower speed at wide angle without IS. That's why you do not see IS in short zoom lens.
myp

John Curtis · Jan 11, 2002

Inigo makes a good observation, the IS -Off dumpster shot could have a focus problem making the test unfair (both shots were ISO 100). I retook an IS-Off shot today and posted a third compairson discovering that IS still improves my sharpness at 1/250 second. I guess, unlike others who can get handheld, razor sharp images at 27X, I need IS.

http://www.pbase.com/johncurtis/gallery/c2100uz

John

Inigo Montoya said:
Interesting comparison....

In the picture of the two signs, you can clearly see the movement
of the camera across the top of where it says "Parking Restricted".

The dumpster picture on the other hand, looks more like a focus
problem,
and seems to have more noise as if taken at a lower ISO setting.
Can you check the EXIF info to verify?

--John C

michel58672 · Jan 11, 2002

Daniella3d said:
You seam to be able to hold the camera steady up until 1/50, not so
bad for a big camera like that.

Hi, Daniella,

When making this tests, I tried to be in "normal" conditions as would be anyone taking a pic rather than testing the IS (just standing without support of a wall or anything), and just shooting without taking too much care. In the real life, if I am in difficult conditions like this one (1/5 sec, maybe enhanced with photoshop, I don't remember),

I use to stop breathing, block the arms, and so on, and above all taking many pics among which I may be lucky enough to get one not too blurry.

Daniella68313 said:
Did you try infrared?

Not yet, I feel very inclined to try when I see Bob S and other's pics. It is a marvellous world ! It remembers me the athmosphere of one of my recent snow pics http://www.pbase.com/image/887879

Is a infrared filter expensive ? I still have to buy a wide angle, a macro, a C180 to add to the B300. It's good to know that much technical/aesthetic pleasures are still to come, but I have to save time to try and continue improving the main tools : eye and imagination.

and steadiness.

Michel.
P.S.
[OT] http://www.pbase.com/image/467497

Uzi Stabilizer on-off Comparisons, Tripod 4 Sale

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Terry Thorn

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Terry Thorn

Guest

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

New member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts