Optically stabilized lense vs. non stabilized

Roland Mabo said:

Roland Mabo said:

Can the Pentax K10D also use optically stabilized lenses
or do they conflict with the CCD anti-shake?

Click to expand...

There are no optical stabilised lenses available in Pentax K-mount
and there will not be any - the body must support the function and
since Pentax has choosen the route of in-body shake reduction, they
won't support in-lens shake reduction.

Click to expand...

Would a lens with in-lens stabilization need more than power connectors? I guess I read somewhere that the K10D has lens power connectors.

--
.......
Have a nice day (a picture says more than 1000 words)
Jim

Inspiration Challenge - in depth feedback guaranteed

'Don't overestimate technology - nothing is knowledgefree'

Yes, I owned this lens all of 2 weeks before I returned it. For me, it was a dog.....
--
Frank from Phoenix
Canon1DMk2,1D,Oly5060 and lots of typos

One big plus for in-body stabilization is the flip side of the fact that the IS/VR lens selection is limited: the in-body SR lens selection is effectively UNLIMITED, since in-body SR works with pretty much any lens.

Therefore, you have SR for:

• MF lenses.
• Specialty lenses (like fisheyes and tilt & shift).
• Fast primes (stabilized 50/1.4, anyone?)
• etc.

The chances that most of these lenses will have an IS/VR version in the competing systems is slim to none, which is one of the main attractions I find to the Pentax system. I almost bought a K-M 5D just for this reason, but I'm really glad I waited, as the K10D offers virtually everything I'm looking for.

I can't wait to shoot my newly arrived 35/2.0 at 1/8 sec handheld. Good luck doing that with N* or C*.

--
--- http://www.flickr.com/photos/reneeanddolan/ ---

I have read one report from a Swedish user comparing Minoltas 7D in body stabilisation to Nikons VR at focal length up to 800 mm. According to his experiences both system was equally good in stabilisation. One negative point with Nikons system is that it takes a wile for the stabilisation to activate when pressing the shutter. Also he did not felt that a stabilised viewfinder was important.

ogl69 said:

VR/IS lenses offer for users 4 stop shutter speed with almost 100%
result. Canon and Nikon claimed 4 stops and it's true.

Click to expand...

ogl69, are you making this up? I think you are. Otherwise, can you show me docmentation?

Here's what Canon claims for its IS lens system. They claim 3 stops (90%).

Do note that the effectiveness is measured by the probability of image not blurred by camera shake. Specifically, for Canon IS, it's close to 100% for 2 stops, 90% for 3 stops. For 4 stops, it's only 75% - a far cry from your 100% 4 stops claim.

Interestingly, without IS, you have about 20-25% of not having image blur from camera shake. In the same token (projecting from their graph), you may have about 40-50% chance of not having blurred image at 5 stops with IS.

Reference (click on Camera Shake, select last slide):
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/IS_Lens/is_version.html

lak said:

Interestingly, without IS, you have about 20-25% of not having
image blur from camera shake.

Click to expand...

I mean 20-25% of not having image blur at 3 stops from camera shake even without IS.

Where's the edit button when I need it?

Obviously, this is variable depending on the photographer.

lak said:

In the same token (projecting from
their graph), you may have about 40-50% chance of not having
blurred image at 5 stops with IS.

Reference (click on Camera Shake, select last slide):
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/IS_Lens/is_version.html

Click to expand...

Hopefully the K100 owners might be able to shed some light on this one.

As someone who quite frequently points his camera straight up (at the stars, passing airplanes, etc) I'm wondering if the stabilizer works as well when the camera's lens is pointing upward, instead of on a horizontal plane.

Anyone tried it?
------------
R. Little (aka Getmoresoon)

just that you won't get much shake reduction while panning a shot. That's why Pentax recommends turning it off, and why other manufacturers build a panning mode to disable that axis. However, if you take shots with it on, they should still be okay, just not quite as okay as if you turned it off.

I leave SR on when I'm on a tripod (usually forget to turn it off). Again, it's not recommended, but I don't think it actually hurts.

I think we're in violent agreement.
--
Russ
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rfortson/
Even bad photography can be fun

It is recommend you turn IS off when it is on the tripod because it is not needed, uses extra battery energy and puts unnecessary wear and tear on the IS system.
--
Frank from Phoenix
Canon1DMk2,1D,Oly5060 and lots of typos

Optical stabilization for me does make a significant difference with long lenses. It is of particular use for bird photography because it allows the photographer better ability to see and identify the subject and make shutter decisions. I am coming from the Canon perspective, but while there is definitely the advantage of any stabilization system in producing sharper pictures at lower shutter speeds, the benefit of Optical Stabilization, in composition, for shorter focal length lenses is minimal. However the advantage at focal lengths in excess of 200mm is perhaps the most significant factor in longer lenses. If I was doing a lot of long lens photography especially of birds I would definitely not get a camera system that did not have Optically Stabilized lenses available.

Here is a link to a few more of my thoughts on the subject relating to specific Canon lenses but it also addresses many of your questions:

http://www.creationview.com/Review10.html#IS

Enjoy Photography!

no, not entirely true. you will not have stabilisation for specialty lenses such as tilt-shift or fisheye, because for example, the fisheye doesn't cast a rectangular image, therefore shake reduction won't work. if you shift a tilt shift lens, again it is not guaranteed to work because of possible vignetting.

Dolan Halbrook said:

One big plus for in-body stabilization is the flip side of the fact
that the IS/VR lens selection is limited: the in-body SR lens
selection is effectively UNLIMITED, since in-body SR works with
pretty much any lens.

Therefore, you have SR for:

• MF lenses.
• Specialty lenses (like fisheyes and tilt & shift).
• Fast primes (stabilized 50/1.4, anyone?)
• etc.

The chances that most of these lenses will have an IS/VR version in
the competing systems is slim to none, which is one of the main
attractions I find to the Pentax system. I almost bought a K-M 5D
just for this reason, but I'm really glad I waited, as the K10D
offers virtually everything I'm looking for.

I can't wait to shoot my newly arrived 35/2.0 at 1/8 sec handheld.
Good luck doing that with N* or C*.

--
--- http://www.flickr.com/photos/reneeanddolan/ ---

Click to expand...

cheng2004 said:

no, not entirely true. you will not have stabilisation for
specialty lenses such as tilt-shift or fisheye, because for
example, the fisheye doesn't cast a rectangular image, therefore
shake reduction won't work. if you shift a tilt shift lens, again
it is not guaranteed to work because of possible vignetting.

Click to expand...

Erh. Why would you think that?

All lenses will eventually cast a rectangular image at the film. Otherwise you would get vinegetting from tilt-shift and fisheye lenses.

Accordingly, since the cameras with SR all have sensors which are smaller than film, there will be enough "space" for SR to work with these sorts of lenses.