Image stabilization; who has the best?

Started Feb 21, 2013 | Questions thread
Midwest Forum Pro • Posts: 16,991
Re: Image stabilization; who has the best?

MPrince wrote:

Smartypants wrote:

No, no reason, I just wanted to better understand if one system is better that another.

I shoot Sony a850 with IBS and that great as I own older Minolta glass.

I'm thinking about moving to a Canon or Nikon and starting over with new glass and I've been looking at the current lenses by both vendors and thought I'd ask here.


That being the case, you should consider that with IBS, all your lenses are stabilized, whereas with Canon/Nikon, only certain lenses will be stabilized, and they will cost more and be heavier. Some people claim in lens is better than in body, but I'm not convinced - I can get good results at 200mm (my longest lens) at 1/8s with my Pentax K-7. Once you get much longer that you're probably better off using a tripod anyway, imo.

With a DSLR, you need optical stabilization. It stabilizes the optical viewfinder view as well as the image that the autofocus and metering have to work with. You may not be convinced that optical works better than in-body but the weight of expert opinion from all I have seen is that optical is decidedly better than in-body.

Optical stabilization does not make lenses noticeably heavier, and when even inexpensive kit lenses can have it, it is not that expensive a proposition either.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Biggs23
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow