Is image stabilization really the stuff?

Started Mar 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
Chris Malcolm Senior Member • Posts: 1,986
Re: Is image stabilization really the stuff?

cosmonaut wrote:

When I got my first camera with image stabilization I was amazed, a Olympus 510. I swore I would never own another camera without stabilization. But now the longer I do this the less I use or need it. I almost never find myself in a situation I need it.

When I am shooting landscapes it's always in low light and I am 100% on tripod. When I am shooting wildlife I can push the ISO so high and still maintain good image quality and sharp images without it on.

The high ISO capabilities of the newer Sony cameras has all but eliminated my need for image stabilization. I can see it with the a77 or the NEX cameras as they suffer some in the high ISO area. But I have read so many post complaining the a7/7R doesn't have it in body it's the deal breaker for many.

When I had the E-M1 it was a must as 1600 ISO was my limit for except able results. So how much do you really need it and for what? If I can shoot 8000 ISO I can honestly say I don't need it.

-- hide signature --

It's like a pop-up flash. If you haven't brought an off-camera flash or other lighting along and you need more light it lets you get the shot.It exatends the point and shoot range of conditions your camera can handle. But of course it's not as good as properly stabilising the camera, e.g. on a tripod. That gets you sharper images, and if lets you use a lower ISO then better IQ as well.

-- hide signature --

Chris Malcolm

 Chris Malcolm's gear list:Chris Malcolm's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A550 Sony SLT-A77 Sony 50mm F1.4 Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 Sony 500mm F8 Reflex +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow