Let's say Person A brings his IS-enabled camera out, but his main intention for getting out of the house isn't to embark on a serious outdoor photo shoot. He might be meeting up with some friends or etc. Along the way he sees a shot that he wants to capture. However, he needs a slow shutter speed in order to get the shot and he does not have a tripod on him. Therefore, he tries his best to take the shot with IS on.
Person B, on the other hand, knows that he is going to need to shoot at slower shutter speeds for his shots. These shots will/might be important to him. However, he does not bring any form of camera support out. He then attempts to shoot, hoping that the IS saves him.
I think what Kit means to say is if you know you are going to need the tripod to shoot, why compromise on quality results by refusing to do so?
On a sidenote, 4-stop image stabilisation is quite powerful
I see this as the reason why people take photos.
Not photo sharpness.
depends on what sort of shots you are talking about
if you have many strobes , and you want to do a night portrait shot, you can do it even with a d50
You have admitted that TS needs a tripod.
You have admitted that you've went way off course in addressing her concerns.
And I've drawn the conclusion(long ago) that you know next to nothing as far as IS/VR is concerned.
You have anything more to contribute? Or are you just saving that big fat ego trying to blabber the last words out?
Well in that case, go feed that ego..... have your last say.
I suggest that the TS or moderators close this post, as now it is turning out to be a quarrel. We have given the answer already. Yes, a tripod is needed in his situation.
I would say, these 2 members go to Hong Lim park and trash it out.......