Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    132

    Default The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Last edited by -Cyan; 29th December 2009 at 04:39 PM.

  2. #2

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    i think this one came up a few times before.
    5DMk2,400D,EOS3 50mm F1.4,28-75 F2.8,GRDIII 28mm F1.9
    www.flickr.com/jenson_goh

  3. #3

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    fantastic idea!

  4. #4

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    actually there is one even better if this method is too troublesome...get a camera that already has built in stabilisation from the start.
    You wont see me much less remember me but i am the guy who makes you look good.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Quote Originally Posted by blurry80 View Post
    i think this one came up a few times before.
    And then..?

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Singapore South
    Posts
    54

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    anyone tried it? Does it really work? I supposed for relatively short exposure like 1 (or 2 sec?) or less it could work if one has a steady hand but if exposure is longer than 2 sec, it will be difficult.

    Anyone could share experience?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reportage View Post
    actually there is one even better if this method is too troublesome...get a camera that already has built in stabilisation from the start.
    (:

    Very Brilliant Idea.
    I should have thought of that!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    316

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    no harm trying la.. as good as free

  9. #9
    Senior Member Galdor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Planet Gaia
    Posts
    9,544

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Wonder how many people use this method instead of getting IS lens?
    Minolta. Konica Minolta. Sony

  10. #10

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    what does it means if I broke my string? :P
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  11. #11

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    ok, time to MO these items.

    who's game to try?

    hahaha, i'll do anything to replace tht bulky tripod

  12. #12

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    why not get a fast prime
    5DMk2,400D,EOS3 50mm F1.4,28-75 F2.8,GRDIII 28mm F1.9
    www.flickr.com/jenson_goh

  13. #13

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Quote Originally Posted by blurry80 View Post
    why not get a fast prime
    hahahaha, it's $1 verus ard $200

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    1.45N 103.83E
    Posts
    3,202

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    This method might helps in Vertical movements but still subject to tilts and forward and backward movements. Type of string do matters too. No harm trying but be ready for curious onlookers.

  15. #15

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Quote Originally Posted by DeSwitch View Post
    This method might helps in Vertical movements but still subject to tilts and forward and backward movements. Type of string do matters too. No harm trying but be ready for curious onlookers.
    yap, the person said strings tht dnt stretch?

    onlookers? it's ok lah, i already have lots of pple looking at me

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    611

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    i tried and failed... i personally think this is more suitable for those who pan a lot... because this would eliminate some of the vertical movements... also, this is even more troublesome to store since the metal washer would easily scratch the camera in the bag... putting inside pocket then congrats... once pull out almost all things in the same pocket would come out with it...

    just to share my experience... i prefer a tripod with a tripod strap (not bag)... hope this helps...

  17. #17

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Looks like a way to make my camera heavier

  18. #18
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Biological IS anyone?

    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  19. #19

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    Get a monopod.

  20. #20
    Member agws1970's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North East Singapore
    Posts
    365

    Default Re: The most economical Image Stabilizer - Less than a buck.

    This has been floating around since about 10 or 15 years ago from Popular Photography

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •