Comparison of VR/IS/In-body stablization


Status
Not open for further replies.

satay16

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2006
3,067
0
0
#2
whoppie. sony wins!:thumbsup:
 

cantaresg

New Member
Feb 23, 2007
765
0
0
Woodlands
#4
I feel that a lot of details are abstracted in the article. Sounds like no conclusion at all.
 

mpenza

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2002
12,938
0
0
Singapore
www.instagram.com
#5
Thanks for sharing :) Sony Alpha 100 performed best for in-body IS with 2-3 stops improvement. Nikon 18-200 VR (3-4 stops), Canon 70-200 F4L IS (2.5-3.5 stops) and Canon 17-85 IS (3 stops) are the best among the lenses tested.
 

satay16

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2006
3,067
0
0
#6
I feel that a lot of details are abstracted in the article. Sounds like no conclusion at all.
you have to buy their magazine to read the whole thing.
 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#7
I feel that a lot of details are abstracted in the article. Sounds like no conclusion at all.
The chart is good enough a reference for average camera user. No need to be too scientific, cuz the main variable would still be the individual user.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#9
wouldnt be a good read. in fact, it tells you nothing besides IS/VR/whateveryoucallit works.
which we all already know it works to some extend.. I just feel it's a subtle form of advertising that a particular model performs best.
 

Mar 14, 2005
576
0
0
#10
my 2cents is that this comparison serves no practical purpose other than what others said, marketing purpose. if i am buying a new system i am not going to skew my choices in favour for something that best compensates for my wobbly hands.
 

Prismatic

Senior Member
Feb 25, 2003
1,323
0
36
38
In the void.
Visit site
#11
Honestly, I doubt there will ever be a conclusive result to which kind of image stabilization works better. In the case of this test, the results are actually not very useful at all. 2-3.5 stops difference? The fact that there's a range of values means that the results are very subjective. Also, how do you judge a stabilized image at 2 stops down to be sufficiently blur-free to be acceptably blur-free?
 

cantaresg

New Member
Feb 23, 2007
765
0
0
Woodlands
#12
that's why i thought they should have provided a clearer description of their test. When I tried taking a picture with IS on, it seems to me that even when IS is on, the image still looks blur at 1 stop slower shutter speed.
 

satay16

Senior Member
Jan 14, 2006
3,067
0
0
#13
woah. i'm quite impressed. i thought sensor-shift IS is much poorer when used with tele lenses.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom