IS or antishake

[kegler]

canon n panasonic got IS on their lens for S1 n fz10..

but minolta's z3 with antishake on their CCD? hmm

anyone got any idea which is better? so far i only notice IS on lens... hmm

comments?

 

[kegler]

anyone minolta A series got any comments on their AS sys?

 

[metalgear]

Mechanics behind both is the same - gyros and micro-motors, issue is move lens or ccd to capture movement - me thinks no difference here in terms of performance as requirement would be identical.

anti shake quality is very subjective (amount/type of blur) so its very hard to come to conclusion.Also anti-shake is still not very predictable and overcompensation when the camera is totally still exists.

 

[Caussway]

Mechanics behind both is the same - gyros and micro-motors, issue is move lens or ccd to capture movement - me thinks no difference here in terms of performance as requirement would be identical.

anti shake quality is very subjective (amount/type of blur) so its very hard to come to conclusion.Also anti-shake is still not very predictable and overcompensation when the camera is totally still exists.

Check dpreview for test of A1's IS. Gives you 2 - 3 stops slower shutter speed.
Panasonic has just announced FZ-20 with better AF and IS ;p

 

[metalgear]

Check dpreview for test of A1's IS. Gives you 2 - 3 stops slower shutter speed.
Panasonic has just announced FZ-20 with better AF and IS ;p

Image stabilization improvements remains an inexact science. even panasonic announced that OIS has gotten "better" in the FZ20 over its FZ10. The true measure will be to challenge ordinarily shot images compared to OIS images - techique vs technology. I'm not doubting that its good, but I'm sure it will get better once the technology becomes common place. Then again it might go down to a something like a "digital vs film" war with no clear winners except customer preference.