Anti-Shake Technology

[poppyseeds]

I read an article about the anti-shake technology here.
Is anyone familiar with the listed cameras or have any advice on taking pictures under low illumination, for example at crowded concerts... stage performances with dim lightings... etc?

 

[Big Mike]

Welcome to the forum.

That technology appears in many different forms. Canon and Nikon have it in some of their SLR lenses. Canon calls is IS and Nikon's is VR. Sony (formerly Minolta) has built it into their SLR cameras. Many of the small digi cams also have this or similar technology.

What you have to realize is that this technology is to combat blurriness caused by camera shake. When we shoot with a camera in our hands, the small movements we make...will move the camera and cause blurriness. The slower the shutter speed, the more blurry the image. All these 'anti-shake' technologies work to steady the camera or lens so reduce the blur.

However, there is a second cause of blurry images...and that is subject movement. Shooting people or animals for example. Anti-shake, in any form, will not prevent blurriness caused by subject movement...only a faster shutter speed will do that.

So while this technology is great for increasing sharpness in many situations...it still isn't going to save your shots in all situations.

 

[Stevedevil]

Do Image stablizers use the same format that most Video cameras do where they crop some pixels from the outer edge of the frame to allow a common ( more stable ) view??

 

[ericande]

Do Image stablizers use the same format that most Video cameras do where they crop some pixels from the outer edge of the frame to allow a common ( more stable ) view??

no, it's completely different.

 

[Don Simon]

Advertising higher sensitivity (ISO) as a 'stabilisation' technology is a bit cheeky and in no way helpful for understanding photography, and I wish sites like that would point out or complain about it (as I believe Dpreview did a while back).

That said, to answer the original question, shake reduction technology of any kind can only do so much. For shooting in low light levels without flash, you would be better off with a faster lens (larger maximum aperture) and/or tripod. Since you're asking about specific models, can we assume you're looking for a new camera? If so IMO shake reduction technology should not be the deciding factor.

 

[Big Mike]

Advertising higher sensitivity (ISO) as a 'stabilisation' technology is a bit cheeky and in no way helpful for understanding photography, and I wish sites like that would point out or complain about it (as I believe Dpreview did a while back).

Is that really what they are doing? :shock:
My mother-in-law just bought a cheap digi-cam and one of the features is 'digital stabilization'. I though that it was weird.

 

[Stevedevil]

With most video cameras they use a MASS COLOUR CHANGE on pixellation, so if you suddenly change ( By mass or slight ) the pixels on the outer edge of sensor will detect first, then by process will try to not include outer layer and adjust pixel position to suit view.

Now I believe Sony have done this as to say any Lens put on body will have IS, but at a reduced ( cropped ) image

So now on this post we are seeing that image stable is actually a faster lens???

 

[Stevedevil]

Does IS work in Manual Mode?????

I dont own one so

Is f stop lower in Manual Mode???
(Sorry Higher but lower in Number )

 

[lostprophet]

Canon IS
Nikon VR
Sigma OS

all the above have a group of elements in the lens that move


Minolta / Sony dSLR
The sensor moves and from memory the new range of Pentax dSLRs

on compact cameras they either use the moving elements / moving sensor or the digital crop or they over-ride the ISO or use a combo of the above

 

[lostprophet]

Does IS work in Manual Mode?????

I dont own one so

Is f stop lower in Manual Mode???
(Sorry Higher but lower in Number )

if you mean Manual focus then yes and if you mean manual exposure also yes

on my Canon I have 2 IS lenses, one that compensates for 2 stops and one for 3 stops

in other words if I can handheld a shot at 250th of a second without IS then with IS on I should get the same sharpness at a slower shutter speed by 2 stops or 3 stops depending on the lens

 

[Don Simon]

With most video cameras they use a MASS COLOUR CHANGE on pixellation, so if you suddenly change ( By mass or slight ) the pixels on the outer edge of sensor will detect first, then by process will try to not include outer layer and adjust pixel position to suit view.

Now I believe Sony have done this as to say any Lens put on body will have IS, but at a reduced ( cropped ) image

No the system in Minolta/Sony's and Pentax's dSLRs is a mechanical one; the sensor is physically moved. With Canon and Nikon the system is in the lens instead of the body/sensor. Either way there is no cropping.

 

[Stevedevil]

OK fair enough, they now MOVE the sensor on a sudden light ( pixel ) change, all I will say is the outcome looks pretty impressive at fast shutter speeds, the 2 - 3 stop will Obviously struggle at lower light I feel,

But would not a Tripod effect a faster shutter speed, as it seems that IS ( for us that dont shoot F1 ) effects shutter speed / f Stop

I will have to go to local supplier and try the old fashion panning technique on an IS and an L series

 

[RacePhoto]

OK fair enough, they now MOVE the sensor on a sudden light ( pixel ) change, all I will say is the outcome looks pretty impressive at fast shutter speeds, the 2 - 3 stop will Obviously struggle at lower light I feel,

But would not a Tripod effect a faster shutter speed, as it seems that IS ( for us that dont shoot F1 ) effects shutter speed / f Stop

I will have to go to local supplier and try the old fashion panning technique on an IS and an L series

IS adjusts the image on my Canon camera using the lens. Here's what happens when someone takes a photo, just as the IS is trying to get a fix on the subject. Keep in mind that you can't take a double exposure under normal conditions, and if it was blur, you wouldn't have two distinct images like this. No flash, which could also cause apparent double images.

I believe that this is an IS artifact. Uncommon, but since I took this in the rain, low light and was going snap happy, panning along with the race cars, I did it.

ISO 400, 1/20th, f/5.6, 200mm - IS mode 2 panning hand held.

 

[lostprophet]

never seen that before, at first I thought you'd had the lens on mode 1 but I see it was on mode 2

could be because your taking photos of cars ;-)
doesn't happen with bikes

 

[RacePhoto]

never seen that before, at first I thought you'd had the lens on mode 1 but I see it was on mode 2

could be because your taking photos of cars ;-)
doesn't happen with bikes

Sounds reasonable? But working car races I've never seen them scraping a driver off a bale of hay. :er: :lmao:

I've shot motocross and some moto grand prix type events on race tracks. Loads of fun. There's only so much time in life, so I had to pick the one that I can get access to more often. Also have done some Karts. Those shifter karts turn times faster than some cars! Bikes approach the track records for cars, because they can corner faster, accelerate faster and a list of other reasons.

They are all good to me.

For fairness, here's the next picture immediately after the (what has been described to me as caused by IS) error. All the way up to 1/30th of a second and f/4.5, all else the same. Hand held, panning. Still not a prize. Just plain, too dark for photos. This was a 70-200 L 2.8 lens.