Image stabalizer. How important is it?

[RumDaddy]

I know if your shooting sports or wild life. Or anything that may result in a having to shoot in a hurry or on the spot. IS is probably really important. I know a tripod makes IS not so important. All of my canon lenses have IS. But Im looking into purchasing a SIGMA 10-22 F/4 and a Sigma Fisheye 10mm. Neither will have IS! But I figure these are unusual lenses that will be used in very controlled situations. No rush. No on the go action shots so to speak. More for portraits and or landscapes.

Am I right in thinking I may not need IS for these situations?

Also Ive never shot professinally or I should say important images with out IS. Is that important or noticable?

 

[OrionsByte]

Photography has been around for a lot longer than image stabilization has, and many, many images have been printed, published, or sold that never had the benefit of it. It's a tool, that's all. IS can help minimize camera shake when you're hand-holding a shot at low shutter speeds, but even then it's not perfect, and if the shot is "important" you'd be better off putting it on a tripod anyways.

 

[Hardrock]

For me IS is really only important on longer lens. Plus most of the time when I use a wide angle its on a tripod. So basically its really preference and how you intend to shoot.

 

[Derrel]

It is **invaluable** when shooting in windy conditions, or from moving platforms, like ferry boats, sport boats, tour buses, moving automobiles, or when shooting one-handed, when walking backwards and focusing and framing, and when doing slow-speed panning work. There is virtually NOTHING better than Nikon's new VR-II when shooting in windy,gusty conditions...the VR is far better than a tripod. As far as slow-speed panning...I will take VR over a tripod any day of the week, 7x52, 365. VR is also good when you're slightly out of breath, from hiking or exertion, or when you're a bit nervous (buck fever, for example), or when you've got adrenaline really pumping through your veins (like when fighting a large gamefish on board a boat filled with shouting anglers and a smoking reel...).

 

[chaosrealm93]

its helpful on lower end lenses as they dont have the faster apertures as well as being helpful on longer focal lengths

 

[Overread36]

Remember IS is only countering the shake of your own body at the time of shooting - its important on the long telephoto lenses because the longer the focal length the more amplified those shakes of the body become to the image - take a 3 or 400mm lens - you need at least 1/300sec for an exposure without handshake worries (and that is only the rough ground rule - it needs to be faster still for crop sensor). That is quite demanding on the lighting if one does not want to use a very high ISO or ultra wide aperture - thus a few stops of IS really helps them have additional shutter speeds available to use.

With wide angle lenses you're down to 1/60sec and with good posture and something as wide as a 10-20mm or 8-16mm you can probably go lower still provided the scene is fairly static. Thus you don't need the IS because you've already a good slow shutter speed you can use. IS could of course help, but its not critical - furthermore (as said) a great many wide angle lenses are used for landscape and thus are shot from a tripod; where IS is pretty much not needed at all*



*excluding when panning on a tripod where one direction IS helps

 

[Big Mike]

It's much more important on long lenses. Remember that IS helps to fight blur from camera shake...and the rule for avoiding blur from camera shake is that you want a shutter speed that is 1/focal length.
So if you are using a 500mm lens, you would want a 1/500 shutter speed. IS might give you three stops grace, so you could shoot at 1/60.

For a 20mm focal length, you only need 1/20 to avoid blur from camera shake....so the IS wouldn't be required nearly as much as with a longer lens.

Now, keep in mind that IS (or VR, OS etc) only helps to stop blur from camera shake...not subject movement. So while it can be helpful for shooting sports etc...you still need fast shutter speeds for freezing the action.

For landscapes, you should probably be on a tripod anyway, so IS is not needed.

For portraits (and shooting hand held) it can certainly be a help...but just like sports, you still need a relatively fast shutter speed to ensure sharp photos.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

IS is handy for two things:low light/slow shutter speed handheld shots, and longer lenses. However, if you have moving subjects and slow shutter speeds, you will get a blurry shot regardless. Stabilization does not matter in sports unless using a long lens. As stated above, a slow shutter speed would mean blurred action anyway unless its in some sort of creative panning shot, but you would still have some blur of arms,legs etc.. Also IS can slow down your AF speeds when shooting things like birds in flight. It also drains your batts faster. Its better to have it if needed, but the only IS I use is on my 70-200. Everything else is under 60mm or my 400mm is shot at 1/1000th or better handheld, or is on a monopod or tripod.

 

[gsgary]

IS is a waste of time and money for sport

 

[Overread36]

*is waiting for pinsharp display shot from a 300mm fsomething with no IS from gary *

 

[Big Mike]

IS is a waste of time and money for sport

But there are plenty of great photo opps during a sport, when the subjects won't be moving much or at all. A basketball player at the free throw line etc.

 

[spacefuzz]

IS is a waste of time and money for sport

disagree full heartedly.

 

[KmH]

Absolutely. For most photography IS/VR/OS causes more problems than it solves.

Using good camera holding technique, in lieu of image stabilization, goes a long way to controlling camera shake.

I don't own any lenses shorter than 200 mm that have an image stabilizer in them. I have a 200-400 mm zoom that has VR, but since I usually put the lens on a monopod when I use it, I usually leave the VR turned off anyway.

Except for the long focal length lenses, it's just a gimmick the camera/lens makers marketing dept. touts.

Most amateur photographers, and an amazing number of paid photographers, never approach an understand of how their camera, lens, or a photograph work.

To the average person, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.....Arthur C. Clarke

 

[spacefuzz]

Absolutely. For most photography IS/VR/OS causes more problems than it solves.

Using good camera holding technique, in lieu of image stabilization, goes a long way to controlling camera shake.

I don't own any lenses shorter than 200 mm that have an image stabilizer in them. I have a 200-400 mm zoom that has VR, but since I usually put the lens on a monopod when I use it, I usually leave the VR turned off anyway.

Except for the long focal length lenses, it's just a gimmick the camera/lens makers marketing dept. touts.

Most amateur photographers, and an amazing number of paid photographers, never approach an understand of how their camera, lens, or a photograph work.

To the average person, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.....Arthur C. Clarke

I disagree about it being a gimmick. It does help stabilize your image and lets you slow down shutter speed. If youve ever stood in a low light room and just compared shots with & without its pretty obvious. What if I need a strange angle and need to be on one leg holding the camera with one hand while leaning over a wall? Love VR for stuff like that. Or when I'm backpacking and dont want to carry a tripod up a 10,000 ft mountain, go high ISO D7000 and VRII! Other more mundane things, such as a volleyball game I shot, I was running around the gym changing angles in response to the game, it was nice that I didnt have to worry about getting rock solid before firing the shutter.



Most amateur photographers, and an amazing number of paid photographers, never approach an understand of how their camera, lens, or a photograph work.

Since I understand Quantum Mechanics does this mean I get a prize?

 

[Gaerek]

I disagree about it being a gimmick. It does help stabilize your image and lets you slow down shutter speed. If youve ever stood in a low light room and just compared shots with & without its pretty obvious. What if I need a strange angle and need to be on one leg holding the camera with one hand while leaning over a wall? Love VR for stuff like that. Or when I'm backpacking and dont want to carry a tripod up a 10,000 ft mountain, go high ISO D7000 and VRII! Other more mundane things, such as a volleyball game I shot, I was running around the gym changing angles in response to the game, it was nice that I didnt have to worry about getting rock solid before firing the shutter.

Most amateur photographers, and an amazing number of paid photographers, never approach an understand of how their camera, lens, or a photograph work.

Since I understand Quantum Mechanics does this mean I get a prize?

I don't think he ever said it wasn't useful, just that in most cases (the examples you give, of fairly rare/unique situations, point this out nicely) it's either not needed or won't work anyway. It's useless to landscape photographers. It's useless to photographers trying to photograph subjects with motion. Not including usage with long glass, about the only useful situation for IS/VR is low light with little motion.

Does it help? Certainly. But it's less useful than what the camera/lens companies would like you to believe.