Image Stablisation in Digital Cameras

[planefixer]

As someone who has yet to go into digital photography (still snapping away slides with my EOS 10!!), I was wondering what people on this forum think of image stablisation. I only ask as in my looking for a digital SLR camera (which hopefully I will be able to purchase sometime this year!) every time I set foot in a camera shop, a salesman will tell me I MUST have Image Stablisation, for taking digital telephoto shots. The only thing is, all the info I have read about I.S. states that it of NO USE if taking a shot of a moving subject (i.e. an aircraft in flight/landing). Also I have managed to take film telephoto shots for years with very few occasions of a "blurred image" and that is with relatively slow speed slide film.

So I thought I would ask the people out here who actually take Digital Aviation Shots. What is the opinion of fellow Aviation Photographers on the forum of I.S.??

P.S. I take photos of civil airliners/biz and military aircraft.

Regards
Tony

United Kingdom

Thanks for reading this far

And Thanks in advance for any information

[warthog64]

I like and use it very much!

Canon (ofcourse!) 100-400 L IS #2



1/30

[ruudb]

It is bollocks, vr/is works great!! Also with flying, landing you just have to get a first contact with the plane but you need it anyway for AF too, and than no problem!! I heard about this nonsense too that vr/is isnt working on planes, but I think people using it don't work. Yeah, if you want to pick up your cam at the last minute it wont work but I assume you first concentrate on the subject you want to take picture of.
So, buy a cam with lens with imagestabilizer. But that's just my opinion.

[Laurens Alblas]

---

[Tom Tiger]

Depends on what you are willing to spend. IS is not a must,

All of these shots (and everything before 2007) was made without IS

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomtiger/s ... 201161182/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(my airshow shots of 2007 were made with IS)

IS is a helpfull tool on my Canon it works very well but even with IS I can still make mistakes.

IS works fine with moving objects (mode 2 on the Canon 100-400mm).

L8tr.. Tom

[hmv]

Olympus has a new camera, E-510 D-SLR with build-in Image Stabilisation.

[bigfoot]

I have a minolta 5D and it tells me when i'm not stable enough. I guess it's the same on the Sony A100

And it does work for me. If the light isn't perfect and my shutter time goes below the 1/200 the stabilastion thing helps keep them sharp, and that is with a 70-210mm.

up coming camera releases:

Canon
-EOS-1D Mark III
-EOS 40D

Nikon
-D3
-D30

Sony
-A300

[Glidepath]

I like and use it very much!

Canon (ofcourse!) 100-400 L IS #2



1/30

tjsa, zo'n foto. het laat een beetje de vraag open; is het I.S. of is het Roel's ervaren camerahand?

Ik heb I.S.-gebruikservaring en ben niet zwaar overtuigd van het nut. Als je het geld kan missen moet je het doen, maar bedenk; er zijn vele honderden miljoenen zeer goede foto's gemaakt voordat I.S. / O.S. / Steady shot zijn intrede deed. Dus kun je zonder? Ja dat kan.
Koop wel een goede lens en leer met je spullen werken. Succes

[Key]

VR/IS can be very helpful, but for me personally it is mostly so in steady shots under difficult circumstances. As a matter of fact, I nearly always turn it off when panning. That is a movement in which the muscles have much less tendency to give you a 'shaky' hand than when holding still.
We had another topic about this BTW, some time ago. Maybe a search will bring it up.

Erik

[SpotterNL]

tjsa, zo'n foto. het laat een beetje de vraag open; is het I.S. of is het Roel's ervaren camerahand?

Een beetje van jezelf en een beetje van maggi, ehh Canon denk ik