Image Stablization myth??

[Paarsh Saini]

Dear readers,

I was reading an online article a week ago on Image Stabilization that suggested that we should have our IS feature on the camera turned off whenever we are using a tripod to capture the image. The only thing that I wanna ask is that does availing IS while using a tripod REALLY make a difference or is that just a saying. BTW, I don't have a tripod that's why I posted this.   

Thanks :)

[hvbemmel]

Image Stabilization looks for movement in the lens. When the camera is completely still (tripod) this can cause little movement in the lens. On my Sony DSLR the difference is very noticeable, on my Nikon DSLR not so much.  So generally you have to put it off when it´s on a tripod save for a few lenses that are already able to "sense" the tripod.

also read http://digital-photography-school.com/image-stabilization-on-tripods/

[Paarsh Saini]

 

@hvbemmel, thank you sir for your reply. I really appreciate it. Now I get the concept. The article is nice too. Thanks once again.

[Paarsh Saini]

Since the general conception regarding handholding the camera at low shutter speeds demands Image Stabilization switched on, so on that basis does it make sense to switch it off when actually photographing at higher shutter speeds? I did not seem to make out any noticeable difference in the quality of the images when I shot the same scene handheld at the same shutter speed (1/1300 sec), once with IS enabled and then disabled. Thanks.      

[Kevin Childress]

Paarsh Saini wrote:

Since the general conception regarding handholding the camera at low shutter speeds demands Image Stabilization switched on, so on that basis does it make sense to switch it off when actually photographing at higher shutter speeds? I did not seem to make out any noticeable difference in the quality of the images when I shot the same scene handheld at the same shutter speed (1/1300 sec), once with IS enabled and then disabled. Thanks.      

I can't say with absolute certainty, but I highly doubt the camera would engage IS at 1/1300-sec shutter speed unless the camera was vibrating or moving a bit otherwise. If you have a steady technique for hand-holding the camera, I doubt you'd see much of a difference until you got down to a much slower shutter. I feel confident in hand-holding without the concern of IS activation to down around 1/25-sec. 

 

[hvbemmel]

As the article I linked to says the IS lens group is normally locked into place. When the IS function is active, the IS lens group is unlocked so it can be moved by the electromagnetic coil surrounding the elements. The stabilisation works at low speeds, say under 1/30 . Above that speed the stabilisation has no function, it won´t be able to compensate but also won´t be able to influence the lens group.. The effect with a tripod is that the elctromagnetic coil will function thus moving the elements, that just what you wanted to avoid using a tripod. The movement is tiny but can cause unsharpness due to the movement. 

I once made a whole bunch of photos from my house with Christmas lighting on and forgot about the Stabilisation, I could throw away the complete series and start over again.

[© Tom Cooper]

I would expect when IS engages to depend on the focal length of the lens (assuming in-lens stabilization).  So IS for a 500mm lens might be on at 1/1300th, while IS is almost meaningless for a 12mm lens at any shutter speed.

 

In-body stabilization would have to be based on detected image movement, as the body may or may not know the lens focal length.

 

I'm with Herman on turning IS off when using a tripod.

 

Tom C.

[Paarsh Saini]

@Kevin, @hvbemmel, @Tom Cooper, thanks everyone for explaining :) .