Does Anti-Shake help with a camera?

[LuxLuthor]

I made small thumbnails of each of 4 pairs of images I took today with Canon SX110 that has 10x optical zoom. All shots were hand held and on AUTO setting, in somewhat reduced lighting with setting sun.

First two sets of images are unzoomed, then zoomed 10x, which exaggerates shaking.

​

​

These next two sets were unzoomed, then about 3-5x

​

​

 

[jusval]

Usually anti-shake is usefull for times when you are in low light and shutter speeds are long. It's usefull for zoom also, but if it's in a daylight shot, zoom does not always cause "shake", since the shutter speeds may be high enough to negate the shake.

I use a Sony with anti-shake because I can't hold a camera still any more. I shake, so it works good for me.

If you can do manual settings, then you might try a few shots with the shutter speed set long, like 1/4 or 1/2 second and do it with and without anti-shake. That will show you the difference.

 

[300winmag]

I find it depends on the camera. A manufacture may recommed that Image Stabilization be turned off when using a tripod or other camera support.
IS does not prevent blur if a subject itself is moving.

 

[Stillphoto]

Yeah I agree with the above posts, especially that when you have exterior means of stabilizing (tripod, setting the camera down on something) that the stabilizer should be turned off. I know Canon recomends that. Image stabilization does suck up a bunch of juice from the battery, so if it's not already set this way, switch the stabilizing mode to shoot only. That way it just stabilizes when it counts (as the image is being captured). I noticed a considerable increase in battery life on my g9 doing this.

Also of note is that since it was on auto, I'm going to assume that since the wide shots had much brighter elements, the shutter speeds were increased. Wide shots in general tend to be sharper on point n shoots.

Plus keep in mind that fully zoomed in, optical quality may degrade a little bit just due to the design of the lens.

The SX110 is a great little camera! Do you dabble in using the other modes at all? Or pretty much just have it on autopilot? If the later is true, I suggest trying P instead...Gives you a bit more control while still doing the work for you.

 

[300winmag]

When I was taking a photography course I was trying to take pictures of downtown(at night) through the glass windows on an 8th story building, not one picture would turn out clear they were all fuzzy. My teacher was stumped she could not figure out why it was happening. Then one of the students suggested that I turn off the IS and... crystal clear. It was because I was using a tripod.

 

[monkeyboy]

When using IS/VR on a tripod, you can get a feedback loop i.e. the lens correction motion of the IS lens-group causes the tripod to wobble very slightly which then triggers a larger correction motion which causes more wobble and so on and so on... this is analogous to feedback in a microphone/speaker system.

Some lenses however, are designed to be used with VR/IS switched on when mounted to a tripod. Usually extreme telephoto lenses (500mm +) are hard to steady even on a tripod and switching on IS/VR can improve things greatly. I've read a lot of discussion about this on DPReview forums but there's a lot of contradictory information too. I guess you should just go with whatever works for your particular lens/tripod/camera setup.

 

[Stillphoto]

True true on big lenses...But on the point n shoot level (and smaller slr lenses), the stabilizing lens element is just going to bounce around waiting for movement to happen when there is none.

Cooool video of a cutaway lens with IS system in action:
http://i.gizmodo.com/5163783/how-optical-image-stabilization-lenses-work-jiggle-jiggle


While I completely understand the feedback loop scenario you monkeyboy describe, I sorta declare shenanigans on that theory here. A hand on the camera, or tripod, would attenuate the growing vibrations. Plus that would only really matter in long shutter speeds, at which point the subject's motion would blur the picture anyway (save for low light still life shots).

What we really need is this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dPlkFPowCc&feature=player_embedded

 

[LuxLuthor]

I have done a lot with photography in the past before they had any type of image stabilization technology, so tripod was crucial.

Apparently this is a 3rd or 4th iteration of Canon's IS in this SX110 model, newer models releasing this month are yet another generation ahead. I do have IS set to shoot only, and would turn it off with a tripod as you guys said.

Obviously, this is not a professional level camera, but what a nice improvement (IS) to have since my last Canon Powershot S45 (4mp 3x) for hand held zoom shots. It is a pleasure to have a camera that uses 2 AA NiMH (Eneloops), so I just carry an extra set and have no attention on battery life.

LOL! Stillphoto, that chicken video is both amazing and hysterical the things that people make videos about. They do have something like that for professional movie cameras. First video is interesting as well.

 

[Patriot]

IS is such a nice feature. It would be hard for me to get along without it since it seems that all my indoor shutter speeds are less than a 20th sec.


I just took these four pics with a Canon S2 IS at 12x optical zoom in low light.

The first 2 pics are IS off, the second 2 pics are IS on.

 

[Big_Ed]

I really like the image stabilization in my Kodak. It makes a huge difference. I had a Gateway digital camera a few years ago that was so frustrating to use because the slightest shake would completely blur the image. I'd never buy another digital camera without image stabilization.

 

[bretti_kivi]

I would, because I find I have it turned off in the mean time for 90%+ of my shots. I'm selecting what and when I shoot, using trees, walls, tripod, ISO800+ and nice, fast glass. You don't have that luxury with a PnS, so fair enough.

Bret

 

[gadget_lover]

RE: blurry shots through windoww...

I once used a camera that was confused by shooting through windows. The IR used by the autofocus mechanism would try to focus on the glass instead of what was beond it. I don't know exactly why.

Daniel

 

[LuxLuthor]

IS is such a nice feature. It would be hard for me to get along without it since it seems that all my indoor shutter speeds are less than a 20th sec.


I just took these four pics with a Canon S2 IS at 12x optical zoom in low light.

The first 2 pics are IS off, the second 2 pics are IS on.

Those are all pitch black. I think you have to take off the camera lens cover first. :wave:

 

[LuxLuthor]

I would, because I find I have it turned off in the mean time for 90%+ of my shots. I'm selecting what and when I shoot, using trees, walls, tripod, ISO800+ and nice, fast glass. You don't have that luxury with a PnS, so fair enough.

Bret

I think we have all established that IS is not relevant in scenarios where you are using a tripod, or high ISO/fast shutter. Don't be too quick to disparage some of the newer PnS models. This SX110 has ISO up to 3200. We are all talking about its practicality with more spontaneous hand held shots.

It's SPRING already. These little suckers just popped up today, after a hard, cold frost last night.

 

[Stillphoto]

Beautiful!

 

[will]

RE: blurry shots through windoww...

I once used a camera that was confused by shooting through windows. The IR used by the autofocus mechanism would try to focus on the glass instead of what was beond it. I don't know exactly why.

Daniel

Sometimes cleaning the glass will help. Another problem with auto focus occurs when shooting through bars, chain link fences, then manual focus is the best bet. Most camera user manuals will spell out auto focus problems.

 

[Patriot]

It's SPRING already. These little suckers just popped up today, after a hard, cold frost last night.

Pffft, you planted that yourself. :kiss:


Great color and sharpness Lux.

 

[Icebreak]

Those homes look like they may have interesting histories.

Oddly, I just took a photo of a big yellow house with three chimneys just to see how they would come out if I didn't use the tripod. Close to a half mile away. 3.2 zoom I think. Much more than that and it got fuzzy. The IS is set to panning in case a bird flies by. These should be clickable.