Most photographers I know will say that Image Stabilizer (IS) is a good feature to have, but just how important is it? The following pictures were taken within 3 seconds of each other with one hand because I am not that strong and holding it with one hand will significantly show the effect of the IS for my hands will be shaken. To skew the results a little bit in favor of no IS, I took the picture without the IS first so my hand will be even more tired and shaky for the second picture with IS.
Camera: Sony A300
Lens: Minolta 70-210 f/4 “beercan”
Settings:
120mm
Aperture priority at f5
ISO 200
+0.3 Exposure
Dynamic Range +
Auto White Balanced
Vivid mode
Jpeg (large)
Shutter at 1/6 (set by camera to match exposure)
… and obviously NO flash.
Press the images to enlarge. (Caution, 2MB+ photos)
Well, I have set this as objective as humanly possible, I would definitely say the Image Stabilizer helps significantly enough to dip you over the fence if you are stuck between two cameras; one with and one without IS.
Wait! You say, Nikon and Canon have IS lens. Yes, they do, but those lens are going to break your wallet. Besides, I’ve tested those lens and the built-in IS is better than the ones that are in the lens. No, I don’t have any samples right now, so you don’t have to take my word for it. But I do have samples for the image above, so hopefully you’ll believe that.
This article is not affiliated with Sony Co, Sony, or Sony Canada.
