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.

No IS

With IS

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.

So, I have had my camera since last October (2008), I enjoy my Sony A300 and even though I picked a camera, I have been keeping up with the new releases, ranging from the D90 that came out late last year, along with the DSLR cameras that some like to call “bridge” cameras; the ones with the extended zooms and looks like a DSLR.  My dad has been in the search for a DSLR-like camera and I really like the new Sony HX1 not really because of the image quality, but rather the HD 1080 recording and the panaroma feature.  

However, this post is about picking an entry DSLR, so let’s get back that.  
As a new photography less than a year ago, I had no clue what I was looking for.  I didn’t even know if I wanted a Sony, a Nikon, a Canon, Pentax… etc.  The main reason I picked the A300 is because one of my supervisors at the time had a Sony A700 and his images were gorgeous.  Of course, he was also stacked with high end minolta and sony lens… but nevertheless, his images were very good.  Now in hindsight, I realize that the Sony is definitely the best camera for my situation: a beginner on a tight budget.

Why is Sony better, you might ask.. and I will list my reasons right now

1. Live view.  Many people will tell you that live view is not important, but like many of you, I was using my cell phone and compact camera before my DSLR and I was using the live view.  If I were to lose the live view all at once, I wouldn’t be too comfortable.  The live view, especially ones that tilts, significantly helps different angles and to put the camera in awkward positions, without the need for you to do so. Also, another thing that many people don’t think of is the that you will very often ask other people to take pictures for you. Most people are already repulsed by the idea of a big chunky camera and if you force them to look through the viewfinder, they probably would stay away from you next time you look like you need a picture taken for you.

2. Value.  At the time of purchase, the A300 was cheaper than the Canon XSi and the Nikon D80, two cameras that were in the same class, that being the upper entry level.  While I will admit right now that the IQ (image quality) of the Canon and Nikon are better (but not by much and not in every way), it is important to realize that a camera at that price (sub $1000) will not produce studio quality results without studio quality equipment such as the flash and some prime lens (prime lens are lens with fixed focal point, generally with a bigger maximum aperature).  The dynamic range and resolution of an image is often not as good as the ones in the higher class, such as the Nikon D300 and Sony Alpha A700 and Canon 50D. However, the feature of built-in image stabilizer will significant help your pictures and Sony (as of now) is the only company that offers build in camera image-stabilization. I will write another post to showcase that very soon.

3. Lens. Any photographer will tell you that the lens is far more important than the body. And if the lens are the biggest factor, it would make sense to find a camera that has high value lens. Well, Minolta lens will be, dollar for dollar, the best lens you will ever find. They have many legendary lens for under $300, including the 50mm f1.7 prime and the 70-210 f4 “beercan”, both lens which I got for less than $200 each. These lens are better than lens you get for $1000 with Nikon and Canon, and there have been tests that proves it for both dynamic range and resolution.

Minolta
Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax

If you plan to go further into photography, your first DSLR probably wouldn’t even last you 2 years. My suggestion is to go with one that is easiest to learn on and cheapest to improve. Although the D5000 just came out and I haven’t played around with it, the new Sony lineup A380, A330, A230 now teaches you how to improve your photos. What more do you want from your camera to help you become a better photographer?

This article is not affiliated with Sony Co, Sony, or Sony Canada. The view expressed above is purely personal.

I went to the Vancouver Zoo earlier this month and I would like to showcase a couple of photos I like and the reasons for it.

First up, we  have a pair of flamingo’s.

Double Dipping

I like this picture because of the contrast of the between the birds and the green behind them.  I also like the symmetry of the actions of the two birds.

Cheetah

I also learned a very interesting trick at the Vancouver Zoo while taking pictures of a Cheetah.  Many times with the most exotic animals, I was forced to have the fence bothering me because obviously the zoo has to make sure the large meat eating animals would be get to the visitors.  Also, when the animals are too far away, zooming in doesn’t help much because the placement of objects is the key to a successful picture; zooming in only brings the objects closer and doesn’t rearrange them.  However, when I took this picture, I was looking at the cat straight on, therefore applying a delusion of the animal being closer than it really is.  Also, the fence in between us could be seem to have disappeared with a small enough aperture.

Today, I finally took all the pictures I took in the last month or so and put them on my computer.  Then I uploaded some onto my flickr.  Feel free to take a look at them, all my nature pictures I took this fall is located here: http://flickr.com/photos/kwan-family/sets/72157608249000618/

Feel free to leave a comment!