The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at!

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Anti-Shake Would Have Helped There

Sorry for not posting a link, but I'm pretty sure Ken wouldn't appreciate me snitching his picture. But if you go to this page and scroll about halfway down, look at a picture called "We were celebrating Noni and Pops' 44th wedding anniversary." Amidst all the super-clear, more-colorful-than-life Nikon baby pictures, that one is a perfect illustration of what IS/AS/VR/SR/OIS etc.* is good for, and why the Big Two are risking making themselves vulnerable to cameras that have that feature.

And by the way, congratulations to Ken and his wife.


* The Luminous Landscape quips that the only abbreviation left is "JE," for jiggle elimination.


Blogger Player said...

Mike, what about "artistic blur"? ;)

On a more serious note, the point is well-taken, but I think he was using the wrong lens. Maybe the nifty professional 17-55/2.8 DX would have helped. And yet, if he had IS, he could have used whatever lens was handy, seemingly the 18-55.

I really don't see any downside to "TC" (Tremor Control). :)

7:28 AM  
Blogger Allen George said...

Nikon's pushing VR into lower-priced lenses now - witness the 55-200 VR with an MSRP of $250...

I believe there's a place for both VR systems.

9:24 AM  
Blogger b e u l e r said...

The AS on my A2 works well, but not at 1/2 second exposures even at 28mm equiv. I would like to know if any AS/VR/IS/OIS/SSS system works at this shutter speed, even for non coffee drinkers.

10:18 AM  
Blogger John Bates said...

I don't think that IS would necessarily have helped in this situation, Mike. The blur on each of the grandparents is different: it's their motion that is causing the blur, not the camera.

11:49 AM  
Blogger robert e said...

This post, link and discussion is really bringing home the idea that, in many situations, a SS (sensor stabilizing) camera can be worth an optically stabilized lens, or a bounce strobe, or a tripod.

Plus, it's cheap, invisible, weightless, odorless and nearly fuss-free--a ludicrous cost/benefit ratio. It's either the photo bargain of the decade or I'm dreaming.

12:25 PM  
Blogger david vatovec said...

Actually that is a hell of a shot for a handheld half second exposure.
Mike, U didn't pick up the right image this time - in this case the AS wouldn't help - the subject is shakin' too remember?

2:20 PM  
Blogger Monza76 said...

I think robert e has a good point. In-lens stabilization may actually be more effective BUT in-camera systems are always there, and these cameras are not significantly more expensive (compare Pentax K100D with Nikon D40, or compare Pentax K10D and SONY A100 with the Nikon D80 for price).

3:07 PM  
Blogger Tim said...

I'm pretty certain that the blur caused by the lady moving and not the photographer moving.. IS might have helped a bit but it wouldn't have done much to help the blurred lady.

3:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I own a Canon EOS 30D and have no problem agreeing that the Nikon D80 has a superior viewfinder. I seriously considered buying one for this and many other reasons. The deal-breaker for me was that Nikon's 17-55mm f/2.8 doesn't have IS but Canon's does. Another heartbreaker is that the D80 won't meter with AI and AIS lenses. As the old saying goes, "You pay your money and take your choice."

6:20 PM  
Blogger ken said...

No IS on that 1/2 second shot. THey were blabbing away, so IS wouldn't have helped, nor woud 1/4s at ISO 3200. I'd need f/1.4, which means the sigma 30mm f/1.4 on a D40. I'll be reviewing that lens, too.


9:51 PM  
Blogger Peter said...

Another heartbreaker is that the D80 won't meter with AI and AIS lenses.

Isn't that a bit disingenous? The Canon won't even mount FD (FT?) glass (is there even an adapter for that?). If you happen to have a bag full of nice AI/AIS lenses, Nikon gives you an option for that from D200 on up. I don't see how a Canon user can claim that lens compatibility as a knock against a Nikon camera. Maybe if you were a Pentax user... but I digress.

7:56 AM  
Blogger Brambor said...

Holy Mackerel! Was that a subliminal attempt to make us suffer? I haven't gone through so many baby pictures in a year :-)

1:55 PM  
Blogger rob povey said...

I can't believe his slanderous comment about English food!!

I know some of our pub grub is a bit dodgy, but we have some wonderful gastro pubs (and some gastroenteritis ones!!).



3:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home