Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Image stabilization  (Read 20650 times)
howiesmith
Guest
« Reply #80 on: January 05, 2007, 11:20:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My experience with hand-holding 200mm in 4/3" format (FOV like 400mm in 35mm format) is that the VF image can bobble around quite a lot. I have had fairly good success getting sharp hand-held images at low shutter speeds with more normal focal lengths is fairly steady, but those bobbling VF images have shattered my hubris, and make me desire "VF image stability".
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=93889\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the personal info.  I stand corrected.  Good to know this from your experience rather than my guess.
Logged
AndyF2
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #81 on: February 12, 2007, 11:45:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I finished some shots tonight to test what I thought was the IS being unstable, thinking it may have been due to operating well below it's intended temp range (-20C tonight, -10 the first time I suspected it).  There is a clear difference in the full frame printed at 8x10.  Looking at details, the IS was drifting vertically.
There was a comment earlier in this discussion that the IS in some lenses (or Canon in particular was being referred to) hunts when on a tripod.  Is there more information on this somewhere?  It didn't pop up in a google search.
The lens I used as the Canon EFS 17-85 IS.
It's interesting, but IS may require a certain minimum of shake to avoid creating movement on it's own!
Andy
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603



WWW
« Reply #82 on: February 15, 2007, 05:05:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I finished some shots tonight to test what I thought was the IS being unstable, thinking it may have been due to operating well below it's intended temp range (-20C tonight, -10 the first time I suspected it).  There is a clear difference in the full frame printed at 8x10.  Looking at details, the IS was drifting vertically.
There was a comment earlier in this discussion that the IS in some lenses (or Canon in particular was being referred to) hunts when on a tripod.  Is there more information on this somewhere?  It didn't pop up in a google search.
The lens I used as the Canon EFS 17-85 IS.
It's interesting, but IS may require a certain minimum of shake to avoid creating movement on it's own!
There's a slightly outdated piece of information on Canon USA's website.

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS has tripod detection, as does the older EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.

As far as I know, all L-class IS lenses after the 70-200 include this tripod detection, but the EF-S 17-85 and EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6L IS do not.
Logged

Jan
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1046


« Reply #83 on: February 15, 2007, 10:15:56 PM »
ReplyReply

i got a 24-105 recently and the instructions re IS were ambiguous, so i decided in the process of lens testing to try the 24-105, 17-85s, and 70-300 DO on a tripod with IS on and off.  i used a solid tripod with mirror lockup.  i could see no difference between IS on and off -- i could see significant difference between the lenses at different focal lengths
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad