I got a question today about my thoughts on image stabilization and I thought I would share on the site as well. I know a lot of you are long glass users and this may be a beneficial topic. This is primarily written from my own experience and use over the years. Your findings might be different. Again, it all comes down to what we are shooting and the variables at play. So here goes.
Image stabilization I feel was primarily a tool offered to compensate for your hands shaking. The general rule was that we needed 1/focal length for shutter speed to eliminate seeing hand motion in an image. So if you have a 200mm lens, then you need to shoot at 1/200 minimum to eliminate your hand vibration. This varies with different hands. I generally need a stop more with certain lenses. This completely is irrespective of the subject and subject motion. This is only dealing with out own generated vibration. This ends up looking like motion blur, but it is from our hands. Take two images at 100mm at 1/25 of a second. One on a tripod and one handheld. You will see your own motion blur.
As a tool, image stabilization is tremendously helpful. I’ve been able to shoot by hand focal lengths I considered not hand-holdable at one point just fine with the latest stabilization we have. The E-M1mkII has amazing stabilization based on the sensor. Lots of lenses have it too. And some cameras today sync the two up for even more amazing stabilization. 6 stops?!?!?!?! That is insane. And it works. But when do we need it. And a lot of discussion revolves around using it or not at high shutter speeds.
The old general rules that have worked tried and true over the years still seem to make sense.
Am I on a tripod? No need for stabilization.
Am I faster than my focal length? No need for stabilization.
Am I on shaky ground or a moving platform like a boat? Maybe I need it.
Am I hand-holding below my focal length in terms of speed? Yup I could use it.
Thom Hogan wrote an article about Nikon’s stabilization system and he touches on a lot of very interesting things. My experience in the field mirrors much of what he says. I highly recommend reading this. Much of it applies to other brands as well as in-body stabilization too.
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/lens-technique/all-about-nikon-vr.html
So when it comes to fast shutters like 1/500, 1/1000, etc… what’s the deal?
I bought an Olympus M43 body specifically because of its image stabilization, and have been very happy I did so. I only take photos casually, but being able to use long shutter speeds with a tiny prime lets me get respectable results in less-than-ideal light with a tiny package that I can put in my jacket pocket.
If you are being limited by hand shake, 3-4 stops of image stabilization more than “make up for” the relatively small sensor on M43 cameras.
Thanks for this Tony I share your thoughts. I shot sports using a 400mm canon it was always supported. However I shot nature with it & it was never supported. The caveat was that in nature I was always shooting at fast speeds or that was the objective & if I wasn’t I would employ the IS feature. I now have the 300mm F4 Olympus that I combine with an OMD 5 MKII. Its like a feather in comparison but theres the rub this smaller lens seems less stable. So I employ the IS more often. And to be fair I only just got the lens so its taking time to get used to it.
The IBIS on my Olympus OMD E-M1MkII is unbelievable. I’m 65 now and found I was getting quite a bit of camera shake with my Fuji cameras and with my Nikon D500. That prompted me to rent one for a weekend of testing.
Bottom line, I bought one with the excellent 12-40mm f2.8 lens. I shoot editorial stock and can get away with handheld images down to 1/20th a sec which is a huge help to me. I just leave the IBIS on and have even used it in continuous focus / continuous shooting mode, tracking subjects, with no issues.
Can’t wait for the next generation E-M1 Mk3!
Hello Tony,
I have found that image stabilization using long Nikon telephotos on a tripod is quite effective at controlling shutter or mirror induced shake. They even recognize the lens is on a tripod and change the stabilization routine. I would think that if manufacturers keep adding long glass to MFT systems this would be something to consider too.
Shakes generated from your hands hardly matter when you are shooting manual, but yes image stabilization can help when the shakes are too much, and you should immediately have at least 3 stops. Thanks for writing this.