Digital Cameras Forum

Digital Cameras Forum Discuss compact digital cameras or ask general digital photography questions - what camera to buy, memory cards, digital camera accessories, etc. You may also want to look at the Digital SLR forum, or the Camera Manufacturer forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital Camera Reviews >>
Digital Camera Buyers Guide >>
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Senior Member Anbesol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,430

    image stabilization

    does IS affect quality? outside of the blur - does it reduce the capable resolution of the lens, or in the anti-shake world - does it affect the quality of the CCD?

    was just wondering if it might...

  2. #2
    Nature/Wildlife Forum Co-Moderator Loupey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    7,856

    Re: image stabilization

    I've heard people say that the non-IS version is sharper than its IS counterpart. But to make that comparison valid, one would have to compare the same model (70-200 f/2.8, 300mm prime, etc).

    I believe that the resolution difference, if noticeable, can be rationalized by how one shoots in the field. If you are a stanch supporter of using tripods (pun intended) all time time, then go with the non-IS version and save $$. If you plan to do a lot of hand-holding, then the advantage of the IS is going to vastly outweigh any of the initial resolution difference (again, if any).
    Please do not edit or repost my images.

    See my website HERE.


    What's a Loupe for anyway?

  3. #3
    Captain of the Ship Photo-John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
    Posts
    15,422

    Re: image stabilization

    Quote Originally Posted by Loupey
    I've heard people say that the non-IS version is sharper than its IS counterpart. But to make that comparison valid, one would have to compare the same model (70-200 f/2.8, 300mm prime, etc).
    You're right about that - except it's really an optics issue, I think. The best example I know of is the Canon 300 f/4L and the newer IS version of the same lens. People who've used them both feel that the older, non-IS version was better - but not because of the IS, just because they changed the optics a bit. But no one says the 300 f/4L IS is a bad lens. They just say the older one was better. And as you said, the benefits of image stabilization will outweigh any negative effects, which will be minimal or non-existent, anyway.
    Photo-John

    Your reviews are the foundation of this site - Write A Review!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •