Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   General Discussion (
-   -   Optical versus sensor shift Image stabilization (

pnut Dec 29, 2009 12:47 PM

Optical versus sensor shift Image stabilization
I would like to understand the difference between the two IS methods, and which is better and why?

One camera I am considering has OIS in the lens, the rest have sensor shift technology.

JohnG Dec 29, 2009 1:00 PM

In general the differences are:

sensor shift works on any lens used on the camera. For example a 50mm 1.8 lens gets that benefit. There are no 50mm 1.8 lenses with image stabilization in Canon / Nikon for instance.

In lens has the benefit of showing you in the viewfinder the result of the stabilization - you don't see it happening with sensor stabilization.
There is also some discussion that at longer focal lengths lens-based stabilization is a better performer. But I don't think that's necessarily accepted as fact by everyone.

Mark1616 Dec 29, 2009 1:22 PM

Yep, that's about it from John. I would just add that people get very excited about IS/VR/Anti-Shake etc thinking that is going to solve a whole world of problems. It won't, but it's like any feature in photography, if used correctly it will assist the photographer to get a better shot.

TCav Dec 29, 2009 3:22 PM

Ditto X 2.

pnut Dec 29, 2009 8:42 PM

Are both equally effective?

Example Lumix LX3 versus GF1 (yes I know they are very different but I mean in terms of image stabilization).

Thank you.

shoturtle Dec 29, 2009 8:44 PM

Pretty much imho, I doubt there is a clear cut winner between the in body IS vs lens IS systems.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00 PM.