Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   General Discussion (
-   -   Stabilization in Ultra-Compacts? (

bikebro Nov 16, 2005 1:06 PM

So my issue is that my hands shake more then the average person. I am wondering if the optical stablization systems in cameras like the Fuji F10 and the Panasonic FX9 will help me take better pictures then a camera with it. I haven't quite figured out how these systems work or how well they work. Will it help me take better quality photos or just reduce the number of blurry shots?

I haven't owned a digital camera yet so I have nothing to compare it to. The only camera I own at the momment is a Cannon APS. I have had a few(very few) blurry photos in that caused from my hands shaking I think.

slipe Nov 16, 2005 1:15 PM

The stabilization in the FX9 is true mechanical stabilization and works very well to counter hand shake.

The Fuji F10 takes a different tact and allows you to make practical images at higher ISO. This increases your available shutter speed for a given limited light.

For still subjects you will get better shots with less noise in limited light with the FX9. But stabilization doesn't help at all for subject movement. For freezing action in available light the F10 is better.

normc Nov 16, 2005 1:56 PM

I have what is sometimes called "essential tremor" it is a medical condition and as far as I know the cause is unknown. Image stabilization has been a big help for me to help with the camera shaking problem. When there is lots of light and corresponding fast shutter speeds it likely is not very important. In nearly all other conditions it will make a difference in and held photography.

Nagasaki Nov 16, 2005 6:25 PM

There was a program on UK TV last night which tested image stabilization in a couple of camera. The result was quite convincing in favour of IS.

Wildman Nov 16, 2005 6:58 PM

IS really works... but you have to remember that IS works only against camera shake, NOT movement of the subject.

My EF-S 17-85IS lens lets me hand hold my 20D down to 1/13 second with good results. My old Canon Powershot Pro90IS has a 10X (37-370 35 mm equivalent lens). It's the size of a brick... not hardly "ultra compact". It produces great shots fully zoomed when hand held.

I know of now "ultra compacts" with decent reach and image stabilization. So far, it seems like one or the other in that category... either long reach OR stabilization. BTW, I define ultra compact as a camera that will fit in your pocket.

normc Nov 16, 2005 9:01 PM

There is an excellent PhotoShop Plug in called "Focus Magic" that works for motion blur.

msantos Nov 19, 2005 12:37 AM

The IS on Panasonics works excellent, I have two of them

theranman Nov 21, 2005 12:00 PM

Personally, I'd be curious to know what the major qualitative differences are between optical, electrical, and digital stabilization are. I always assumed that electrical and digital stabilization were the same, but I could be wrong.

I'm considering the purchase of one of the following;

Sanyo C6 (digital stabilization)

Sony T9 (optical stabization)

With the Sanyo, part of the picture is slightly cropped around the borders when using the digital stabilization. Not sure if the same happens with the T9.

Any enlightenment?



E.T Nov 21, 2005 12:58 PM

theranman wrote:

Personally, I'd be curious to know what the major qualitative differences are between optical, electrical, and digital stabilization are.
Pretty much that later ones are same cheating and nothing more than PR lies.
Only types of real IS are optical which is done by having moving element in lens and KonicaMinolta's solution which moves sensor/CCD. (means all lenses are stabilized in its DSLRs)

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 PM.