Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 9, 2007, 6:41 PM   #101
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 711
Default

jpmann66 wrote:
Quote:
Are shake reduction and dust reduction technologies gimmicks, or something I really should look for in a new entry level DSLR?*
Hello;

Actually, I am getting between 2.5 and 3.5 more stops with my "SR" shake reduction on. Where normally I would have to shoot at 1600 iso, I am able to shoot at 400 iso and am getting about 85 percent of my images very sharp at a 1/15th of a second using between 40 to 100 mm.

So yes "SR" works for me and very well.

Ah, the camera is a Pentax K10D.

http://www.pressbook.com/homebook.as...&owner_id=5144
Attached Images
 
benjikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 9, 2007, 11:23 PM   #102
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

benjikan wrote:
Quote:
Hello;

Actually, I am getting between 2.5 and 3.5 more stops with my "SR" shake reduction on. Where normally I would have to shoot at 1600 iso, I am able to shoot at 400 iso and am getting about 85 percent of my images very sharp at a 1/15th of a second using between 40 to 100 mm.

So yes "SR" works for me and very well.

Ah, the camera is a Pentax K10D.

http://www.pressbook.com/homebook.as...;owner_id=5144
And that is what many who have never expreienced it don't understand/miss .... its NOT a CURE ALL or ALL ABOUT absolute low light.

It is all over the range.... like long lenses at still fast speeds (like 1/90) but on a 600mm equiv lens.... where 1/F (1/600th) would be the SAFE non IS rule... or just slightly below)

That is where I find its highest value... not JUST absolute darkness.
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2007, 2:20 AM   #103
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

When I first saw this question posted, I noticed that there were already a few responses so I thought, "I guess that one's taken care of" and didn't bother to open it. Now it's 6 pages long and I had to check out what was going on in here.

I have to say, I didn't realize this would be such a hotly debated subject. Seems pretty simple, anti-shake helps reduce blur from camera shake. You can pay for it in the camera body, in the lenses, or do without. You factor it into your purchasing decision like anything else and move on.

For me, I have to confess to being an anti-shake fanatic. When I got my Panasonic FZ30 I was thrilled to be able to shoot at 420mm equivalent at 1/13 with reliably sharp results, and I definitely enjoyed shooting 1/4-1/2 second exposures in the Museum of Science.

Now that I have the Pentax K100D I continue to enjoy AS, almost as much as I enjoy high ISO performance, which I enjoy almost as much as using fast lenses. All three together is a blast.





Here's a shot I posted before. I took this in a warehouse my brother bought. It was shot with a 50mm 1.4 screw mount lens at 1/8 second. I don't know what f-stop. It was complete darkness and I shot it with the camera in one hand and a flashlight in the other. Manually focusing was awkward.





This was taken from inside a cemetery after midnight. I would have preferred to use a tripod, but cops do patrol this place and I wanted to be able to take off at a moments notice. It was shot with an A 50mm 1.7 at 1/2 second, f/2.4. I cropped off about 20% of the width and height.





This was taken with a Takumar 135mm 2.5 manual lens stacked on a manual focus 2x teleconverter, shot at 1/90 ISO 400. It came out decent, but the ones I shot afterward at 1/125 ISO 800 were noticeably sharper. I would have preferred to use a nice 70-300 zoom, but for about $45 this is some pretty affordable telephoto.


I really wanted to post some photos I've taken of my brother performing at some local bars, but I usually don't like posting images of people without their permission. Many of those would not have been possible without AS.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2007, 7:48 AM   #104
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Corpsy wrote:
Quote:
I have to say, I didn't realize this would be such a hotly debated subject. Seems pretty simple, anti-shake helps reduce blur from camera shake. You can pay for it in the camera body, in the lenses, or do without. You factor it into your purchasing decision like anything else and move on.
Now THAT is a statement I completely agree with It's just one of any number of other features to consider. It is not the most important in all cases and not the least important. Several people here find it a highlly useful feature and thus buy their gear accordingly. Several people find other features more important and thus make their decisions accordingly.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 10, 2007, 9:26 PM   #105
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 22
Default

While I admit I did not expect this lengthy a debate, I make no apologies for asking the question.I am a novice. Isaw all kinds of features and was bewildered. Now I've read a couple ofbooks, this thread, some other forums and some reviews,so I have a little more understanding. I never had a doubt that I would "factor them [these features] in". The quesiton was simply, how much, compared with other features? I appreciated the discussion and everyones input. -- john
jpmann66 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:15 AM.