Image stabilization shoud be stabilized

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Normally I leave VR turned on and turn it off when I need to (and
remember . I think in the future I shall leave it turned off.

leave it on and learn how it works.



Your advice differs from that of professions wildlife photographers.

first of all, he said nothing about wildlife. stabilized lenses are
very useful in far more situations than just wildlife.

second, it might be different from one wildlife photographer, but
certainly not all of them.

It is a well known that stabilization only serves to slow down the
autofocus speed at shutter speeds above 1/500 of a second/ I shoot birds
in flight at at least twice that speed.

it's not well known at all, since it doesn't do that.

stabilization *helps* autofocus speed because what the autofocus
sensors see is not constantly jumping around, one moment on the bird
and the next moment off the bird.

with stabilization, you can keep the viewfinder on the bird, under the
selected focus point (unless you're using tracking focus, which is
useful in some situations).

the issue he describes, using stabilization with shutter speeds over
1/500th, has to do with the stabilizer sampling frequency, which i
already mentioned. it does not affect autofocus.

http://www.evergladesphotosociety.org/articles/flightpart01.html

Of course you are free to do as you wish.

as is everyone.

On 8/17/2013 9:23 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

Themaker told me that all the birson this website were shot with IS off.
Yes, a tripod was usedfor many of them, but others were hand held.

why buy a stabilized lens if you're not going to use the stabilization?

for appropriate times, such as low light shots when longer exposures are
needed. If you have doubts, Google is your friend. There is also a
discussion of this in DPreview.



shooting birds with a stabilized lens is much easier because you can
keep the bird where you want in the frame, since the stabilization
stabilizes what you see in the viewfinder. this also helps autofocus
and exposure too.



VR off:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/hummer%20flying1.jpg

VR off:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/osprey%20about%20to%20land.jpg

VR off:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/anhinga%20the%20next%20buildeer.jpg

VR onL

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/It%27s%20Mine.jpg

Do you see the pattern.


those with in-camera stabilization don't get this benefit because the
viewfinder is not stabilized, only the sensor.

otherwise, it's hard to keep it steady, especially at longer focal
lengths.



See above. do some esearch.
Do as you wish. I letr my results do the talking.

--
PeterN

On 8/17/2013 9:23 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

Normally I leave VR turned on and turn it off when I need to (and
remember . I think in the future I shall leave it turned off.

leave it on and learn how it works.



Your advice differs from that of professions wildlife photographers.

first of all, he said nothing about wildlife. stabilized lenses are
very useful in far more situations than just wildlife.

second, it might be different from one wildlife photographer, but
certainly not all of them.

It is a well known that stabilization only serves to slow down the
autofocus speed at shutter speeds above 1/500 of a second/ I shoot birds
in flight at at least twice that speed.

it's not well known at all, since it doesn't do that.

stabilization *helps* autofocus speed because what the autofocus
sensors see is not constantly jumping around, one moment on the bird
and the next moment off the bird.

with stabilization, you can keep the viewfinder on the bird, under the
selected focus point (unless you're using tracking focus, which is
useful in some situations).

the issue he describes, using stabilization with shutter speeds over
1/500th, has to do with the stabilizer sampling frequency, which i
already mentioned. it does not affect autofocus.

http://www.evergladesphotosociety.org/articles/flightpart01.html

Of course you are free to do as you wish.

as is everyone.


Stop shifting. The core issue is that stabilization does not help an
image at high shutter speeds. In fact it hurts the image for reasons
stated in the article.
You are opining agianst the weight of authority on this issue.

--
PeterN

On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:23:20 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Themaker told me that all the birson this website were shot with IS off.
Yes, a tripod was usedfor many of them, but others were hand held.

why buy a stabilized lens if you're not going to use the stabilization?

I buy stabilised lenses because I can't get the lens I want without
stabilisation.

shooting birds with a stabilized lens is much easier because you can
keep the bird where you want in the frame, since the stabilization
stabilizes what you see in the viewfinder. this also helps autofocus
and exposure too.

those with in-camera stabilization don't get this benefit because the
viewfinder is not stabilized, only the sensor.

otherwise, it's hard to keep it steady, especially at longer focal
lengths.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 21:23:22 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Normally I leave VR turned on and turn it off when I need to (and
remember . I think in the future I shall leave it turned off.

leave it on and learn how it works.



Your advice differs from that of professions wildlife photographers.

first of all, he said nothing about wildlife. stabilized lenses are
very useful in far more situations than just wildlife.

second, it might be different from one wildlife photographer, but
certainly not all of them.

It is a well known that stabilization only serves to slow down the
autofocus speed at shutter speeds above 1/500 of a second/ I shoot birds
in flight at at least twice that speed.

it's not well known at all, since it doesn't do that.

stabilization *helps* autofocus speed because what the autofocus
sensors see is not constantly jumping around, one moment on the bird
and the next moment off the bird.

with stabilization, you can keep the viewfinder on the bird, under the
selected focus point (unless you're using tracking focus, which is
useful in some situations).

the issue he describes, using stabilization with shutter speeds over
1/500th, has to do with the stabilizer sampling frequency, which i
already mentioned. it does not affect autofocus.

http://www.evergladesphotosociety.org/articles/flightpart01.html

Of course you are free to do as you wish.

as is everyone.

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is is getting a fast autofocus if
the image is moving on the sensor at the time of exposure?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , PeterN
wrote:

It is a well known that stabilization only serves to slow down the
autofocus speed at shutter speeds above 1/500 of a second/ I shoot birds
in flight at at least twice that speed.

it's not well known at all, since it doesn't do that.

stabilization *helps* autofocus speed because what the autofocus
sensors see is not constantly jumping around, one moment on the bird
and the next moment off the bird.

with stabilization, you can keep the viewfinder on the bird, under the
selected focus point (unless you're using tracking focus, which is
useful in some situations).

the issue he describes, using stabilization with shutter speeds over
1/500th, has to do with the stabilizer sampling frequency, which i
already mentioned. it does not affect autofocus.

http://www.evergladesphotosociety.org/articles/flightpart01.html

Of course you are free to do as you wish.

as is everyone.

Stop shifting.

i'm not shifting anything.

The core issue is that stabilization does not help an
image at high shutter speeds. In fact it hurts the image for reasons
stated in the article.

nope. it *can* hurt the image because of the stabilization sampling
frequency versus the shutter speed, but it doesn't always hurt the
image.

it also has nothing whatsoever to do with affecting autofocus.

You are opining agianst the weight of authority on this issue.

not at all. i understand how the technology works.

there can be an issue at higher shutter speeds, but *not* for the
reasons he claims. he is mistaken as to why.

even someone unfamiliar with how stabilization actually works would
realize that the autofocus and stabilization systems are independent.
if anything, a stabilized view *helps* the autofocus system because the
subject is not moving around the frame as much.

In article , PeterN
wrote:

Themaker told me that all the birson this website were shot with IS off.
Yes, a tripod was usedfor many of them, but others were hand held.

why buy a stabilized lens if you're not going to use the stabilization?

for appropriate times, such as low light shots when longer exposures are
needed. If you have doubts, Google is your friend. There is also a
discussion of this in DPreview.

http://improvephotography.com/743/ti...otography-anim
al-bird-digital/

Bird Photography Tip #10: Don¹t skimp on Image Stabilization. It is
unfortunate that image stabilized lenses often come at a premium,
because some photographers opt for the cheaper lens without image
stabilization. *Especially for telephoto lenses, your image
stabilization will be absolutely vital to the success of your
photography of birds in flight.

http://photographylife.com/how-to-photograph-birds
The best bird photographers in the world will tell you that they
cannot live without their 500mm and 600mm lenses, preferably with
optical stabilization + teleconverters.

shooting birds with a stabilized lens is much easier because you can
keep the bird where you want in the frame, since the stabilization
stabilizes what you see in the viewfinder. this also helps autofocus
and exposure too.

VR off:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/hummer%20flying1.jpg

VR off:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/osprey%20about%20to%20land.jpg

VR off:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...ext%20buildeer.
jpg

VR onL

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/It%27s%20Mine.jpg

Do you see the pattern.

that's the farthest thing from a controlled test possible.

those with in-camera stabilization don't get this benefit because the
viewfinder is not stabilized, only the sensor.

otherwise, it's hard to keep it steady, especially at longer focal
lengths.

See above. do some esearch.

i have.

now take your own advice.

Do as you wish. I letr my results do the talking.

your results are meaningless. they're not a controlled test of anything.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is is getting a fast autofocus if
the image is moving on the sensor at the time of exposure?

exactly why you want stabilization!

note that there is a panning mode, where you can pan to follow a
subject and it stabilizes the up/down direction. this can be quite
useful for birds in flight but less useful for one perched on a branch.

On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 22:31:05 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is is getting a fast autofocus if
the image is moving on the sensor at the time of exposure?

exactly why you want stabilization!

note that there is a panning mode, where you can pan to follow a
subject and it stabilizes the up/down direction. this can be quite
useful for birds in flight but less useful for one perched on a branch.

You are up to your old trick of evading my meaning. Let's try again:

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is image stabilisation assisting you
get a fast autofocus if image stabilisation leads to the image moving
on the sensor at the time of exposure?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is is getting a fast autofocus if
the image is moving on the sensor at the time of exposure?

exactly why you want stabilization!

note that there is a panning mode, where you can pan to follow a
subject and it stabilizes the up/down direction. this can be quite
useful for birds in flight but less useful for one perched on a branch.

You are up to your old trick of evading my meaning. Let's try again:

You are confusing autofocus as a process with focus as it affects
sharpness of the image. What good is image stabilisation assisting you
get a fast autofocus if image stabilisation leads to the image moving
on the sensor at the time of exposure?

i'm not evading anything, nor is it 'my old trick'.

image stabilization is leads to the image *not* moving on the sensor.
that's the whole point! it also helps autofocus attain focus since the
focus points are on the same parts of the subject.

however, like everything, stabilization has its limits and using it
outside of those limits can potentially be worse (but not always). one
such limit is high shutter speeds, and that's not due to autofocus
issues.