Image Stabilization at high Shutter Speeds - Not Needed?

[Henry Domke]

Is lens image stabilization required when shooting at high shutter speeds?

Doesn't a high shutter speed stabilize the image enough?

For example, what value does IS give you if you are shooting a bird in flight and your shutter speed is 1/2500th of a second?

Is image stabilization ever harmful? Does is slow down AF in any way? Does it have a meaningful impact on battery life?

Would you ever want to turn the IS (or VR) switch to off?

[Daniel Cadieux]

Hi Henry, good question that many of us have asked ourselves before. Here is a useful thread that discussed this very issue:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/107599-Does-IS-help-on-fast-shutter-speeds?highlight=stabilization

In short for my personal experiences, I always leave it on...

[Dan Brown]

I leave mine on also for handholding. I am using the new version of the Nikon 80-400mm vr and the vr is so much better than the old version that I think it's worth running! When it activates, you can really see the difference.

[arash_hazeghi]

I think you asked this question before. Image stabilization is definitely needed for hand-holding long lenses such as a 500 or 600. Its primary purpose is to stabilize the finder so you can track the bird reliably, it also eliminates jerks that may result from swinging a heavy rig when tracking a fast bird, thus giving you higher parentage of sharp files . I never turn it off.

[Roman Kurywczak]

OK having read through the thread...question: is there really no penalty ( Having seen plenty of Daniel's and Arash's ...images I would say no) then why was it taught to turn it off once the shutter speed exceeded the focal length?

[arash_hazeghi]

then why was it taught to turn it off once the shutter speed exceeded the focal length?

There is no such rule :S3:

[Roman Kurywczak]

OK...not rule...just thought I read it somewhere.

[Jim Neiger]

There are many times when shooting at high shutter speeds that IS is not providing any benefit. That said, there are many times it may provide benefits and there is no significant penalty for turning it off, so I always leave it on.

[David Stephens]

Look through the VF while hand holding 500 to 1200mm of lenses and you'll want it on. It makes it much easier to site the subject.

[Jim Neiger]

Look through the VF while hand holding 500 to 1200mm of lenses and you'll want it on. It makes it much easier to site the subject.

I have heard this from others, but I never notice a big difference in the view finder when shooting with amd without IS on. I just checked my lens after shooting all day each of the last two days and IS was off. I didn't even notice while shooting. I must of left it off after experimenting with no IS and forgot to turn it back. Normally I always have it on.

[arash_hazeghi]

the finder stabilization makes a big difference in my personal experience, without it it is really hard to track stable at 840mm or 1200mm. That's the main reason I use IS which has BTW greatly improved in MKII super telephoto lenses. It also helps a lot when shooting from a moving platform like a boat or a moving vehicle.

[Jim Neiger]

It's been a while since I tried IS off with the 2x on. I used the 1.4x on the 600mm about half the time Friday and yesterday and I didn't notice that IS was off.

[arash_hazeghi]

I actually notice it immediately in the finder if I switch IS to off. You can setup a target on the wall try to perfectly center it handhold and then shoot a deep burst with IS on and OFF. With IS ON target will be centered in most of the frames. With IS off it will be all over the frame. At least that is my experience.

If I'm not mistaken I think Doug also uses it for the same reason.

Cheers,

[David Stephens]

I have heard this from others, but I never notice a big difference in the view finder when shooting with amd without IS on. I just checked my lens after shooting all day each of the last two days and IS was off. I didn't even notice while shooting. I must of left it off after experimenting with no IS and forgot to turn it back. Normally I always have it on.

Interesting. For me, it's most obvious when I look at a static subject, but once I noticed that, then I could see it when tracking a BIF. If you don't see it with a static subject, then you must be incredibly steady with your hand holding. I've hand held, with IS on, 1,000mm moon shots as low as 1/40-sec., but I can easily see the movement in the VF when I turn IS off.

Back to the OP's question, there's no harm in leaving it on. I leave it on all the time.

[Roman Kurywczak]

There are many times when shooting at high shutter speeds that IS is not providing any benefit. That said, there are many times it may provide benefits and there is no significant penalty for turning it off, so I always leave it on.
Very cool! Just to make it clear for others that may come late to the party.....hand holding correct?

[Jim Neiger]

Yes. Using a 600mm with and without TCs.

[Dave Viklund]

So what about if you are on a tripod or monopod, any negative?

[Michael Gerald-Yamasaki]

OK...not rule...just thought I read it somewhere.

Urban legend. LL, I think.

Cheers,

-Michael-

[David Stephens]

So what about if you are on a tripod or monopod, any negative?

Not with the Canons IME. I've read mixed comments about Nikon.

[arash_hazeghi]

So what about if you are on a tripod or monopod, any negative?

that's a good question,

If your shutter speed is fast, (usually 1/400sec or faster) there is no drawback.

However if your shutter speed is slow (around 1/2sec to 1/200sec) it might hurt you depending on the lens. Some older lenses do not have tripod detection mode and the ones that have it like my original 500 IS , don't "detect" the lens is on tripod all the time. This sometimes causes a slight blur in the photos (i.e. not sharp at pixel level) as a result of IS element floating with a low frequency even when the lens is mounted on rock steady tripod. The slower the shutter speed, the more likely that this would happen because. With the MKII lenses I have not seen this issue though, I mounted my 600 II on a Gitzo when I was testing it and took test frames from 1/2 sec to 1/500sec with IS ON and then OFF and all the frames were pixel sharp.

if you shutter speed is slower than 1/2 sec then def. turn IS off as the image will float and cause something like motion blur when exposure is too long (e.g. long exposure at night time etc.).

[Diane Miller]

To see the float in action, put the camera on a very steady tripod and go to your max telephoto, with TC's. Frame the crescent moon, go to live view and zoom in on it. With IS on with my Canon 600II, the image will swim as though you were looking at a reflection on gently rippling water. Turn the IS off and you will see a steady image (relatively speaking).

[Dave Viklund]

very cool, thanks

[David Stephens]

To see the float in action, put the camera on a very steady tripod and go to your max telephoto, with TC's. Frame the crescent moon, go to live view and zoom in on it. With IS on with my Canon 600II, the image will swim as though you were looking at a reflection on gently rippling water. Turn the IS off and you will see a steady image (relatively speaking).

Interesting. Mine floats and vibrates for a fraction of a second and then locks in, but mines a Series I 500mm. Maybe that's the difference.

[Diane Miller]

I wonder if mine is not doing what it should be doing. I think it claims to detect when there is a tripod and "turn IS off" -- but I've long wondered about the details.

I'll test it again in a few days when I have more time.

[arash_hazeghi]

I wonder if mine is not doing what it should be doing. I think it claims to detect when there is a tripod and "turn IS off" -- but I've long wondered about the details.

I'll test it again in a few days when I have more time.

Tripod detection mode doesn't turn IS OFF, rather it is supposed to "lock-in" and only correct for sudden movements only (e.g. a wind gust) as opposed to continuous compesnation when handholding.

David, I think it's possible that in LV mode IS turns off because it is not reading user activity (i.e. you are not half pressing the shutter or the camera is not under remote operation mode). I'm pretty sure my 500 MKI did float when on tripod.

[Jerry van Dijk]

Not with the Canons IME. I've read mixed comments about Nikon.

Definately a problem with Nikon! I've been shooting deer at twilight with the Nikon D7000 and the 80-400 (old version) @ 400mm, while supporting the camera with the lens tripod mount on the wall of the hide. I kept getting blurred images until I remembered a post here on BPN discussing the use of IS/VR on tripods. I then switched VR off and images got sharper immediately. This was with shutter speeds between 1/400 and 1/500 (and ISO 1600). Generally, VR is quite good on this lens and indeed noticable in the viewfinder.

[Diane Miller]

I'm surprised there would be an issue at the SSs Jerry mentions. Definitely need to go do some tests. I can cause enough loss of IQ all on my own, without any extra help from the lens. :e3

Another factor is the initial jump IS makes as it kicks in. I used to notice it significantly with my Canon 300 f/2.8, and now i don't seem to notice it with the 600II -- maybe just because I'm used to it, but I think it is a lot less. I always hold the shutter button halfway for a split second to let it kick in and stabilize. If a shot was fired in that first split second, there would be some blur at a range of SS that would not show blur with the IS fully engaged.

[Michael Gerald-Yamasaki]

Definately a problem with Nikon! I've been shooting deer at twilight with the Nikon D7000 and the 80-400 (old version) @ 400mm, while supporting the camera with the lens tripod mount on the wall of the hide. I kept getting blurred images until I remembered a post here on BPN discussing the use of IS/VR on tripods. I then switched VR off and images got sharper immediately. This was with shutter speeds between 1/400 and 1/500 (and ISO 1600). Generally, VR is quite good on this lens and indeed noticable in the viewfinder.

Jerry,

The manuals for the older Nikon VR lenses expressly state not to use VR locked down on a tripod.

Cheers,

-Michael-

[Floyd Davidson]

Definately a problem with Nikon! I've been shooting deer at twilight with the Nikon D7000 and the 80-400 (old version) @ 400mm, while supporting the camera with the lens tripod mount on the wall of the hide. I kept getting blurred images until I remembered a post here on BPN discussing the use of IS/VR on tripods. I then switched VR off and images got sharper immediately. This was with shutter speeds between 1/400 and 1/500 (and ISO 1600). Generally, VR is quite good on this lens and indeed noticable in the viewfinder.

The Nikkor 80-400mm AF-D lens was the first VR lens Nikon ever produced. There of course have been many advances since it came out in 2000, and it is perhaps not an appropriate example for how Nikon's VR works, in particular since it is now a discontinued model. One of the specific advances has been how VR funtions when mounted on a tripod.

[Jerry van Dijk]

Jerry,

The manuals for the older Nikon VR lenses expressly state not to use VR locked down on a tripod.

Cheers,

-Michael-

That's correct, and I think the problem I describe at high SS is specific for this range of Nikon lenses with the old VR I system. I would be curious to hear some experiences from the dark side with the newer 80-400 VR II on tripod.

[arash_hazeghi]

The old 80-400 VR uses decade old obsolete VR technology. It was one of Nikon's first VR systems and very poor even at the time.

Modern Nikon lenses don't have such issue. Especially ones that have VR II

[Daniel Cadieux]

My older IS generation 100-400L gives me soft images with IS on when using my elbows as "tripod" when lying prone on the ground shooting shorebirds or waterfowl (looks like I must be quite steady!). Even with higher SS. When "regular" hand holding it does not make a difference and I leave it on. With my newer generation 500mm I can leave the IS on at all times with no image degradation in any situation.

[Martin Dunn]

My 2 cents worth.
I recently came back from a safari where I had used the VR feature on my 70-300mm Nikon lens for the first time.
In the past I have got great results with this lens, without using the VR. This time I used the VR because so many peolple recommended that I should and the focus was all over the place. I am sure that it was the VR that caused the problem.
I won't be using it again. I know some people swear by it, but for me it just doesn't help.

I found this article by Thom Hagan (http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm) particularly enlightening.

[arash_hazeghi]

My 2 cents worth.
I recently came back from a safari where I had used the VR feature on my 70-300mm Nikon lens for the first time.
In the past I have got great results with this lens, without using the VR. This time I used the VR because so many peolple recommended that I should and the focus was all over the place. I am sure that it was the VR that caused the problem.
I won't be using it again. I know some people swear by it, but for me it just doesn't help.

I found this article by Thom Hagan (http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm) particularly enlightening.


Hi Martin,


I can't see how VR can affect focus, I think before drawing any conclusion you must do a controlled test to confirm that was the cause. And if you confirm it was, most likely your lens's VR is defective, I'd send it back to Nikon.

As for the article, I don't personally buy it. First, it is just speculation, it never provides even one example that proves his speculation is right, nor does he provide any references to the numbers he claims. His main justification, i.e. sample rate vs. shutter speed doesn't make sense, even if the sampling frequency is longer than shutter speed, it means VR will be less effective but it doesn't degrade the image. It's a feedback loop system so the camera tracks the integral of the readings on a smooth trajectory not just the last data point. A while back I asked a few top Nikon shooters if they have noticed issues with Nikon VR II system in their super-tele lenses and the answer was a unanimous "no", so that's what I'm inclined to believe for Nikon system.


Having said that, the simple Nikon VR system in a cheap zoom lens is not really comparable to gen 4 Canon IS technology used in super telephoto lenses which was the topic of discussion here.

but thanks for sharing your experience, hope you can fix your lens.

[David Stephens]

I found this article by Thom Hagan (http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm) particularly enlightening.

Interesting. I don't know about Nikon, but absolutely nothing he says in that piece applies to Canon, IME.