I dunno...I don't buy a camera system based on one thing like this. Get me close and it becomes a non-issue...this is one that seems to be a distinction without a difference when using the thing. The Canon IS may be the next level, not sure, but am curious when I pick one up.
runamuck wrote:
HUH? Nikon stabilizes only part of the image? Which part? Edges? Center? Background? Foreground? Just how does it identify vibration apart from camera shake or movement?
Forget photography. You should have a job in advertising.
I was kidding. I think the only real comparisons are between in-body IS and in-lens IS. Canon's hybrid IS should get thrown in the mix. However, between IS and VR, you're likely comparing apples to apples. I think 5-stops is starting to push the level of practicality. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of IS, but unless you're taking pictures of static objects, subject motion starts to become a factor at these super-slow shutter speeds.
When Canon puts the IS in the body and creates a image-stablized electronic 100% viewfinder, I'll be a happy camper. Maybe my 5-year old will get to use such a camera.
There are different generations of each system with claimed improvements for each. That's one reason that I paid more to get Canon's latest IS on their 200mm F2.0 (the Nikkor was a mature release with corresponding IQ and VR). It works exceedingly well, in my opinion, better than their own (older version) 70-200 F2.8.
jdben622 wrote:
When Canon puts the IS in the body and creates a image-stablized electronic 100% viewfinder, I'll be a happy camper. Maybe my 5-year old will get to use such a camera.
Yeah, he can use one right now if you want him to. Go buy him a used Konica Minolta DiMage A2. It probably has the best electronic viewfinder ever. 100%, image-stabilized, and 922,000 pixels refreshing at 60fps.
