Beginner IS v VR

[D700graham]

Hi all, been reading a little bit about when your camera is mounted on a tripod, landscapes, longish exposure etc, to turn off the IS, now obviously this is for canon lenses, but does the same rule apply for Nikon VR lenses? Or am I wide of the mark?.

 

[MWHCVT]

Yes the same thing applies, IS/VR/OS are all the same thing and while a very small number of lens can detect if its on a tripod and deactivate the IS/VR/OS automatically most can not, so to put is simply if your on a tripod turn it off

The reason for having it off is that it's there to counteract movement, but the tripod makes sure there is no movement so it would therefore counter something with micro movements and those movements will actually soften the image

 

[FredDee]

On any make, turn off VR, IS or whatever the manufacturer calls their version of Image Stabilisation.

 

[D700graham]

Thank you very much for the reply's guys its appreciated.

 

[HoppyUK]

The reason IS/VR should be turned off on a tripod, is signal feedback that builds up in the system and causes the mechanism to move when it shouldn't. Some lenses are very prone to this, like the earlier Canon-L teles eg 100-400L, where the image can drift all over the place on a tripod. Lenses with tripod-sensing are usually okay, but even then it's a bit like stopping at the traffic lights and keeping the car in gear with the clutch depressed, as opposed to putting it in neutral with the handbrake on.

My simple rule of thumb, if I have a hand on the camera (eg subject tracking on a tripod, or using a monopod) IS stays on. If not, then switch off regardless.

 

[BillN_33]

My simple rule of thumb, if I have a hand on the camera (eg subject tracking on a tripod, or using a monopod) IS stays on. If not, then switch off regardless.

Richard - are you saying that if you have a long lens on a Gimbal on a tripod, you should have IS/VR switched on - or have I misunderstood you?

 

[HoppyUK]

Richard - are you saying that if you have a long lens on a Gimbal on a tripod, you should have IS/VR switched on - or have I misunderstood you?

No firm rules, but if you have a hand on the camera, there will be some movement so IS works as normal, whether on a tripod or not. But there are also other considerations, like shutter speed and how necessary/beneficial IS in a given situation, also the nature of any tracking movement, IS Mode-1 or 2 etc.

I have also used IS-on with a stationary camera on a tripod, with a long lens in windy conditions. Easy to check - switch on live-view at max magnification and you'll often see some movement even with everything locked down. Switch IS on/off and see which is better.

 

[gramps]

Interesting read: http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm

 

[HoppyUK]

Interesting read: http://www.bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm

That article is often quoted as a 'theoretical' reason not to use VR, but it shows no example images of the theory actually being true in practise, nor have I ever seen any from anyone else. I have also tried hard to demonstrate the theory myself using Canon equipment, without success.

 

[gramps]

Not sure that's entirely what I got from reading the entire article

 

[HoppyUK]

Not sure that's entirely what I got from reading the entire article

Of course not. Thom Hogan is saying there can be a problem with VR at certain shutter speeds. I understand the theory, but I'm saying I've never seen any real evidence of it, either in that article or elsewhere, and I've failed to replicate any problems myself (using Canon). If Hogan is right, it should be easy to demonstrate, and clear to see.

If there really was any such VR issue, I think it would be very well known and documented. And Nikon would either stop putting VR in their latest $10,000 lenses, or make some recommendations about its use.

A cynic might say that bloggers are prone to posting contentious content to drive traffic

 

[gramps]

If there really was any such VR issue, I think it would be very well known and documented.

There is certainly significant discussion and reports on the internet as a search will confirm, just because you haven't noticed it doesn't mean it isn't correct ... balance of opinion and all that

And Nikon would either stop putting VR in their latest $10,000 lenses, or make some recommendations about its use.

You really believe that?

 

[Steve Smith]

Just remember that it's there to counter movement of the camera, not the subject.


Steve.

 

[HoppyUK]

There is certainly significant discussion and reports on the internet as a search will confirm, just because you haven't noticed it doesn't mean it isn't correct ... balance of opinion and all that



You really believe that?

What I do know is that if what TH says is true (his post is four years old now) then there would have been an almightly row about this and wholesale rejection of VR by consumers, amateurs and professionals alike.

I have searched for real evidence of this theory, and found none. Nor could I replicate* it with Canon equipment that works in just the same way.

*It's actually not an easy theory to test, you basically have to shoot lots of pictures around the critical shutter speeds, with and without VR/IS, then go through them and try to ascertain which ones are blurred by camera-shake and which ones are blurred by some IS/VR interference. It really needs hundreds of images, a numbers game, with % hit rate leading to a conclusion.
As I recall, I did a hundred or so but in the assessment it was immediately obvious that: at longer shutter speeds, IS is extremely beneficial; at the critical speeds TH cites, my IS images were obviously and consistently sharper; at higher shutter speeds IS/VR makes no difference anyway, but there's a big advantage to having a stabilised viewfinder when framing hand-held with long lenses.

 

[Nod]

for the framing benefit IN LENS stabilisation offers over unstabilised or in body stabilisation. I tend to keep it turned on apart from when I'm using a tripod and have never noticed it causing any problems other than reducing battery charge life.