Does lens stabilization affect image quality?

[Deliberate1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"Leica rate their system to work at an effective 3 stops, which is pretty much the industry standard but I’d advise against using it for general use as the system, which handy in certain situations, can reduce image quality, ever so slightly."

 

This comment is pulled from a very comprehensive review published by Kristian Dowling. He does not provide a technical explanation nor have I ever read that this feature on other cameras degrades image quality. For me, as for many, hand holding in tough situations is unavoidable and a reason to splurge for a camera that provides a technological assist. But not at the cost of image quality, however it may be affected. Your thoughts on the claim?

Many thanks.

[pico]

Some cameras emphasize that  stabilization should be turned off when on a tripod or other firming device (such as a sandbag) otherwise the system 'hunts' for something to do and defeats its purpose.

.

[mjh]

The image stabiliser is actually rated at 3.5 f-stops (CIPA standard) and in my experience it works really well. It should be turned off when shooting from a tripod, as any image stabiliser should, but even with a tripod I would not expect issues other than with long exposure times.

Edited October 21, 2015 by mjh

[Erik Gunst Lund]

Since the image is actuaaly shiftet as the camera moves, unintensional you can get strange looking things happening in for instance the background like 'double lines' and/or funny looking bokeh

[pico]

Since the image is actuaaly shiftet as the camera moves, unintensional you can get strange looking things happening in for instance the background like 'double lines' and/or funny looking bokeh

We get funny looking bokeh including 'double lines' in some modern, perfect lenses.

 

I am interested to see outlandish outcomes from image stabilization. It could add to our photographic vocabulary, for better or worse.

 

Are there examples we can view?

.

[John Black]

With 10 plus years of using Canon IS lenses and 100,000's of images, I cannot think of a single instance where Canon's IS introduced an optical artifact.  I guess anything is possible, but it would have to be some really extraordinary circumstances.

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Canon’s image stabiliser can be the cause of blurred images when it is inadvertantly left switched on although the camera is mounted on a tripod, but that is the only kind of artifacts I have observed.

[algrove]

One or two reviewers mentioned leaving it on can cause noise in images. Read the reviews carefully.

[Echo63]

One or two reviewers mentioned leaving it on can cause noise in images. Read the reviews carefully.

I would love to read the theory behind that !

 

 

 

Yes - if the IS doesnt correct the vibration/movement perfectly it will soften the image slightly.

But if you turn it off, the same vibration/movement it couldnt correct would affect the image worse (in most cases, by either motion blurring, or noise from requiring the use of a higher ISO to get the same "vibration/movement stopping" effect)

 

Some Canon lenses have trouble with tripods, and it does affect IQ - turning the IS off on a tripod fixes it though

 

 

IS only has an effect on the camera movement though, it doesnt stop moving things in your frame from blurring (i know this is stating the obvious, but you would be surprised at how often people would complain their IS wasnt working properly because people moving in the frame were blurry, back when i worked as a camera service tech)

Edited October 23, 2015 by Echo63

[frame-it]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

This shouldn’t bother Leica M users, as it will always exhibit parallax shift, hiding or revealing objects. 

[frame-it]

3 hours ago, jaapv said:

This shouldn’t bother Leica M users, as it will always exhibit parallax shift, hiding or revealing objects. 

and also because M's don't have OIS or IBIS

[jaapv]

IBIS and OIS are not unique in producing parallax perspective shift, which this diagram illustrates with IBIS/OIS. The cause is a shift of the optical axis away from the centre of the image.  The M has it built in.
It has nothing to do with less image quality, however.