Optical stabilization can be confusing to some new photographers. Image stabilization systems are integrated into the optical structure of the lens or onto the sensor in the camera itself. Many forms of stabilization exist. Manufacturers give them all different names, but the performance and functionality are pretty much the same across the board. Below is a list of the most commonly known manufacturers' image stabilization systems:
- Vibration Reduction (VR) – Nikon
- Image Stabilization (IS) – Canon
- In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) – Olympus
- Optical SteadyShot (OSS) – Sony Cyber-Shot
- MegaOIS – Panasonic and Leica
- Super Steady Shot (SSS) – Sony
- Optical Stabilization (OS) – Sigma
- Vibration Compensation (VC) – Tamron
- Shake Reduction (SR) – Pentax
Before delving into stabilization, I will address one common misconception. Image stabilization does not freeze fast-moving objects at lower shutter speeds. Stabilization works for still objects, and helps you achieve a properly exposed shot in low-light situations. The reason it does not work for objects in motion is that to freeze moving objects you must shoot at a high shutter speed. Shooting at high shutter speeds defeats the purpose of the stabilization.
Shutter speed is what controls the relative sharpness of your photos. Shooting below the recommended shutter speed for your focal length will introduce motion blur. Some photographers deliberately shoot at a lower shutter speed for this effect but, for the most part, setting your shutter speed equal to or greater than your current focal length is the rule of thumb. While you can expect this rule to yield the results you want, setting your shutter speed exactly equal to your focal length may not be enough to correctly capture a sharp, exposed image.
Photographers have many tricks to help capture sharp images in low-light conditions. Sometimes, it's how you hold your camera, positioning of your arms, or even using a table or structure to balance or stabilize your camera. While all of these options are fine, adding stabilization into the mix can make your photos sharper than if you were to not use it. Combining these tricks, along with the stabilization system, will always yield better results.
There are many advantages and disadvantages to both in-camera and lens stabilization. Stabilization is a great feature to have when shooting while moving, or in lower light. Zooms and primes may have this feature, but you won't find it on wide-angle lenses. Stabilization isn't commonly available on every lens a company makes. There are a few reasons why companies omit this feature on some of the lenses they sell. The wider angle you have on a lens, the easier it is to naturally keep a steady, sharp shot at that focal length. Wider focal lengths between 14-24mm will usually not have stabilization. The focal length is so wide, any vibrations will not be noticed when shooting at 1/60th of a second.
Telephoto lenses usually incorporate a form of stabilization. Over the years, companies have realized how difficult it is to hold a lens while zooming out to the longest focal length. Creating sharp images can be harder if you are in a scenario that has less than ideal lighting, forcing you to zoom in close to your subject.
Lens and
in-camera-based stabilization are the two versions most commonly used. Optically stabilized lenses use a floating element, which is mounted onto a special device to counteract camera shake. This is electronically controlled, and the optics is shifted opposite to the camera movement. The in-camera system basically works the same way but, instead of moving optics, the sensor itself moves to compensate for these vibrations. This type of system is more effective in controlling camera shake. There are different modes to which you can set your lens, depending on the conditions in which you are shooting. Nikon offers a standard mode and an active mode. The active mode is used for situations where the photographer is shooting from a moving vehicle.
For this example, we will use a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II lens. Keeping the rule of matching your shutter speed to your focal length, if I were to shoot the longest range for this lens (200mm), my shutter speed would need to be at least 1/200th of a second. Using those tricks to help alleviate motion blur, and also keeping your elbows in or leaning against a wall, may not be enough. Having the lens stabilization provides me the extra performance I need when those tricks aren't available to me. The overall advantage of this type of system is that it provides a smoother performance when shooting longer focal lengths.
Stabilization is more effective on longer telephoto focal lengths. The main reason optical stabilization is preferred over in-camera stabilization is because it produces vastly cleaner results in these longer focal lengths. It's known that long lenses require much bigger sensor movements, which aren't possible with in-camera stabilization. Technology can change (and who knows what they'll come out with in the future), but using optical stabilization is a common, dependable method, which will provide you with smooth, reliable results for that particular focal length.
On lenses that support this feature, some may come with different modes. They may be labeled differently, but there are two modes that are usually on all stabilized lenses. Each manufacturer labels them differently, but the results are the same. Normal for Nikon or stabilization mode 1 for Canon can be used for most scenes. Using this mode can greatly reduce blurry images while you are hand holding your camera. If you are panning, this is also a mode you'd want to use, since it will compensate for horizontal movements. Camera shake is usually differentiated from movement that may be applied when changing your composition. Active mode for Nikon or stabilization mode 2 for Canon compensates strictly for when you're shooting from a moving vehicle or panning up and down. Using both modes correctly can greatly enhance your ability to capture images in all situations.
Some disadvantages of a lens-based system are reduced availability, higher cost, degradation of bokeh, new advancements in lens design and functionality, and loud noise from the stabilization system.
While most companies like Nikon and Canon have been updating their older lenses to support stabilization, many other manufacturers' lenses continue to lack this feature. This is why it's very important to choose wisely before investing in any company. Each manufacturer has something unique to their product line. This even includes the stabilization system they use.
Another bothersome factor of lens-based systems is the higher cost associated with these stabilized lenses. Many companies will charge a premium for lenses that have a stabilized system built in.
As discussed earlier, bokeh is something we love as photographers, but some may not realize that these optical stabilization systems affect the quality of bokeh. Since light passes through the lens, the system shifts the light from its original optical path, and this is what can negatively affect lens bokeh.
As technology changes new advancements for stabilization will change, thus making your lens less effective compared to the newer version. While this isn't a big deal for many, to benefit from these advancements you have to replace your entire lens. Many professionals will deliberate at length before replacing their old lens, but it's something to be aware of if you like to have the best in stabilization.
The sound that the system makes may be loud in quiet situations, or if you are recording video. This high-pitched sound can be picked up in video mode and can be disruptive to people around you when you're shooting.
In-camera stabilization gives you the freedom to use any lens the company makes while the camera stabilizes your shot. This is the biggest advantage to the in-camera system. You'll never have to worry about getting a lens without stabilization; all lenses you buy will benefit from the same stabilized system within the camera.
The cost for the lenses you'd pair with an in-camera stabilization system is also reduced, since the companies do not have to include the more costly optical stabilization in the lens itself. It's a one-time purchase, thus making all of the lenses in your bag superior and increasingly useful.
Since you will also not require lenses with an image stabilization mechanism inside, all of your lenses will be much smaller and lighter to carry around. The lack of the lens stabilization system will also make the lenses less fragile, since it's one less component that can fail.
If you go the lens stabilization route instead of camera body, when new advancements emerge you'll only have to upgrade the camera body itself. This normally isn't an issue, as you'll most likely upgrade your body before upgrading your lenses.
Having image stabilization on the sensor will also negate any adverse effects that might have impacted bokeh. Since the optics do not alter the light traveling through the lens, the bokeh will remain unaffected by this system. The lenses are also going to be much quieter, since the only motor you'll hear is the focusing motor. This has its advantages for recording video on your DSLR.
The downside to sensor-based stabilization is that it tends to be less effective in smoothing out the jarring action and bumps when taking photos at longer focal lengths. The longer the focal length, the more the sensor has to move to compensate for shake. Because of limited space, the sensor-stabilized systems are not as effective as optically stabilized systems. Another downside is poor performance with the auto-focus and metering systems. Using a sensor-based stabilization system, AF performance and metering in low-light situations is decreased. Since the image coming out of the lens onto the sensor has not been stabilized, the metering and AF system sensors also receive a shaky image. With advancements in technology, this may not be a big issue, but usually optical stabilization will outperform in this area over sensor-based systems.
Regardless of which company makes your lens, they all work pretty much the same way. The only difference is that some stabilization systems are more effective when stopped down. This means you could still achieve a sharp image of a non-moving subject at 1/20th of a second while another lens may be able to get a sharp shot at 1/10th of a second. These types of specifications are important if your photography requires image stabilization.
Many photographers use their DSLR cameras for dual purposes. Using these cameras for video provides amazing quality, with cinematic results. Using a stabilized lens for video can dramatically help you achieve a smoother, shake-free look in your final product. This may be a requirement for videographers when shooting with a handheld device. Keep in mind that stabilized lenses offer some assistance, but using additional hardware, like gimbals, can greatly improve your video stability. Some VR lenses employ different stabilization modes for the lenses themselves. For example, Nikon's lenses that use VR have a switch on the side of the lens for normal or active mode. You should make sure you are selecting the correct mode for the scene you are shooting.
Be careful not to leave the image stabilization on forever. This system is designed to compensate for shaking under slower shutter speeds. If you shoot in daylight or in areas that require a faster shutter speed, you should turn off lens-based image stabilization. For example, some lenses over 1/500th of a second are sharper with the stabilization turned off. Companies also recommend that the image stabilization should be turned off if you are shooting on a tripod. Understanding how the system works can greatly increase your opportunity to get amazing images or video every time you shoot.
Generally, I prefer optical stabilization, regardless of manufacturer. This doesn't mean sensor-based stabilization is bad or something that should be ignored, it means that it's not suited for the work I do. When shooting photography, I stand by the rule of thumb that glass is everything. Having the best optics with image stabilization is a wonderful duo. It provides me the flexibility to think about what I'm shooting, rather than worrying about what the equipment might do. I need to have dependable and repeatable results. Using lens-based stabilization provides that dependability I desperately need from my equipment.
