Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Those that don't shoot with the Pen-F, EM10ii, EM5ii, EM1, or the EM1ii won't understand how good IS can be...but for those of us that do we just smile all day long.

lwiley Loc: Los Banos, CA, USA

If I'm not mistaken IS (image stabilization) is a product of the camera image sensor diodes software not the lense. I do not remember IS ever being part the camera systems in analog cameras.

moonhawk Loc: Land of Enchantment

Oh, my Nikons are no slouch--the 200-500 has excellent VR. But, yeah, the E-M1 mkII rules.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

There are gyro stabilized platforms and gyro controlled platforms for analogue gear but they are rare.
Current stabilization occurs in lens, in body, or sometimes both and
effects anything from 1 axis to 5 axis of rotation.
Stabilization by software manipulation of the sensor data is rare but with the interest in
"in camera stacking" it is likely to become more available.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Ask Google or Siri. Maybe they know exactly how they do it. I'm sure it's done in a lab though. They can't just make shit up.

dmsM43

I remember seeing a test of IS in dpreview. I believe that they had several people try handheld shots at different focal lengths, and then averaged the results. With my Olympus E-M1 which has IBIS, I've been able to get good results handheld with my 7-14mm Panasonic wide angle at 1 second set at 7mm. You can handhold longer with wide angle lenses than with telephotos. My best result with the E-M1 with a 400mm handheld was 1/15 second, which isn't bad for an old guy at 70+. Bear in mind that these are not consistent results, usually I take two or three shots to get one that is sharp.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

duplicate... please delete

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

After switching to Canon many years ago and having used various Image Stabilized lenses for fifteen years, all I can say is that I am able to get a lot more sharp shots hand held at shutter speeds that I would have had to avoid without IS. I find IS particularly helpful with telephotos... but a lot less important with wide angle lenses and nearly useless for high magnification macro work. Small sensor cameras are more susceptible to shake blur than large sensor... But larger mirrors and shutters make for more internal vibration, which stabilization also can help counteract. Higher and higher resolution cameras are more susceptible to shake blur, too... but higher usable ISOs help to offset that to some extent.

Exactly how many stops worth is gonna vary depending a lot upon the user, too. Different people are better or worse at holding their camera steady, though most can improve with practice and by using tried-and-true techniques. With reasonable care I could get a fairly high percentage of sharp shots hand holding a 200mm lens (on full frame/35mm film) down to about 1/125 without stabilization... With it I can get pretty darned good results at 1/30 or even 1/15.

But image stabilization cannot help freeze subject movement or do anything to prevent the blur it can produce at slower shutter speeds.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Thanks everybody for the replies.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

IS is Canon's description of stabilization it uses in it's lenses and has been around for a long time, I've used it in the good old film days and do so now (only todays version of IS is vastly improved). I also used a gyro based stabilizer (I usually used for movie shooting) for still sometimes as well(that was in the very early 80's)!

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

The stabilization is done by gyroscopes. Gyros retain their positions once they are spun up. The surface of the earth is moving at ~1000 mph, but not in a linear motion, but in a circular motion. As the earth turns, the earth changes its position relative to the locked in position of the gyro. This is what limits the total possible stabilization to 6.5 stops. The only way to compensate more is to use GPS and computing power to compansate for the seven (?) gyroscopes "movements" relative to the earth. That kind of GPS and computing power in the size of something the size of even a full frame camera size does not exist yet and is not even close to existing yet. Then it just becomes a matter of determining the limits of the gyros, the limits of the pizo electric devices, and comparing that to what the vibrations are involved in the real world. No uncertain judgement by people, just number crunching by computers to determine what is the maximum number of stops that can be stabilized.