Gyroscopic stabilization versus VR: Does anyone have any experience with using a hand held gyroscopic stabilizer with a still camera? These things have been used for as long as I can...

therwol Loc: USA

Does anyone have any experience with using a hand held gyroscopic stabilizer with a still camera? These things have been used for as long as I can remember with movie/video cameras to prevent shake. B&H sells several of these things for use with still cameras. They would add quite a bit of bulk to a camera, and some of them aren't cheap, but I just want to know how effective they are versus just using a lens with VR (or IS). Call it curiosity.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

therwol wrote:

Does anyone have any experience with using a hand held gyroscopic stabilizer with a still camera? These things have been used for as long as I can remember with movie/video cameras to prevent shake. B&H sells several of these things for use with still cameras. They would add quite a bit of bulk to a camera, and some of them aren't cheap, but I just want to know how effective they are versus just using a lens with VR (or IS). Call it curiosity.

In the mid sixties, as an employee of Aerojet and recently returned veteran, I was awarded third place in a company wide raffle, a navigational training flight out of Mather AFB. I immediately formed a bond with the sergeant assigned to the PIO who routinely photographed the students in training. After we were airborne, he handed me his F3 and asked me to take a picture of him. The plane was bouncing all over the place, making it hard to compose and focus. He took the camera back, attached a device a bit larger than the motor drive, handed the camera back to me and flipped a switch on the box. The camera then held me while I easily focused, composed and ran off 5-10 shots. Now I'm sure that gyro was more high tech than anything of its time, but I wouldn't even try to compare it to what's commercially available in this era. I've never shot with anything like it before or since. I do know, however, that some vibration reduction systems give me the same feeling, allowing me to shoot a 300mm at 1/60 of a second.

therwol Loc: USA

BHC wrote:

In the mid sixties, as an employee of Aerojet and ... (show quote)

These devices have gotten smaller, and you can hold one with a pistol grip, the camera being mounted on top. Gyroscopes are not high tech, but they're effective. As someone who worked for Aerojet, you should know that gyroscopes helped stabilize and guide rockets to their destinations with great precision. VR is obviously newer technology, but is it more effective? That's what I wonder. I could possibly see using one of these things in low light situations with lenses that don't have VR. I've had problems with that in the past, cranking up the ISO to high noise levels to get pictures when I didn't have a support for the camera.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

VR is excellent for cancelling very small lens movements, where as a gyroscope mount is most effective with larger deviations while moving over rough ground.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Nikonian72 wrote:

VR is excellent for cancelling very small lens movements, where as a gyroscope mount is most effective with larger deviations while moving over rough ground.

Concur. The new ones might be a different design but the ones we used in the 90s were designed to smooth the jerky motion when hand holding movie/video cameras-- and then came that nauseating trend where movies were intentlionally made with jerky movements.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Nikonian72 wrote:

VR is excellent for cancelling very small lens movements, where as a gyroscope mount is most effective with larger deviations while moving over rough ground.

Ah, a reasonable and succinct explanation; thank you.

therwol Loc: USA

Nikonian72 wrote:

VR is excellent for cancelling very small lens movements, where as a gyroscope mount is most effective with larger deviations while moving over rough ground.

Understood. I would think that putting the camera on a relatively stable platform that resists movement might also benefit taking stills at slow shutter speeds, but the question in my mind is how much, and at what expense, certainly weight and bulk. I'm not going to run out and buy one of these things to find out. It could be a huge waste of money if using one is as inconvenient as I think it would be. I was just wondering the outcome of using one of stabilizers by someone who has actually put a still camera on one.

Thanks.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

therwol wrote:

Does anyone have any experience with using a hand held gyroscopic stabilizer with a still camera? These things have been used for as long as I can remember with movie/video cameras to prevent shake. B&H sells several of these things for use with still cameras. They would add quite a bit of bulk to a camera, and some of them aren't cheap, but I just want to know how effective they are versus just using a lens with VR (or IS). Call it curiosity.

I read an article about one yesterday, and it was definitely big and heavy. The operator wore it as a backpack! A bracket came around front to hold the camera. Then he climbed into a helicopter, so it's not for the average shooter. Definitely extreme.

cthahn

Forget it.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

You can be assured that modern VR or IS works very well when incorporated into the lens design. I have never used nor I will ever use a gyroscope especially when you are saying it adds bulk to the lens.
The technology of VR lenses is so precise that many of the modern lenses with that technology can suppress hand movement for up to 4 stops of light.
I am sure you do not want to invest on one of those.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Nikon's new P lenses come in VR and non-VR versions. They charge $50 more for the VR version, suggesting their cost for the VR is much less than that. You probably can get a lot of VR lenses for the cost of one gyro kit.

I suspect a good gyro kit might be more effective, though. It sould be interesting to see some test data.

HarryBinNC Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns, No.Carolina, USA

Check this out - and watch the video embedded in the page - pretty amazing:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1315017-REG/ikan_ms_pro_beholder_3_axis_gimbal.html

And this: http://www.ken-lab.com/

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

therwol wrote:

Does anyone have any experience with using a hand held gyroscopic stabilizer with a still camera? These things have been used for as long as I can remember with movie/video cameras to prevent shake. B&H sells several of these things for use with still cameras. They would add quite a bit of bulk to a camera, and some of them aren't cheap, but I just want to know how effective they are versus just using a lens with VR (or IS). Call it curiosity.

Gyroscopes alone wouldn't work very well. You also need to point easily, accurately, and rapidly--something that is difficult to do with spinning masses powerful (heavy/high spin rate) enough to stabilize the camera. One solution would be to spin three orthogonal rotating masses up to a rate from which they could be further spun up or spun down. Changing the rate of spin would cause the camera to rotate for pointing purposes. Now all you have to do is add a computer and sensors (gyroscopes) to enable command of the spinning masses and an electrical power supply; you also need a device to send commands to the computer; and you need to isolate the camera from any vibration from the spinning masses. This type of system is how some earth satellites maintain or change their orientation.

Much simpler to put accelerometers and transducers on lens elements. And their weights are probably 1/1000 the weight of the lens.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Do a search on Amazon and you will find many gyro stabilizers, some at low prices. You'll also get a zillion quad copters. Which made me suspect why the prices have plummeted. All drones have them!

https://www.amazon.com/Fantaseal-Inertia-Stabilizer-Control-Session/dp/B01N4IPH1G/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1489850984&sr=8-4&keywords=Gyro+Camera+stabilizers

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I suspect that camera VR technology is addressing a different sort of motion that gyroscopic devices were designed for. I think Niconian72 addressed this belief above.