sony in camera image stablization: Hi all Can someone tell me if the on board image stabilization in the sony a77 is as good as the canon or nikon lenses with IS...

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Hi all Can someone tell me if the on board image stabilization in the sony a77 is as good as the canon or nikon lenses with IS

Wink44 Loc: Montgomery AL

According to photo magazine reports, Sony's system is as good or better than anyone else's. After all, Sony pioneered the technology o begin with. I have an a65, and it works very well.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

There are reasons why not to want in camera is, for example if the is on a Canon/Nikon lens goes you still have other lenses you can use whilst one goes for repair.

If an in camera IS goes you lose the camera.

That is what I also have a scanner, a separate printer and an all in one, if one scanner packs up I don't lose the lot to repair

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

While JR1 has a point, if you have 2 bodies, then the repair part isn't as big of a concern, and you're not paying for a separate IS system with every lens.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

heyrob wrote:

While JR1 has a point, if you have 2 bodies, then the repair part isn't as big of a concern, and you're not paying for a separate IS system with every lens.

I agree but few will have two bodies, however, it is rare for these things to go wrong these days anyway.

Also remember in camera is/os/vr has to be a jack of all trades incorporating gear that needs to be able to cope with lenses from the fisheye to the longest lens just like in camera focus motors, is/os/vr in lens is specifically designed just for that lens

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

JR1 wrote:

I agree but few will have two bodies, however, it is rare for these things to go wrong these days anyway.

Also remember in camera is/os/vr has to be a jack of all trades incorporating gear that needs to be able to cope with lenses from the fisheye to the longest lens just like in camera focus motors, is/os/vr in lens is specifically designed just for that lens

I'm with you on the multiple scanners & all in one thing too. :thumbup:

Gill747

"After all, Sony pioneered the stabilization technology o begin with"

Actually, it was Konica Minolta that pioneered the "Anti-shake" technology which Sony acquired after buying Konica Minolta's, SLR camera division.

I have Konica Minolta's 5 and 7D cameras and own a Sony A5. The stabilization feature works great on all my cameras

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I have 4 Sony cameras and never had a problem with in camera stabilization. Not having the stabilization in the lens doesn't mean the lens is going to be cheaper than Nikon or Canon, quality Sony lenses are just as expensive as the top two manufacturers.

boberic wrote:

Hi all Can someone tell me if the on board image stabilization in the sony a77 is as good as the canon or nikon lenses with IS

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Some time ago, someone posted a photo from a Sony camera that was having IS trouble. The result looked like it was from a mis-mounted lens hood.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Thanks for the info. While Sony lenses are just as expensive as Canon or Nikon.If you look at Sigma or Tamron the non is version is about half the price as the is cousin.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Thanks for the info. While Sony lenses are just as expensive as Canon or Nikon.If you look at Sigma or Tamron the non is version is about half the price as the is cousin.

Frapha Loc: Tulsa, Oklahoma

Sony recently pumped some serious money into Olympus and one of the return benefits they got was access to the Olympus 5-axis IS technology, which more advanced than what Sony already had. I believe Olympus is one (among others) mfgr who has always had IS in most of their DSLR lineup. Many "industry experts" claim that the Olympus IBIS system is the best in the industry.

This article is a good read about the different stabilization systems and their effectiveness -- http://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Tell you the truth Ive' like many have allways had a bias toward Canon or Nikon, I realize that this is kind of stupid. I need a 2nd level camera as money is tight or I would want a Canon 1dx or a Nikon d4. Maybe I should take a look at Olympus also Thanks.

Frapha Loc: Tulsa, Oklahoma

boberic wrote:

Tell you the truth Ive' like many have allways had a bias toward Canon or Nikon, I realize that this is kind of stupid. I need a 2nd level camera as money is tight or I would want a Canon 1dx or a Nikon d4. Maybe I should take a look at Olympus also Thanks.

Not that I want to change the topic or direction of this thread, but I'm a LONGTIME Oly user (35+ yrs) who is in process of jumping ship to Nikon. In short the reason is Oly's lack of high-ISO/low light performance and their seeming reluctance to stay current in the DSLR offerings. One downside to changing (as I see it) is having to pay for IS every time I buy a lens. :cry:

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Not all Nikons have IS technology, for instance the Nikon 24-70 f2.8, 16-35 and many more don't have IS technology. With the Sony, since it is built into the camera you don't need it in the lens, however it is there if you want it or you could switch it off on the body.

Frapha wrote:

Not that I want to change the topic or direction of this thread, but I'm a LONGTIME Oly user (35+ yrs) who is in process of jumping ship to Nikon. In short the reason is Oly's lack of high-ISO/low light performance and their seeming reluctance to stay current in the DSLR offerings. One downside to changing (as I see it) is having to pay for IS every time I buy a lens. :cry: