What are the disadvantages of Image Stabilizer?

[Liang]

I know Image Stabilizer can reduce camera shake.

What are the disadvantages of Image Stabilizer?
Will it degrade the image quality?

[neil_r]

It will not degrade image quality as it is a mechanical stabilisation i.e. the lens is physically stabilised, it is not some clever picture manipulation.

The only drawback I can see is a bit of battery drain.

And if you are worried you can turn it off :D

N

[tommykjensen]

The cost.

[Liang]

Thanks for the help!

[Zeke]

The cost.

Sad, but true.

[PacAce]

For one, it costs a LOT more than non-IS and, yes, it does degrade the image quality somewhat but I doubt it'll be something you'll be able to notice.

And one other thing. It's takes a second or two to kick in so you won't be taking those "quick, get a picture this split second" type of pictures. :mrgreen:

[neil_r]

yes, it does degrade the image quality somewhat

:?:

There is degradation in image quality in "low end" cameras and digital video cameras where they use digital image stabilisation, which crops the edges off of the image and uses these "spare" pixels to compensate when the camera moves.

However my understanding is that the canon IS lenses use gyros to eliminate shake and have no actual effect (in terms of manipulation) on the image.

N

[PacAce]

yes, it does degrade the image quality somewhat

:?:

N

Just my personal opinion based on MTFs I've seen of IS and non-IS lenses as well as comments and observations I've read from different sources of reviews.

BTW, those gyros you were talking about actually move optical elements that were added to the IS lenses which don't exist on the non-IS lenses.

[WestFalcon]

PacAce is correct...Image quality is affected slightly by IS. For proof, see photodo.com

[GPR1]

The other factor is weight. You have to lug around a lot more weight.

Greg

[Tom W]

The other factor is weight. You have to lug around a lot more weight.

Greg

Well, IS is lighter than most tripods. ;)

[CyberDyneSystems]

FYI The reason for the ever so slight decrease in image sharpness measured is not a result of a gyro per se..

The addition of IS to an existing lens design also requires the addition of additional lens elements (thse that get attached to the IS gyros)

Many assume,. and repeat far too often,. that the two Canon 70-200mm f/2.8's for example are identical except for the IS Gyros.. Well this is not at all true. The IS version has a redesigned elemnt set.. which includes more elements to accomodate the IS system.

Anytime you add glass the possibility of loseing some sharpness increases.

However.. the gain in "sharpnees" offered to hand holding etc.. offered by the IS lens usually FAR outweighs any possible perception of a loss in sharpness casued by the extra elements.

The fact is.. to get this magical higher quality image that the test reports illustrate.. you'd need to be using your NON-IS lens in a test facility where outside influences such as camera movement/shake/shutter vibration etc.. will not occur. :roll:

In other words.. it may be POSSIBLE for the Non -IS lens to give a slight increase in Image quality.. (an increase that is really not perceptible) but in our real world use the opposite will be true 99% of the time. The IS will give users the sharper images because of what the IS does of rus.

[Burninfilm2]

aside from the cost and additional battery drain, both already mentioned..there is none. It is a wonderful technology!!! Hope this helps..Bob <><

[cmM]

the image quality is the same!
There is difference, but it is not visible on digital. (only on fine grain film)

It's a lot of money, though.