[isusdfr]

Hi i have just purchased a k5 and also a sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Both have image stabilisation built in, i was wondering which one works better, which one should i use and which one i should turn off?

thanks

[Adam]

I would just stick to the in-camera stabilization, as it uses less power and personally I don't like when the VF is stabilized. There are threads that discuss the pros and cons of each system, though, so you should read those before making your final pick.

Generally speaking, they are both just as good, but some find in-lens stabilization to be more effective at longer focal lengths.

[Ex Finn.]

Hi i have just purchased a k5 and also a sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Both have image stabilisation built in, i was wondering which one works better, which one should i use and which one i should turn off?

thanks

Try each one and make up your own mind, then share results.
Cheers.

[Chaos_Realm]

Some find in-lens stabilization to be more effective at longer focal lengths.

It probably depends on the lens to an extent. But my experience anything over 300mm I stick to OS, but anything up to 300mm i find there to be little or no difference.

[Zafar Iqbal]

My Sigma 17-50 f2.8 is the only lens with OS and I always have to take an extra step or twoif I want to use the OS. I prefer to just go with the cam's built in SR.

[lister6520]

My only lens with built in stabilisation is a Sigma 150-500.


I find that the in body stabilisation works better in these situations:



For taking steady shots of stationary subjects at reasonable shutter speeds (the 1.5/F rule) then the in lens stabilisation seems to be more accurate and give a sharper image.


For other situations the in body stabilisation seems to work better:

- longish exposures of about one fifth to one hundredth of a second - although it is very difficult to get a stable shot at such low speeds I find that with the in body stabilisation I have a far better chance of getting a reasonably good shot than the lens stabilisation


- moving subjects where you have to follow the subject, such as for instance a flying bird or a moving car. The SIgma stabilisation doesn't seem to cope very well with movement. It is probably designed for shooting stationary subjects. It does have a setting which is supposedly for panning shots but all it does is to disable horizontal stabilisation entirely and stabilise only in the vertical direction.

The Pentax in body stabiliser seems to be a bit more clever and 'knows' that you are panning and adapts accordingly. You can see this from the stabilisation icon in the VF. If you shake the camera the icons shows that it has lost stabilisation. However if you pan smoothly the stabilisation indicator will initially go off but then will come on again while you are still moving, provided that you are panning at an approximately constant speed. The stabiliser will do its bit to improve your almost constant speed pan.


I have used the in body stabiliser very succesfully to shoot birds in flight with slow speeds at long focal lengths whereas with the in lens stabiliser I hardly got any sharp photos.

My guess though is that different lenses will have different stabilisation systems so what is valid for my SIgma is not necessarily so for other lenses.

[abmj]

Many of the tests suggest that Sigma in-lens stabilization provides an extra 1/2 stop or so over the Pentax in-camera system. The problem I have when using my Sigma 17-70 is occasionally forgetting to turn the in-camera system back on when I switch back to a Pentax lens. After leaving it turned off a few times, I just decided to forego that 1/2 stop and use the in-camera system all the time.

[HSV]

A newbie question...and I don't have an OS lens, it's just curiosity. Is it possible to use both OS and SR at the time? What would happen? Is it actually beneficial or it is a detriment to have them both on?

[jatrax]

A newbie question...and I don't have an OS lens, it's just curiosity. Is it possible to use both OS and SR at the time? What would happen? Is it actually beneficial or it is a detriment to have them both on?

I certainly don't KNOW what would happen but I would think that in the best case there would be no ill affects and you would just use twice as much battery power. Logic (or common sense take your pick) would seem to indicate that you would NOT get the best case and there would be ill affects. I suspect the systems would 'fight' each other and you would end up with blurred images. But that's just my opinion. Curious to hear from someone who has tried this.

[Chaos_Realm]

A newbie question...and I don't have an OS lens, it's just curiosity. Is it possible to use both OS and SR at the time? What would happen? Is it actually beneficial or it is a detriment to have them both on?

In answer to your question, yes you can. Do you want to? No!
If the lens is compensating for shake, it will be moving the image that is projected on the sensor to compensate for shake. If the sensor is also moving so compensate shake you can see the lens, which assumes the sensor is in a fixed place is not going to work so well once the sensor is moving. And the sensor will be trying to compensate for the apparent movement of the image which is caused by the lens. Basically it will be creating shake where it is not actually even there.

If Pentax and sigma were to design the system to work together there is a possibility of accommodating heavier shake. But this probably will never happen.

[HSV]

Well, I had the fantasy that the OS and SR would somehow stack up...getting like 6 stops of shake SR, so we can shoot at shoot at ISO 80 all the time. I guess I was dreaming too much!

[Into The Lens]

I read somewhere it's better to turn off the OS (in the K5) when shooting at higher speeds (can't remember if it's above 1/125 or 1/250...). Can anyone explain why? Is it bad for the camera or just for the IQ? Can the K-5 be set so that it shuts off the OS automatically if the speed goes above the point where OS is better to be set to OFF or do I have to remember doing so manually each time (what a drag!).
The reason I'm asking is that I shoot at a lot of indoor low light concerts where I try not to go under 1/125 to freeze my subjects but sometimes I don't have a choice to shoot at 1/60 or even 1/30 with the OS on. So depending on light, I constantly have to adjust my speed, thus turning the OS on/off is not practical. So I was wondering if it was bad to always leave the OS on, even at higher speeds.
Thanks,
Ben

[jatrax]

I read somewhere it's better to turn off the OS (in the K5) when shooting at higher speeds

I have never heard that, can you link to the source? AFAIK the only time to turn off the SR feature is when the camera is on a tripod.

[abmj]

I read somewhere it's better to turn off the OS (in the K5) when shooting at higher speeds ...

Likewise, I've never heard anything like this. Can you cite a reputable source?

I keep the SR on at all times except on a tripod - and sometimes even then.

[Into The Lens]

Okay, here... I found it!! (I read so many articles and threads here and there about the K-5 I couldn't remember exactly where I read this). Since I did not read this on the internet I can't provide you with a link. I read it in a book written by a french author/photograph named Jean-Marie Sepulchre. The name of the book is "Obtenez le meilleur du Pentax K-5" which translate to "Get the most out of your K-5". On page 7, the author says it's best to deactivate the OS when the speed is sufficient because the OS is useless and can slow down the shooting and can alter the image quality because of the micro-vibrations of the sensor. He then goes on saying the operating manual (page 139 - the french copy I presume) states the OS should be turned off when doing macro. I checked in the French and English manual (I also downloaded the French version of the operating manual from Pentax France) and I haven't found this information in neither manual. The book was written in December 2010 and released in February 2011. Maybe the correction was made in the operation manual after the book was written. Anyways, it's not that important I guess. I was more curious because I found this strange and wanted to find out more about the OS. I can scan the page of the book if you want to read it?