New answers tagged image-stabilization
3
In my opinion, the EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 lenses are some of the very few lenses in Canon's current lineup which should be avoided (the others are the unstabilized 18-55 lenses, because the price premium for the stabilized version is so small). As can be seen from this review, it's not a good lens; all that applies to both the USM and non-USM variants. You'll ...
2
1) Yes, the price difference is because of image stabilization. It is not an unreasonable price difference for IS vs non-IS because of the cost and complexity added by the IS mechanism. The optics quality between the older 75-300 and the newer 70-300 is also significant.
2) Yes, it's hugely significant, particularly on the longer focal lengths. You can ...
0
Preliminary note: I wanted to add a comment to the chosen answer, but couldn't add a comment, so I add it as an answer - I'm happy if anybody can move it to the comments.
I have tried the auto-align feature of hugin (via the align_image_stack command). I used it for a time-lapse sequence and it does not work well (probably, because there is too much ...
1
A good rule of thumb is to never shoot slower than your focal length. For example, if you're shooting at 24mm don't go below 1/30 (1/20 being too slow). If you're on a 200mm, try not to shoot below 1/250. This is of course a general statement and does not take into account skill, balance, weight of camera, hand positioning or caffeine intake ;)
This info ...
2
They can all be decent guidelines. In general, ignoring the focal length doesn't make a lot of sense though since it is always going to magnify shake. A lot of other factors come in to play though and these are just rules of thumb. If you have any kind of image stabilization it will throw these off.
Also, some people are much more steady than others. ...
Top 50 recent answers are included
