Get DSLR with Integrated Vibration Reduction or Vibration Reduction on the Lens?
By sdas86
@sdas86 (6076)
Malaysia
December 8, 2008 7:12am CST
Hi,
I am planning to buy a DSLR but I do not know whether integrated vibration reduction is better or vibration reduction on lenses is better.
[i]I know that Sony Alpha Series has integrated steady shot in DSLR body. This means that all types of lenses can be use to take steady photos.
For Nikon, I found that it doesn't include vibration reduction on the body of their DSLR. They only have vibration reduction on lenses. For the vibration reduction lenses, it will be more expensive. [/i]
So, which type of vibration reduction is better? Vibration reduction in the DSLR body or vibration reduction on the lenses?
1 person likes this
2 responses
@ratyz5 (7808)
• Philippines
9 Dec 08
Well, you said it yourself, it would be more expensive if you would purchase lenses with vibration reduction compared to a body that already has vibration reduction and could accommodate a variety of lenses. That's just on being practical on expenses but, if vibration reduction on lenses grants you better photos, and your really into that convenience, you might as well have enough money to purchase lenses that have vibration reduction.
@trickiwoo (2702)
• United States
8 Dec 08
I have very little experience with either. However, I did find an interesting forum discussion on Photo.net You can read it here: http://photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00OlUO
Basically what I'm understanding is that quality wise there isn't much difference at all.
I personally don't use either, and I haven't had any problems at all with camera shake. In good lighting situations, I can use a 300mm lens handheld and have very crisp, clear images. In situations with less lighting, I just use a tripod.
