Image stabilizer type. Long exposure shooting

We tell simple language about optical stabilization in smartphones.

Why is image stabilization so important in modern smartphones? What is this anyway? What is it for? How does optical stabilization work? Let's figure it out.

Image stabilization (OIS) is a special technology that is actively used during photo and video shooting. It prevents blurring of the image, makes it clearer and smoother. In a sense, it replaces a tripod. Optical stabilization helps when shooting in hectic conditions. If your gadget gets shaky while taking a photo, stabilization can help deal with this problem.

How does optical stabilization work?

With the help of a special stabilizer sensor, the camera detects the movement of the smartphone and directs its lenses in the opposite direction. Lenses can move from side to side or up and down. If the subject is moving too fast, no amount of stabilization will help to sharpen the image. Usually, she can only cope with minor fluctuations, such as hand shake. Especially the stabilization will be noticeable when filming on the go - the recorded video will practically not twitch, everything will be smooth, see one of the examples.

Each company has different technology Optical Image Stabilizer (OIS), but in general they are all similar. The Optical Stabilizer is a pretty useful option for those who often use the camera.

), including focus.

But still, why can photos be blurry sometimes? What else needs to be considered in the process of photographing to prevent this from happening?

Stabilizer operation in the camera

Today we will deal with the concept of image stabilizer in SLR cameras... So what is it and why is it needed?

The fact is that the lens and the camera body itself contain a set of complex internal mechanisms. Among them there are sensitive sensors that are responsible precisely for the perception of camera movement in different directions and at different speeds. That is, the camera processor initially takes into account the possibility of a certain error in image acquisition.

With the help of a special device that counteracts this movement, we see the projected image on the screen clearly, without perceptible blurring.

Of course, at certain points a stabilizer is needed in the camera; without it, the photo will turn out to be of much worse quality than with it. This applies even to cheap "soap dishes". But built-in stabilization has its limits. Let's take a closer look at everything.

When stabilization is needed:

1. Hand shake and unstable position of the photographer.
2. Strong winds, motion pictures or moving objects.
3. Long focus lenses. A long focal length can give a significant "shake", which will certainly be reflected in the photo.
4. Slow shutter speed required for special visual effects in a shot or in low light. As the shutter time increases and eventually the frame is taken, the likelihood that the camera will wiggle increases accordingly.

Image destabilization invariably results in a blurry, unclear picture. These problems can be solved in some cases. So, problem number 1 and partially number 2 can be solved using a tripod when shooting, or you need to take a more stable position with support on both legs.

It is very useful to train yourself not to move, to freeze when photographing. Often beginners have difficulties with this, but the camera needs time to take a frame, and in this regard, unnecessary movements are useless.

To avoid camera shake when working with long focal lengths, as an option, you can get closer, if shooting conditions allow, then you do not have to twist the camera's zoom.

If you have a crop, but you need to multiply the number by the value (1.6 for Canon and 1.5 for Nikon). This gives us 1/80 and 1/75, respectively. Thus, it is not recommended to shoot below these limits in order to avoid shaking. Try to follow the rule, although it cannot be an absolute guarantor of getting a sharp shot.

When there is strong external vibration (shooting while running or in a moving car, open space in very windy weather, etc.) even a good stabilizer is unlikely to save you - just keep this in mind when shooting.

Stabilization in cameras of different models

Where to find a stabilizer in cameras? The switch is usually located on the side of the lens itself, next to the autofocus. And with him everything is simple - incl. and off.

Sometimes, however, some cameras have active and normal stabilizer modes. The first should be turned on with large fluctuations in technology, and the second during normal quiet shooting. Their differences lie in the frequencies and amplitudes of camera movement that they can suppress.

Regardless of the camera, stabilizers have one principle - to make sharp image, to prevent the appearance of smears and indistinctness. The only thing is that its names can be different: for example, in Canon cameras the stabilization button is called Image Stabilization, in Nikon - Vibration Reduction. The abbreviations you'll find on your cameras are IS and VR, respectively.

This is the same with the stabilizer in the lens, but there are other options that have their merits. Manufacturers of some cameras (for example, Olympus, Sony, Nikon, Canon) have made a stabilizer built into the camera's matrix itself.

We can say that stabilization in the lens is convenient, but on the other hand ... what if you come across optics without a stabilizer and there won't be one in the sensor itself?

Most likely, with such camera parameters, you will win at its lower price, but you will lose in quality. Thus, the stabilizer in the matrix is ​​more reliable, it allows you to think less about whether or not a particular lens has this function.

For example, this stabilizer in Nikon cameras is called “noise reduction” and is set in the menu.

External stabilizer

What can come out additional tool to stabilize the camera? Of course it is. Here we have a wide variety of choices, it can be either a trinog or a monopod. A few words about tripod requirements.

• A heavy tripod made of metal rather than plastic will be more expensive and harder to carry due to its weight, but more stable. This is a definite plus for stabilization.
• The higher you extend the tripod, the more the possibility of camera shake becomes.
• Legs: They should fit well.

Any camera weights are, in fact, do-it-yourself stabilizers. Here, craftsmen offer many options, but the main thing is good stability on the ground and the immobility of the entire structure, achieved due to its weight.

If you are interested in the information and you are ready to go further in teaching photography. If you want to learn how to photograph and receive beautiful pictures, then today it became possible. I offer you, as a guide, a video course “ My first MIRROR". This is a series of video tutorials to help you understand the basic and important points obtaining high-quality photographs.

My first MIRROR- for admirers of the CANON SLR camera.

DSLR for Beginner 2.0- for fans of the NIKON SLR camera.

That's all for today. I look forward to seeing you on my blog again, goodbye and see you soon!

P.S. Do not forget to subscribe to news and invite your friends and acquaintances and share in social networks, not yet canceled.

All the best to you, Timur Mustaev.

© 2014 site

The Optical Image Stabilizer is a device designed to mechanically compensate for camera shake that occurs when shooting handheld and thereby reduce shake.

The benefits of optical image stabilization are obvious: the stabilizer allows you to shoot handheld in low light conditions using relatively slow shutter speeds, and still get sharp pictures. In other words, in certain borderline situations, the stabilizer is quite capable of replacing a tripod for the photographer.

However, optical stabilization has its own dark side, about the existence of which manufacturers of photographic equipment, as a rule, prefer to remain silent. But the fact remains: with inept use, the optical stabilizer can, depending on the circumstances, both improve and deteriorate the technical quality of your images. And if the advantages of optical image stabilization are well known to everyone thanks to advertising, then photographers have to learn about its not so obvious shortcomings from their own experience, which often leads to disappointment in their own photographic capabilities.

To save you both frustration and dangerous optimism when using a stabilizer, I will try to talk about how it works, when a stabilizer is really useful, and, most importantly, when it is better to refuse to use it.

Everything that will be said below concerns primarily the Nikon VR optical stabilization system - simply because I myself shoot mainly with Nikon and my experience with other systems is insufficient to make any authoritative judgments. Nevertheless, I will take the liberty of arguing that almost everything that relates to Nikon VR applies to Canon IS as well. Both Nikon and Canon use very similar optical stabilization modules built into the lens, and, according to by and large, the Nikon VR (Vibration Reduction) and Canon IS (Image Stabilizer) systems function roughly the same, except for the name. Other similar systems have gone not far: Sony OSS (Optical Steady Shot), Fujifilm OIS (Optical Image Stabilizer), Panasonic OIS (Optical Image Stabilizer), Tokina VCM (Vibration Compensation Module), Sigma OS (Optical Stabilization), Tamron VC (Vibration Compensation).

The stabilizer built into the camera rather than the lens, as implemented in the Sony SSS (Super Steady Shot), Olympus IS (Image Stabilizer) and Pentax SR (Shake Reduction) systems, works a little differently, but most of my comments remain strength and for intracameral stabilization.

Before going directly to practical recommendations, let me at least briefly outline internal organization and the principle of the optical stabilizer, so that you have a better idea of ​​what it is capable of and why it behaves this way and not otherwise.

How does a stabilizer work?

The optical stabilization module in Nikon VR and Canon IS systems is built into the camera lens and consists of the following components: a movable optical element (lens), which is part of the lens optical circuit; angular velocity sensors (DUS), measuring the vibrations of the camera; electromagnets that move the optical element in accordance with the readings of the DUS and the microcircuit, which ensures the coordinated interaction of all components of the system.

The VR and IS systems have two angular velocity sensors with piezoelectric gyroscopes. One of them is used to determine the deviations of the camera relative to the transverse axis, and the other monitors the deviations relative to the vertical axis. In aviation terms, the first sensor is responsible for pitch camera, and the second - for yaw.

When the stabilizer is active, information about the direction, speed and amplitude of camera movements is read at 1000 Hz, i.e. 1000 times per second. This data is processed by a microprocessor, which in turn forces the electromagnets to move the optical element of the stabilizer, thereby changing the trajectory of the light beams inside the lens. As a result, the projection of the image remains more or less motionless relative to the camera sensor, and the photographer is able to take a clear picture, despite the vibration.

Please note that the two-sensor system described above is not able to deal with camera vibrations relative to the longitudinal axis, i.e. roll, which in particular occurs when you press the shutter button too hard.

Also, classic VR and IS do not take into account the shift of the camera vertically or horizontally parallel to the focal plane, since the angular velocity sensors are only able to register turns. This is not big problem, since the contribution of parallel vibrations to image blur is negligible, except for shooting from very small distances. For this reason, some Canon lenses are equipped with the Hybrid IS system, developed specifically for macro photography and also responding to parallel camera shift.

As for the optical stabilization systems built into the camera, they generally work according to a similar principle, with the only fundamental difference that the camera matrix itself acts as a moving element, and not the objective lens. Modern systems intra-camera stabilization is able to take into account roll, pitch, yaw, as well as vertical and horizontal camera shift.

The main advantage of systems with a moving matrix is ​​that the stabilizer works with any optics. This saves you the hassle of paying extra every time you buy a new stabilized lens, as is the case with Nikon or Canon technology. Moreover, Nikon and Canon have stabilized only telephoto lenses of the latest generations, and a significant part of normal and wide-angle lenses, in principle, do not have versions with a stabilizer.

A significant drawback of intra-camera stabilization is its relatively low efficiency when working with long-focus lenses. But it is when telephoto lenses are used that the shake is most noticeable and increased requirements are imposed on the stabilizer. The longer the focal length of the lens, the more speed and amplitude the photosensor must move to compensate for vibration, and the degree of its mobility inside the camera is severely limited. At the same time, the stabilizer built into the lens only needs to slightly shift its optical element to move the image projection onto the matrix a sufficient distance to eliminate vibration. As a result, such systems can operate faster and more efficiently.

The main rule

The most important rule of operating VR and IS is as follows: the stabilizer must be switched off at all times, except when its use is justified... In short, the default position of the switch should be "OFF".

This may seem odd given the fact that both advertisements and official guidelines advise keeping the gimbal on all the time and turning it off unless you are shooting with a tripod. Photographic equipment manufacturers insist that a stabilizer cannot harm your pictures, while experienced photographers prefer to adhere to the completely opposite opinion: yes, a stabilizer is useful, and sometimes completely irreplaceable, but if used illiterately, it can rather lead to image degradation. ... Optical stabilization is primarily a solution to the problem, and if there is no problem, then an improperly used stabilizer can itself become a problem.

Having used the word "degradation", I may have gotten a little excited. In fact, even an improperly used stabilizer rarely renders an image completely unusable. It's just that on modern high-resolution cameras it does not allow you to get what is called "ringing sharpness". Yes, the pictures come out more or less sharp, but this is a little not the sharpness that can be achieved by shooting in calm weather with a tripod with a raised mirror and with the stabilizer turned off.

Thus, if you do not suffer from perfectionism or reduce all your pictures fifty times for publication on social networks, then, of course, you do not need a crystal clear multi-megapixel picture, and you can easily keep the stabilizer on all the time, as the manufacturers recommend. - the pictures will be sharp enough. If you expect the best possible from your equipment technical quality images, you should take a more conservative approach.

It is the fact that the stabilizer turned on at the wrong time degrades the image very slightly (but still worsens) that makes me adhere to the strategy described above: keep the stabilizer mostly off and turn it on when it is really necessary.

Do not misunderstand me: sharpness drops both when the stabilizer is on, and should be off, and in the case when the stabilizer is off, but should be on. Moreover, in the second case, the sharpness may suffer even more than in the first. But learning to recognize situations when the stabilizer should be turned on is much easier than when it is worth turning it off. And if I forget to turn on VR, then I will quickly notice the consequences of this and turn it on, and if I forget to turn off VR, then I will be able to notice my mistake only after returning home and looking at the pictures on the big screen, i.e. when it’s too late to fix anything.

When the gimbal is useless

The optical image stabilizer is absolutely useless in two situations: when the lack of sharpness is not associated with camera movement and when shooting is taken at objectively slow shutter speeds.

Regarding the first question, it should be understood that the optical stabilizer only and exclusively compensates for the vibration of the camera. It can't do anything about the movement of the subject. If you want to freeze motion, you need a fast enough shutter speed anyway, whether you use the stabilizer or not. VR and IS allow you to increase the shutter speed with impunity only when shooting static scenes. If the subject is moving and is moving quickly, the stabilizer will not help you.

Likewise, the stabilizer is not able to correct focusing misses, lack of depth of field and other technical errors that steal sharpness - it just eliminates vibration.

When it comes to slow shutter speeds, a tripod is more useful than a VR or IS. With help wide angle lens with the stabilizer, I managed to get more or less sharp shots, shooting handheld at a shutter speed of 1/8 s, but this is already a toss game. At shutter speeds in the region of 1 s and longer, no stabilizer will provide you with acceptable sharpness. Those. The effect of stabilization, of course, will be: instead of a disgusting quality, you just get a bad quality. But is this what you are striving for? Better to grab a tripod and enjoy uncompromising sharpness at any slow shutter speed.

When stabilization is most effective

VR and IS are most effective in the 1 / 30-1 / 60s shutter speed range. This does not mean that all of your shots will be sharp - just the percentage of sharp shots, all other things being equal, will be greatest in this range. Again, this does not mean that stabilization will not work at other shutter speeds - it will, but its effectiveness will be slightly lower. In general, you can expect a positive effect on sharpness from the stabilizer at shutter speeds from 1/4 to 1/500 s. It's just that at long exposures (1 / 4-1 / 15 s) there will be little sense from the stabilizer and the sharpness of the pictures in any case will be very limp, and at short exposures (1 / 125-1 / 500 s) there is not much movement without stabilization. it is noticeable. After 1/500 s (and sometimes even earlier), the rules of the game change somewhat, which will be discussed below.

A stabilizer does not guarantee sharpness, but rather increases the likelihood of a sharp shot. Sometimes even with the stabilizer, the picture turns out to be blurry, and sometimes you are lucky, and the picture comes out sharp without any stabilization and even at a relatively slow shutter speed. The difference is that with a stabilizer, the scrap percentage will be significantly less, and the greatest difference is noticeable precisely at moderate exposure values, i.e. 1 / 30-1 / 60 s. The gain in 4 stops of exposure () promised by marketers belongs exactly to this range. However, according to my observations, a gain of 2-3 stops is the realistic maximum that can be really expected from a stabilizer operating under optimal conditions.

The need for stabilization increases dramatically as the focal length of the lens increases. An optical stabilizer in a telephoto lens is not just a fashionable option, but a really necessary and useful device... The longer the focal length, the more difficult it is to get a sharp picture without a tripod and the more noticeable the contribution of optical stabilization, even at relatively fast and safe shutter speeds. However, here, too, not everything is as simple as it might seem at first glance.

Short excerpts

At shutter speeds over 1/500 s, it is advisable to turn off the stabilizer. There will be no benefit from it. The fact is that if Nikon is not lying and the sampling rate of the stabilizer is really 1000 Hz, then the Nyquist frequency (half the sampling rate) will be equal to only 500 Hz. In other words, the microprocessor of the stabilizer is capable of processing information about oscillations with a frequency not exceeding 500 Hz or 1/500 s without errors. Even with a vibration of 500 Hz, the system will operate at its maximum capacity. Higher-frequency vibrations can be not only not suppressed, but even exacerbated due to sampling errors. At vibration with a frequency of more than 1000 Hz, it is simply naive to expect any positive effect from the system.

Thus, at high shutter speeds, the optical stabilizer is useless for the reason that we are insured against low-frequency oscillations by a short exposure, but it still cannot cope with high-frequency oscillations.

In this case, the angular velocity sensors continue to work, and the movable optical element continues to move convulsively. Those. the stabilizer itself is a source of high frequency vibration - you can hear it hum. At normal exposures, we are willing to put up with this, since we are preoccupied with combating more intense low-frequency vibrations, but when the exposures become so short that they easily cut off the coarse vibration, sacrificing potential per-pixel sharpness just because we are too lazy to turn off the stabilizer is unreasonable.

Shooting with a tripod

If you are using a tripod, it is again best to turn off the gimbal. Even manufacturers of photographic equipment are in solidarity with me on this issue. Compared to a stabilizer, a tripod provides a more benign, and, most importantly, more predictable result.

When the camera is mounted on a tripod, the gimbal, forgotten while it is on, may well be the main source of vibration. Trying to catch non-existent vibrations, the stabilizer generates vibration itself. This vibration, amplified by the resonance in the legs of the tripod, is perceived by the stabilizer as something external, and provokes it to even more actively fight the vibrations that it itself is the cause of. This is somewhat reminiscent of guitar feedback.

My advice to disable the stabilizer when shooting with a tripod also applies to more advanced optical stabilization systems (like the Nikon VR II), which supposedly are able to automatically detect that the camera is on a tripod and turn off on their own due to the absence of shake. In my opinion, the ability of these systems to distinguish true vibrations from phantom ones is not reliable enough to be relied upon. Forced manual shutdown of the stabilizer insures me against any whims and mistakes of overly smart electronics.

Despite all of the above, there are circumstances that justify the use of a stabilizer even on a tripod. We are talking about those cases when the camera, even when mounted on a tripod, still remains unstable, i.e. firstly, when the very surface on which the tripod stands is subject to vibration, secondly, when you shoot, holding the camera with your hands and not fixing the tripod head firmly, and thirdly, when using a monopod. However, in these cases, the use of optical stabilization is not necessary, although sometimes it can have a positive effect on sharpness.

Shooting from an unstable position

In some situations, camera shake can be particularly intense. Whenever you take a photo on the go, or on a weight, or holding the camera at outstretched arms, or even in one hand, you thereby kindly invite the movement into the frame. In general, I advise you to avoid these situations, but when they are unavoidable, optical stabilization will come in handy. For example, some non-standard angles are simply unattainable if you hold the camera strictly according to the charter. And as for a climber who hangs over a cliff and wants to take a photo of a high-mountain landscape in passing, it is difficult to demand that he take any stable position or use a tripod. In a word, if circumstances require, feel free to turn on the stabilizer - at least, it will save you from rough blur and allow you to get an interesting picture.

Special mention should be made of photographing from vehicles in motion: cars, boats, helicopters, funiculars, etc. Here, a rather intense external vibration is added to the tremor of the photographer's hands, and therefore the use of a stabilizer is very, very desirable. There is still no need to wait for a ringing sharpness in such conditions, so let the stabilizer make your life a little easier.

Never have to lean on board motor boat or press the camera against the window glass. Try to sit or stand so that, if possible, do not lean against any vibration-conducting structures at all. Hold the camera in your hands and let your very body dampen most of the high frequency vibrations.

On some Nikon lenses there is a VR mode switch: Normal and Active. So, the Active mode is designed for just such extreme situations when not only the camera is shaking, but everything around is shaking. When shooting from a stable position, you should select the Normal mode. It is designed for lower vibration amplitudes and operates more accurately under standard conditions.

Shooting with wiring

When shooting with wiring, it is appropriate to leave the stabilizer on.

On Canon lenses equipped with an IS mode switch, select Mode 2, which is just for panning. In this mode, the stabilizer only compensates for those vibrations that are perpendicular to the wiring direction.

Nikon VR does not have a dedicated pan mode as panning is automatically recognized. The system itself notices when you smoothly move the camera in a certain direction, and does not try to compensate for this movement. The perpendicular vibrations are worked out in the usual way.

Panning smoothness and continuity is key here. Stopping or slowing down the wiring at the moment the shutter is released are not only quite gross mistakes in themselves, but also confuse the stabilization system, forcing it to perform unnecessary actions.

Stabilizer and back focus

If you use the AF-ON or AE-L / AF-L button for focusing, then you should remember that this button activates only autofocus, but not the stabilizer. The shutter button is still in charge of activating the stabilizer, and it is advisable to press it in two steps. After focusing with the AF-ON button, press the shutter button to the first stop, and only when the stabilizer elements start to move (usually it takes a split second), press the shutter down all the way. You don't have to wait for the stabilizer to wake up and immediately push the trigger to the second stop - the stabilizer will still turn on and will do everything in its power to eliminate the stir. It's just that if you still give him half a second to spin up the gyroscopes and analyze the nature of the vibration, he will be able to act more efficiently. In addition, when you press the shutter button in two steps, the camera experiences significantly less shake than if you put your finger on the shutter in one fell swoop. Do not forget that neither VR nor IS can compensate for the roll resulting from this approach.

Stabilizer and Flash

If you use the built-in flash of the camera at least from time to time (and the built-in flash is not available only in professional cameras), then perhaps another one is waiting for you. an unpleasant surprise: While the flash is recharging, the stabilizer will not work. Due to the fact that both the flash and the stabilizer are quite active consumers of electricity, the camera is forced to restrain their competition for access to the battery, and it does this by turning off the power to the stabilizer until the flash capacitor is fully charged. The camera rightly assumes that since you have turned on the flash, then most likely you are interested in recharging it as quickly as possible, even at the cost of abandoning stabilization. If the flash is fired at maximum power, it may take up to a few seconds to fully recharge. The only one radical solution This problem is the installation of an additional flash with an independent power supply in the hot shoe.

Effect on bokeh

One of the unpleasant features of built-in optical stabilization systems (such as Canon IS and Nikon VR) is their negative impact on areas of the image that are out of focus, i.e. bokeh. The stabilizer is designed to maintain the sharpness of objects in focus, and, when activated, moves its optical element in accordance with this task. In this case, the optical path of all rays changes, and not only those that converge in the focal plane. This is fraught with unpredictable changes in the degree of correction of spherical aberrations of the lens, which in turn can lead to a change in the nature of the bokeh. Usually, when the stabilizer is on, the circles of confusion become slightly more pronounced, and the bokeh becomes a little harsh in appearance. However, this effect is so insignificant and hardly noticeable that I personally do not consider it necessary to attach great importance to it.

Obviously, the stabilizer built into the camera has no effect on the bokeh, since the light rays travel all their way through the lens, without further deviating from the path dictated by the lens design.

Isn't it all too complicated?

Probably tricky. But what to do? Since you have taken to reading this article and have mastered it almost to the end, it means that you are very serious about the quality of your photos, and you will not be scared by a capricious stabilizer.

Frankly, I myself do not always follow my own recommendations, and, at times, I leave the stabilizer on even at short shutter speeds, when one could easily do without it. I become especially liberal during hikes and long walks on rough terrain, when hand tremors noticeably intensify from fatigue, and there is no time to get a tripod or I am too lazy. But in the most crucial moments, when the quality of the images becomes of fundamental importance to me, I try to be extremely conservative and not turn on the stabilizer for no good reason.

This brings us to one more interesting question: Is it worth buying a lens with a stabilizer at all if there is a similar model on sale without it? Very often, conventionally outdated lenses without VR and IS can have excellent optics and at the same time cost significantly less than more modern stabilized models. When it comes to budget zooms, the premium for the stabilizer is usually small, and therefore the purchase of the latest models is almost always economically justified. After all, all other things being equal, a stabilized lens is better at least because it is more versatile. You look, and stabilization will come in handy. But when it comes to buying expensive professional glass, the price difference between stabilized and unstabilized versions of the same lens can be quite significant. For example, the Canon EF 70-200mm f / 2.8L IS USM, popular among photo reporters, costs $ 2,400, while the Canon EF 70-200mm f / 2.8L USM, which is not much inferior to it, costs only $ 1,400. And this difference is not the limit.

Analyze your needs. If you are photographing sports events, and, therefore, work mainly at short exposures, then the stabilizer will not help you much. If you mainly photograph landscapes and architecture, and even with a tripod, then you do not need a stabilizer. Likewise with studio flashes. And only if you regularly shoot handheld in low light conditions, and your subjects are not very nimble, the stabilizer will be of great help for you.

Thank you for the attention!

Vasily A.

Post scriptum

If the article turned out to be useful and informative for you, you can kindly support the project by contributing to its development. If you don't like the article, but you have thoughts on how to make it better, your criticism will be accepted with no less gratitude.

Please be aware that this article is subject to copyright. Reprinting and quoting are permissible provided there is a valid link to the source, and the text used should not be distorted or modified in any way.

Smartphone cameras are constantly improving. Now smartphone modules are acquiring additional functions that were previously only available high class cameras. Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) is good example- it makes the image clearer and smoother. In this article, we will learn in more detail what this function is and how it works, and you will understand how much it will be needed in your next smartphone.

OIS first appeared in commercial devices such as compact cameras and SLR lenses since the mid-1990s. Thanks to her, users were able to shoot better photos without using a tripod. OIS works by moving optical elements to counteract camera shake and thereby reduce image blur.

Subsequently, twenty years later, this function reached the flagship smartphones. Since the sensors in modern mobile devices are significantly smaller than in traditional cameras, some effort is required to get enough light in adverse conditions.

During operation, the camera detects the movement of the smartphone using special sensors (gyroscopes and calculators), and directs the movement of the lens to counteract external factors... Lenses move from side to side or up and down. There is also digital stabilization, it uses software in order to reduce the influence of movements.

And despite its peculiarities, IOS cannot do anything if the object is moving too fast to fix it. The function can improve the image only in case of shaking of the hand with which you will shoot. From this, there are clear advantages of optical image stabilization during video recording. Of course, video smoothing is possible in various video editors, but it will take a lot of time and it is quite possible that the desired result will not be obtained.

OIS requires an enlarged camera module, so on this moment it is found in large smartphones. Among such examples for recent times is an Samsung Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge and LG G5. It is also interesting that the large iPhone 6 Plus and Plus 6s have OIS in their arsenal, while this feature is absent on the regular-sized models. It is likely that the fault of this fact is small size regular iPhones.

Camera manufacturers claim equal equivalent shutter speeds on their products. Thus, camera buyers have the ability to compare as opposed to smartphone buyers. The manufacturers of the latter do not seem to want to repeat such an experience and simply note only the presence or absence of OIS in their device.

It is believed that in order not to blur the frame when photographing hand-held, an equal is needed: 1 / focal length.

At the same time, 1 / focal length is a limiting value, this is not a guarantee of a sharp frame. Therefore, you need to take a series of frames before the normal result comes out, the stabilizer shifts this border by 4 stops, but does not eliminate the need to take a series of frames. If you do not understand, I will try to explain with an example.

Example. You are walking around the city with a DSLR camera and a photographic mood, you see something interesting, stop, take pictures, look at the screen - the frame is blurred. We do not panic, we look at the focal length - 200mm, which means that in order to take a clear shot from the hands, you need 1/200 sec (one two hundredth of a second), take one or two or three shots and get the desired result. So, if without a stabilizer you will take pictures from 1/200 sec, then with it, you can take pictures with the same focal length (200mm) but already 1/60 sec!

Let's assume that you have a camera with a stabilizer. Otherwise, this article will be interesting to you only out of curiosity. Today, the stabilizer can be found both in expensive professional SLR cameras and in soap dishes, and this is no longer some exotic thing, but functionality that is shoved where it is needed and not needed.

Conventionally, all manufacturers of SLR cameras can be divided into two groups: the first one decided to install a stabilizer to the SLR camera to the matrix(Pentax, Olympus, Sony), and the second into the lens(Canon, Nikon). I can't say for sure which is better. The first option comes out more versatile and cheaper, and the second is reliable and of high quality.

All manufacturers name the gimbal differently, Nikon - VR(Vibration Reduction), Canon - IS(Image Stabilization), Tamron - VC(Vibration Compensation), so don't bother with what the manufacturer calls it, they all work the same way.

Do I need a stabilizer? Stabilizer in general useful thing, and in some moments it is simply irreplaceable. I'm talking about telephoto lenses, it is with these lenses that you will feel all the advantages of the stabilizer, otherwise you will be able to photograph either on a bright day or with a tripod, as my father and grandfather once did. To understand the importance of a stabilizer in telephoto cameras, I advise you to read reviews of some of them (,). If you have a wide-angle or portrait lens, a stabilizer is not needed at all.

How and when to use it? Everything is very simple, regardless of the manufacturer, they all work the same.

If the stabilizer is on the camera, we find either the on / off button on the camera or in the camera menu. If you have a stabilizer on the lens, set the lever to the on position. If you have a soap dish, we find the stabilizer function in the menu, turn it on. In soap dishes, they often offer a choice of two modes: turn on, turn on when shooting. The second is supposed to save you battery power. I know that Nikon lenses also have an Active stabilizer mode (for example), in theory it is needed for shooting in extreme conditions (for example, when you are driving in a car), but I did not notice much difference between the normal mode and the Active mode.

And further. The gimbal needs to be turned off when you are photographing with a tripod or by placing the camera on a surface, precisely because of the random nature of its mechanism. At 95% it behaves correctly, but it is the last 5% that can ruin your frame.

Remember, the stabilizer can only help you when shooting static objects, when photographing dynamic objects (moving) it will not help you in any way, so don't even count. A stabilizer is not a panacea, and in low light conditions you need to take a series of shots.

Let's summarize

A stabilizer is a necessary thing, but not a must, except in cases with telephoto lenses. Often it saves 3-4 stops of exposure, but does not eliminate the need to take several frames, all this is due to the random nature of its mechanism. It won't save you when shooting moving subjects.