Anyone had experience of IS making photos worse?

[kristy_duggan]

Has anyone had an experience of Canon's Image Stabilizer making things worse instead of better? At a wedding

event, I turned on the image stabilizer for hand held shots that were using the length of my zoom lens beyond what I

would normallty hand hold with the shutter speed. I usually have a pretty steady hand, except this lens is a little

heavy. All of the images are just not crisp in focus like I want. Almost every shot looks like it has slight hand held

camera shake. However, for the reception, when I turned the IS off, the photos return to my expected crisp focus.

 

Camera - Rebel XT

 

Lens - Canon EF 28-135mm 1:3.5-5.6 IS Ultrasonic

[erikhaugsby]

Do you have any sample pictures?

[tridakfoto]

Kristy

 

It's really hard to say if it is the fault of the lens or user error. You may find more info in the wedding forums as well but many will probably say that using a slower lens such as the 28-135mm for such events is just asking for trouble even with the Image Stabilization.

 

Could it be you had better lighting at the reception then what was at the other area of the wedding? Like I said it is really hard to say what could be the cause of it but the only time I have heard of IS having a negative effect on images was when used on a tripod and the IS is left on ... some of the newer lenses sense this and counteract the effect anyhow so it doesn't matter but for some of the older lenses I have heard it was a problem. Since you stated you handheld the lens, I am not sure what would have caused it other then bad lighting or user error maybe since you said the lens worked well later at the reception.

[tridakfoto]

As Erik asked .. do you have samples so we can see what you mean? :)

[pldove]

Yes - with tripod - mounted 28-300mm EF shots of about 5 sec. at 300mm on a windy night. I just forgot to turn off IS and lost nearly all the shots. Of Mauna Kea erupting. I won't forget to turn IS off. Until next time.

 

When panning with any IS lens, sometimes (rarely) the IS seems to lag and/or overcompensate and then I see the viewfinder image drift. Shots taken then turn out to look hand-shaken.

[digitmstr]

It could well be SUBJECT MOTION blur...

[PuppyDigs]

"Has anyone had an experience of Canon's Image Stabilizer making things worse instead of better?"

 

Nope. Never, if used with proper technique. The only time I could get the 28-135 IS to make a worse image with IS is when

mounted to a solid tripod. In such case it freaks out (as indicated in the instructions).

 

Realize this lens only betters hand holdable shutter speeds by 2 stops. So it you can hand hold 135mm securely at 1/125

sec, it allows you to dip down to 1/30 if you use equal technique. Like others have said, no IS can counter subject

movement. With a 1.6 crop body you may need to be more conservative.

[bobatkins]

Is can make things worse with the lens on a tripod at very slow shutter speeds.

 

I've never heard of it making things worse at fast shutter speeds of with the lens handheld.

[andy_jones2]

The IS mechanism takes a second or so to settle itself down to producing "stabilised" pictures. If you are holding the

camera without any buttons depressed and then quickly fire a shot by pushing the shutter button down quickly (to capture a

special moment ) the IS may not settle down, and as it is trying to , it may not be moving the moveable optical group

correctly. If you have the shutter half-depressed (or the * button depressed if you use that for focus) these will keep the IS

activated and stabilising properly. It is in the critical second or so that the IS kicks in and settles down (after activation by

button pushing) that the IS can make things worse.

[chrisjb]

I have not had probs down to 1/15~1/30th but uts not magic and as mentioned doesn`t matter how steady you are, you won`t stop motion blur at low speeds. What sort of settings were you working with?

[thomas_hardy1]

Could you have turned the IS off when you thought you were activating it?

[john_g10]

I don't think it's related to 28-135mm lens, if you shake a lot IS won't help.

[neill_farmer2]

My sharpest shots have all been after I have remembered to give the IS a short time to settle down.

[jnicholson]

I'm with Andy and Neill.

 

I have definately seen the 28-135mm give less than desired results when I've forgotten proper technique. It makes sense, at least to me, that the system takes time to measure, settle down, then start the IS lens group in motion.

 

I actually keep IS off and turn it on when I think it's appropriate. It's just one of many tools we have to work with but that doesn't mean it's useful in every circumstance. Just my opinion anyway.

[kristy_duggan]

Thanks for all your comments. :) I appreciate the info. You've given me several things to think about. I don't have permission to post the photos. I wish I could. Thanks again.

[chrisjb]

Thought you may have been bound when you said wedding, Can you give us some idea from the exif the type of settings you had, ? :)

[keith_lubow]

Yes. Absolutely.

 

Andy Jones has it. It is made to allow slower shutter speeds to be hand held, not to make every shot less blurry. Turn it off if you are using a fast enough speed for a sharp shot without IS use, and/or cannot hold the lens steady while shooting (except in panning mode, of course). If you don't give it 1/2 sec. or so to "do its thing" and settle in before you fire the shot, the IS makes the shot unsharp. I posted as much some time last year. I was using a 70-200 lens with shutter speeds of '1000 and above, and forgot to turn my IS off, having just been shooting in the shade before moving in to the sun. None of my action shots are tack sharp. Great feature, but using it in the wrong situations can screw you.

[scott_b.4]

I have had that exprience with the 28-135mm. I think what it was is, i was taking pictures too fast and not letting the IS "stablize". Since then, no issues.

[sarah_fox]

I've used that exact lens on a 10D long ago to shoot 1/4s and 1/2s handheld shots that were tripod sharp. This one, for instance, was shot at 1/4s:

 

http://www.graphic-fusion.com/phsunlitstream.htm

 

This is a composite of two images, shot at 1/4s and 1/10s

 

http://www.graphic-fusion.com/phwaterfallfantasy.htm

 

Scroll down in the pages, and you will see highly magnified swatches of each image. They are quite sharp.

 

I may have other examples on my web site, but these are the only ones I remember specifically. I do remember that all of my shots were taken handheld at pretty slow shutter speeds (low light conditions, and sometimes a desire to create a water motion blur), and they almost all came out razor sharp.

 

I agree strongly about the need to let the IS stabilize! If the IS is engaging when the shutter trips, you'll probably get a pretty bad blur from it.

[kristy_duggan]

I think you guys are probably right, I wasn't letting the IS stabilize. I feel quite relieved actually that might be the cause. (I can fix poor technique next time) I've never really used the IS feature before. This is my first lens to offer the feature. I'm used to having to use a tripod for slow shutter speeds or a flash.

 

I turned the IS on because I was shooting an outdoor wedding around sunset in the shadows. I thought the IS would help me during the ceremony as the light dropped. In reality, I didn't need it. This is just one of many lessons I'm learning as I switch to digital and upgrade my equipment piece by piece.

 

Thanks again. :)