Image stabilization really helps alot?

[Agenda]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

so probably the 1000d kit lens is better than the a200 kit lens..

 

[redtealongan]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

That's quite the sweeping statement, there have been many important updates to camera bodies throughout the years, especially high ISO performance. Think about cases like shooting a group photo, or when you will need a large DOF, in a dim place where flash may not be allowed or possible. Shooting F8 @ ISO1600 on a kit lens and F8 @ ISO1600 on a high grade lens will minimize the differences in lens quality and here is where the body becomes important.

What about improved dynamic range? Accuracy and speed of AF? Continuous AF? Shutter burst rate? In-body IS? etc etc... In the digital age, many photographers, including pros, would find them useful to nail the pics they want.

 

[redtealongan]

Anyway back to TS's concern, i find IS to be quite a handy tool to have in many situations... With it, you can get a few stops' advantage in stability in even seemingly not-so-dark lighting, like in mid evening. However it will hardly be able to replace the good old tripod in situations in which a tripod is traditionally required, i.e. long exposures.

 

[thotshouse]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

Eh ... did you forget about the man behind the camera? With better technologies today, I think composition is the art while picture quality is the science. Get a better camera with better technologies (e.g. IS) and focus on the art part (i.e. composition).

 

[calebk]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

And the camera and lens will take photos on its own. :thumbsup:

 

[cthep2]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

OR should it be gwc-40%,20%-lens,20%-cam,20% editing sw:bsmilie:
...whatever..at the end of the day..show us the pics

back to topic..for me yeah.. Sony's SS/IS helps a lot.

 

[londonbridge]

It does not help a lot, but it definately helps SIGNIFICANTLY. Try shooting longer exposure with IS off and then IS on. The difference is there and it does increase your "hit rate" especially for people like me who can't hold the camera still:bsmilie:

 

[zerartul]

I like IS as a a sort of garuntee. Even 1/focal length dont get you a sharp pic sometime. IS ensure u almost surely gets it (note almost ). Its also great for low light long focal primes like 135 and 200. IS works best at longer focal length then shorter ones from my experience. Now a 135 F1.8 CZ from sony with a IS body alpha is a very gd combination for low light portraits hehe. BTW Im a canon user, IS not a nessecity but it sure is nice to have it.

 

[Ouverture]

Picture quality depends 99% on the lens and 1% on the camera.

I agree with most brothers here that to get a good picture, it depends much on how the person uses his lenses to make out the best quality from his camera body, by knowing their limitations and strength and adjusting them accordingly.

There is no best camera body or best lenses in the world. A good camera will need a good lenses to bring out it's maximum potential.

Think of lenses as tyres and camera body as the car itself. They must work hand in hand to produce good performance. Putting lousy tyres on a good car OR a lousy car with good tyres just doesn't make it...as well as good or lousy driver...

 

[Akatsuki]

IS is a nice to have, but not necessary. Like what most say... it does increase your hit rate!