On, "Is Digital Stabilization Effective"...

>Neuman - Ruether wrote in message

><3e949682.1898926@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>...

>>On Sun, 06 Apr 2003 17:46:54 GMT, "peter"

>><nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>>On the best, you cannot tell the difference easily,

>>and the preference may go to the DIS in some

>>circumstances; in the worst, resolution suffers.

>> David Ruether

On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 13:20:33 -0600, "Jeff Price" <flickerflix@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Have to disagree with David here. While his statements might be true in the

>general sense they have not been what I have observed with numerous people

>with many mini-DV camcorders (Sony, Panasonic and Canon). In all cases I

>have observed, optical stabilization has stabilized hand-held shots better

>than electronic stabilization has. There are some differences with low

>frequency vibration (I'd probably tip my hat to EIS there) but with

>stabilizing hand-held shots I'd vote for optical. However, if you have

>steady hands to begin with, and limit your zoom, then it may not matter -

>they both will probably work well.

>

>Go to a store and try them out. Pay special attention to how you hold the

>camera (certain positions will magnify any shake) and the weight of the

>camera leading to fatigue in the shooter (and greater shake).

You may be observing the footage shot with each, with

the less experienced choosing a 1-chipper, and the more,

a 3-chipper (more likely with OIS, and more likely better

held...;-). I suggest doing as you suggest at the end.

I think you will find the best OIS and best DIS nearly

the same in effectiveness (I own about 5 of each, and

this is what I find, at least with Sony cameras...;-).