# DSLRs with IS/VR built into BODY...



## dan.rpo (Oct 22, 2008)

so, i was originally going with a nikon or canon dslr, however, today, i have been swiftly convinced that a Sony or Olympus would be a better buy due to their in body Image Stabilization, drastically reducing the price of upgraded lens purchases in the future......

what are other name brand DSLRs that have the built in body IS feature?


----------



## Anubisyn (Oct 23, 2008)

not answering ur question because im not sure, but as for the IS in the body, i dont really care for that because if somthing happens to it in the middle of shooting somthing, you need to change body's instead of a lens.  Just my .02


----------



## Steph (Oct 23, 2008)

Pentax cameras also offer in-body vibration reduction (it's called SR for shake reduction).


----------



## jlykins (Oct 23, 2008)

In body IS/VR is nice but not the only (or most important) thing to look at. Plus almost all of the zoom lenses are going to IS/VR so the prices are coming down. Hell Nikon made the 18-55 kit lens VR. Don't base your decision on one feature like that.


----------



## dan.rpo (Oct 23, 2008)

well than, if im not basing my decision on in body IS/VR/SR....what are some of the more important factors? ive already held a few camears to know the feel..but im a beginner, and not really sure what to look for in my first DSLR...i have been torn for nearly 2 months on which one to buy.


----------



## skieur (Oct 23, 2008)

Supposedly the body stabilization is better on the telephoto than wide angle focal lengths.  With the Sony, I have been able to shoot down to 1/4 second handheld with a fast and solid wide angle lens and with the 70 to 300mm G lens I have been able to shoot inside without flash at f. 4.5 and the telephoto is 3 times heavier than the camera.

skieur


----------



## jlykins (Oct 23, 2008)

The main things that I would look at would be feeling: how does it feel in your hands. does it fit comfortably, does it feel good to hold. External controlls: Can you change the ISO, white balance, image quality(jpeg,raw, ect..), metering type, focas type, ect, without going into menus. Image quality: does it offer higher ISO's with acceptable noise? And focasing: Is it backward compatable with older (less expensive), and newer prime lenses? I shoot Nikon and the camera I would recomend would have to be the D90. It has the same sensor as the D300 so it can shoot higher ISO's cleanly. It will autofocus every autofocus lens that Nikon has made since the 50's or 60's,. And the controlls I talked about are on it externally. Canon may offer something similar, but I don't have a whole lot of experience with them so I couldn't tell you for sure.


----------



## TUX424 (Oct 23, 2008)

the thing is that if u go with sony or others like that all those companys are fighting for second b/c there is canon and nikon up at the top duking it out over first. that also means that with nikon or canon your gonna have much for third party support so there are more lens to chose from, and other accerises.


----------



## jlykins (Oct 23, 2008)

TUX424 said:


> the thing is that if u go with sony or others like that all those companys are fighting for second b/c there is canon and nikon up at the top duking it out over first. that also means that with nikon or canon your gonna have much for third party support so there are more lens to chose from, and other accerises.


 
This is another good point. Won't go wrong with Canon or Nikon


----------



## epp_b (Oct 23, 2008)

The only problem I see with in-body image stabilization is that you can't actually see the stabilization happening.  You can when it's built into the lens.  Additionally, I'd stay away from Olympus because they use the 4/3rds standard, which is a considerably smaller sensor.

I find that IS is pretty unnecessary for effective focal lengths shorter than 50mm.  For anything shorter than that, I can hand hold it down to 1/2 a second with a few tries and IS is not going to get you a full stop more than that anyway.


----------



## patrickt (Oct 23, 2008)

People with Canon or Nikon systems generally say the in-lens systems are superior and IS in focal lengths they don't have aren't necessary.

Both, in-camera and in-body IS systems work.
I find having IS available for wide-angle shots to be quite useful shooting in old churches where flash and tripod are prohibited. In some museums where flash and tripod are prohibited.

The IS wouldn't be my sole criteria for selecting a camera but it is a good reason to choose one good camera over another good camera.


----------



## tirediron (Oct 23, 2008)

I've used in-body stabilization on my Nikons for years...


----------



## reg (Oct 23, 2008)

epp_b said:


> Additionally, I'd stay away from Olympus because they use the 4/3rds standard, which is a considerably smaller sensor.



:er:


----------



## dan.rpo (Oct 23, 2008)

so than once again, im stumped....a D90 is out of my price range of about $650.


----------



## Garbz (Oct 25, 2008)

Well ignore the price savings if you're looking at Olympus. Just compare their high-end lenses to Nikons similar quality lenses (which mostly have VR anyway) and you'll be far out of pocket. They are top quality but oh so very expensive.


----------



## dan.rpo (Oct 25, 2008)

i purchased a d40 with kit lens yesterday


----------



## skieur (Oct 30, 2008)

If you sift through all the marketting hype and spin, you will probably discover that in use in body stabilization is equal to lens stablization in effect.  The Olympus 4/3 system is a smaller chip which nevertheless produces comparable image quality and the size and weight tends to be less than the other camera and lens systems.  The lenses however are pricey.  As to wide angle with Olympus instead of 18mm for a 35mm equivalent 28mm shot, a 14mm is used.  Still possible just done differently.

As to the lenses and systems arguments, unless you are planning to spend one heck of a lot of money on accessories, primes, and zooms it really does not matter which camera you buy.  As to cost, most good VR lenses are close to $1,500 or more and many good lenses of the body stabilization kind are under $1,000.  By the way, lot of lenses also means travelling heavy and missing shots while you are changing lenses.

Sony is becoming popular because it comes with a range of lenses from Minolta, through Sony, to Zeiss. It has tiltable LCD screen, live view with fast autofocus that is better than the others and yes, you can see camera shake levelling off in the viewfinder.  There is noise in some low light shots visible on screen but it can be filtered out and it may not show up in prints.

The difficulty for camera buyers is that all the cameras have a list of good points and bad points and it is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.  It becomes a matter of this great feature versus this weakness. Which is the bigger issue?  Cost of course complicates the decision even more.

Some experienced photographers buy cameras for the features that they will make the most use of, and work around the weaknesses.  Some photographers buy cameras for a long time and others change/upgrade every few years.  Some buy numerous lenses and accessories, while others buy a wide angle zoom, telephoto zoom, polarizing filters and an auxilliary flash and that's it.

This variation in experience and style as well as budget means that no particular choice fits everyone and their planned use.  There is also of course no perfect camera that meets everyone's needs at any level.

skieur


----------



## jong (Oct 31, 2008)

you cant go wrong with a sony


----------

