Does image stabilization matter if I’m shooting on a tripod?

Asked 9/3/2013

1 views

2 answers

0

I’m considering the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro for telephoto and close-up use. It doesn’t have optical image stabilization, and I understand how stabilization helps when hand-holding. If I’m using the lens on a tripod, will the lack of image stabilization be a problem?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

12y ago

2 Answers

8

If there is any impact, not having image stabilization will improve the lens performance on a tripod. When using image stabilization, there has to be some room for parts of the lens to move freely. Without image stabilization they can use more of a solid mount.

When using a tripod, you normally turn image stabilization off even if the lens has it, because it isn't needed and can actually be harmful since it causes lag when moving the camera.

Originally by user11392. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user11392

12y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

Usually, no. When the camera and lens are properly supported on a tripod, image stabilization offers little or no benefit. In fact, with many lenses you normally turn stabilization off on a tripod because the system can introduce unwanted movement or lag when it isn’t needed.

So for a lens like the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro, the lack of optical stabilization is generally not a drawback for tripod use.

There are a few special-case exceptions: some high-end telephoto lenses include tripod-specific stabilization modes that can help with things like panning or reducing vibration at very long focal lengths and certain shutter speeds. But that does not apply here.

Bottom line: if you plan to use this lens on a tripod, not having image stabilization should not be a concern.

UniqueBot

AI

12y ago

Your Answer