IS on or off on tripods?

[User.82148]

Most advice is to turn off IS but is this correct? I tried my Sigma 150-600 C, which had just been returned from a repair, on a tripod today and I could not not tell any difference between IS on or off. The lens is quite long so it took a little time to settle down but should IS help or hinder? I have s stable tripod, not top quality but very good.

 

[Ploddles]

The manufacturers should know, so if they say off then turn it off. The motors can add shake.

 

[da_nige]

It depends on the lens and manufacturer.

Canon advise on the big whites that it is fine to leave IS on when on a tripod.

 

[Byker28i]

It depends on the lens and manufacturer.

Canon advise on the big whites that it is fine to leave IS on when on a tripod.

Strange, I've always read to turn it off when on a tripod, so I've always done that

 

[mikew]

Off unless you cant get sharp images with your set up then try it on.

 

[redsnappa]

Canon advise on the big whites that it is fine to leave IS on when on a tripod

Page 43 of the manual for my EOS 70D confirms that. Canon say there is no problem using IS when the camera is on a tripod.

Strange, I've always read to turn it off when on a tripod

Most advice is to turn off IS

That is the problem with forums, perpetuated myths become 'fact' for many of their users.

 

[Andrew Benbow]

Well, I've seen my Sigma lens move and hunt when the IS is on and the camera is on a tripod and I've seen a Nikon setup (Nikon lens) doing the same thing so I'm in the turn off camp.

 

[troutfisher]

Totally dependant on the lens,the manual / manf will tell you if it has tripod sensing or not.
If in doubt turn it off.

 

[Byker28i]

Page 43 of the manual for my EOS 70D confirms that. Canon say there is no problem using IS when the camera is on a tripod.
That is the problem with forums, perpetuated myths become 'fact' for many of their users.

You might want to rethink that statement...

Set the Stabiliser switch to off when you are taking a pictures using the bulb setting, long exposures. If the stabiliser switch is set to on the image stabiliser function may introduce errors
When you use a tripod, the stabiliser switch should be turned off to save battery power
The stabiliser is equally effective for hand held photography and photography with a monopod

These instructions are repeated in every canon lens I have with IS, and I have several.

The 5D mk3 manual says:
When using a tripod, you can still shoot with the IS switch set to 1 with no problem. However,to save battery power, setting the IS switch to 2 is recommended.

Page 43 of your manual says the same

 

[PhilH04]

For the most part turn IS/OS/VR off when on a tripod, but, this does depend upon the lens and manufacturer, for example the Canon big whites are 'tripod aware', and using IS can help to alleviate the effects of mirror slap... I tend to leave the IS on with my 500/4 as I nearly always forget to turn it back on if I have turned it off.

I do believe that Sigma and Tamron both advise turning their stabilisation off when firmly mounted on a tripod (stand to be corrected there)

 

[Byker28i]

or example the Canon big whites are 'tripod aware', and using IS can help to alleviate the effects of mirror slap

By these do you mean the 500mm/600mm? as the manual for those also have the same advice as above
Set the STABILIZER switch to OFF when you are taking pictures using the Bulb setting (long exposures). If the STABILIZER switch is set to ON, the image stabilizer function may introduce errors

Using a tripod also stabilizes the image. However, depending on the kind of tripod and shooting conditions, sometimes it may be better to turn off the Image Stabilizer function

So ultimately it's a mixed bag, with Canon covering all bases No wonder people have different ideas.

So basically on a tripod, having it on for long exposures may introduce errors, it will eat battery power, on some lenses they recommend you can turn it onto Mode 2.

 

[Canon Bob]

So ultimately it's a mixed bag, with Canon covering all bases No wonder people have different ideas.

The situation has evolved and hence the advice differs.....

A Canon DLC states;
Improved Performance During Tripod Use: Unlike many other IS lenses that essentially shut off the IS function automatically when tripod use is detected, the new IS II super-telephoto lenses automatically compensate for subtle camera vibrations at shutter speeds from 1/30th to 1 second. Therefore, it is unnecessary to shut off IS during tripod use. This feature will be particularly welcomed by nature and landscape photographers who often use tripods for field work, and who also often use relatively slow shutter speeds. (The IS mechanism is automatically disabled when tripod use is detected and the shutter speed is longer than 1 second.)

Bob

 

[HoppyUK]

Advice varies. The problem is that when there is no movement it can generate a feedback loop in the stabilisation system which then creates movement of its own. The early generation Canon 100-400L IS Mk1 and 300/4 L IS are notorious examples of that, but things have improved. So suck it and see.

My personal rule is to always have stabilisation on when I have a hand on the camera, eg monopod or tripod with gimbal. And also with a long lens in anything less than very still conditions. If there is any breeze, you'll probably be better off with stabilisation on. Check it out by switching to live view on max magnification and chances are you'll see the image moving around; if it's windy, it can dance about alarmingly (maybe take the lens hood off as that can act like a sail). Try it with and without stabilisation, maybe tap the tripod lightly to see what happens.

 

[Turbo-G]

I always turn it off, following a few head scratcher ‘blurred’ shots (d750 / Tamron lens).

 

[Mitzyboy]

I do a lot of night photography, and therefore always on tripod. I use a canon 5diii and a selection of L IS lenses. I learned long ago that if I leave IS on when on a tripod then I am going to risk blurred images. In fact I forgot with my 24-105 once and had to go back the following night to re shoot the shots I had taken. So based on my experience it has to be off when shooting on tripod.

 

[Nostromo]

I know If I use my tamron 70-300 on a tripod with the vr on, it whirls around (if you know what i mean), turn it off and it's fine.

 

[PhilH04]

By these do you mean the 500mm/600mm?

Yep and what Canon Bob says...

 

[Merluza]

I lost a few shots before finding out about this, and one or two since when I forget, some lenses are supposed to be ok but if you don't want to risk it the easiest thing to do is turn it off. The Canon 24-105L will definitely add some blur.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


I never use VR… at anytime nor any condition.

 

[User.82148]

Advice varies. The problem is that when there is no movement it can generate a feedback loop in the stabilisation system which then creates movement of its own. The early generation Canon 100-400L IS Mk1 and 300/4 L IS are notorious examples of that, but things have improved. So suck it and see.

My personal rule is to always have stabilisation on when I have a hand on the camera, eg monopod or tripod with gimbal. And also with a long lens in anything less than very still conditions. If there is any breeze, you'll probably be better off with stabilisation on. Check it out by switching to live view on max magnification and chances are you'll see the image moving around; if it's windy, it can dance about alarmingly (maybe take the lens hood off as that can act like a sail). Try it with and without stabilisation, maybe tap the tripod lightly to see what happens.

Thanks everybody for your responses.

Most suggest it is best to turn-off IS.

My camera manual, 7DII says it is OK to leave IS on when using a tripod. The Sigma lens manual says turn it off.

I like Richard's advice i.e. Try it and find out.

I have a 300l is which is old tech and I find it best to turn off IS.

I am not convinced about the Sigma 150-600C however. It is quite long fully extended and the wind can have an effect as can a less than stable base, e.g. a bird hide.

Time for more testing.

 

[johnf3f]

Just my 2p.

Like "Kodiak QC" I suggest that you turn IS/VR/OS etc off under virtually all circumstances (well all circumstances in my case!). Stabilisers can, very occasionally, save a shot but muck up shots the rest of the time. This really confused a Canon Rep at a local photography show a few months ago who thought I had a screw loose! Unfortunately the longest lens we had to play with was a 500 F4 L IS Mk2 but I thought it would be long enough. Within a minute he was taking sharper shots hand held at 1/160 sec with the IS off than with it on. He was rather confused to say the least but did, at least, begin to see why I never use IS.

I primarily shoot wildlife with a 300 F2.8 or 800 F5.6 and find IS to be a big impediment to sharp shots whether using a tripod or hand held. Just what I have found.

 

[User.82148]

Just my 2p.

Like "Kodiak QC" I suggest that you turn IS/VR/OS etc off under virtually all circumstances (well all circumstances in my case!). Stabilisers can, very occasionally, save a shot but muck up shots the rest of the time. This really confused a Canon Rep at a local photography show a few months ago who thought I had a screw loose! Unfortunately the longest lens we had to play with was a 500 F4 L IS Mk2 but I thought it would be long enough. Within a minute he was taking sharper shots hand held at 1/160 sec with the IS off than with it on. He was rather confused to say the least but did, at least, begin to see why I never use IS.

I primarily shoot wildlife with a 300 F2.8 or 800 F5.6 and find IS to be a big impediment to sharp shots whether using a tripod or hand held. Just what I have found.

Interesting, why do you think IS doesn't help when handheld? I have heard others agree with your view, makes you wonder why we pay such a premium for IS lenses.

 

[Rolyratman]

When shooting motorsport with the 100-400 handheld, I always found I had better results shooting with IS off, when I bought a 300mm f/2.8 I just carried on shooting with it off.

Both these lenses are Mk1 versions, maybe the IS is greatly improved on the Mk2 versions especially with the third mode.

I personally never use IS with a tripod, if I am worried about camera shake I use a 2 second delay or shoot with the mirror locked up.

 

[HoppyUK]

Interesting, why do you think IS doesn't help when handheld? I have heard others agree with your view, makes you wonder why we pay such a premium for IS lenses.

There is a theory that with long lenses, at fast shutter speeds sufficiently high to render image stabilisation unnecessary anyway, that leaving it switched on can sometimes reduce sharpness (when the operating frequency interferes more than it helps). It's extremely difficult to prove because when you're around the hand-holding limit you will always get a few unsharp shots and it's impossible to say exactly what's caused them. The only way to do it is to take hundreds of images around the critical speeds, using lenses of maybe 500mm-plus, with stabilisation on and off, and then assess every image and see if a consistent pattern emerges based on averages. I have never seen this done in any methodical or credible way. I've tried it myself, without any evidence to support the theory, but I've never done that with a really long lens.

On other other hand, it is very easy to prove that image stabilisation is extremely effective at reducing the effects of camera shake at longer shutter speeds below the normal hand-holding threshold, and that is undeniable. Another benefit of in-lens image stabilisation is that it stabilises the image in the viewfinder, making it much easier to track moving subjects with a long lens.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

Interesting, why do you think IS doesn't help when handheld?

In my case, I would consider the benefits only when my
feet are not stable on the ground… trucks, cars, boats,
lifters of all kinds… and, lately, fire trucks ladder!

 

[Byker28i]

There is a theory that with long lenses, at fast shutter speeds sufficiently high to render image stabilisation unnecessary anyway, that leaving it switched on can sometimes reduce sharpness (when the operating frequency interferes more than it helps). It's extremely difficult to prove because when you're around the hand-holding limit you will always get a few unsharp shots and it's impossible to say exactly what's caused them. The only way to do it is to take hundreds of images around the critical speeds, using lenses of maybe 500mm-plus, with stabilisation on and off, and then assess every image and see if a consistent pattern emerges based on averages. I have never seen this done in any methodical or credible way. I've tried it myself, without any evidence to support the theory, but I've never done that with a really long lens.

On other other hand, it is very easy to prove that image stabilisation is extremely effective at reducing the effects of camera shake at longer shutter speeds below the normal hand-holding threshold, and that is undeniable. Another benefit of in-lens image stabilisation is that it stabilises the image in the viewfinder, making it much easier to track moving subjects with a long lens.

Nail head.
IS is another tool for you to use in the right situations. At fast shutter speeds it's often not needed, but at times it's just amazing
Hand held with my old 50D and 24-105, 1/5sec f8 and around 9pm at night

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It seems Fuji subscribe to the theory that moving elements in a lens are always a compromise, and do not include shake reduction in any of their top grade non zoom lenses.

As most units use some sort of Gyroscopic stabilisation system. they can precess, and the image move, when the lens is held still. this can smear the image during long exposures on a tripod.
More recent examples do not seem to have this problem.

However as shake reduction involve some de-centering of a number of elements in the lens. it will always be a compromise. in terms of ultimate image quality.

I am at the age when the natural shake in my hands requires its use all the time, to achieve anything like sharp images

 

[HoppyUK]

Nail head.
IS is another tool for you to use in the right situations. At fast shutter speeds it's often not needed, but at times it's just amazing
Hand held with my old 50D and 24-105, 1/5sec f8 and around 9pm at night

True

The other thing about camera-shake, is when you're on the hand-holding limit, there's great safety in numbers - with or without stabilisation enabled. If you can, take a handful of shots rather than just one - just rattle them off in continuous drive mode. Check them out and they will all vary, with a much greater chance of getting a good sharp one.

NB A monopod is a very effective alternative to image stabilisation, especially with long lenses. They take the weight, give you a nice steady viewfinder image, and dramatically reduce camera-shake. Image stabilisation systems also use a bit of battery power which can be significant if you have to hold the shutter release at half-press for long periods.

 

[SFTPhotography]

•


I never use VR… at anytime nor any condition.

Neither do I.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

But comments like this do confuse me, would you care to clarify what you actually mean?

If I am stable, the camera will be too.
If I am not, the camera won't be neither.

 

[posiview]

I tend to leave on if hand held and off if on a tripod.

Then again I can shot hand held at 1 second with IS on with my EM-1 Mii

Cheers.

 

[HoppyUK]

If I am stable, the camera will be too.
If I am not, the camera won't be neither.

Unless you're made of stone, or dead, that's another less than helpful comment. When hand-holding, camera-shake is always present, and never goes away. You can only reduce the effect to acceptable levels with good technique and faster shutter speeds, or with the often invaluable help of image stabilisation. There are very few exceptions to this, and tripod use can be one of them (though not always, as discussed) and the other is a hypothetical possibility at shutter speeds above 1/500sec with very long lenses (though AFAIC the jury is out on that).

By refusing to use image stabilisation, you're saying that every manufacturer has gone to a huge amount of trouble for nothing.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•

Anyone with enough experience and the steady hands
I have is in a position to leave it off.

By refusing to use image stabilisation, you're saying that every manufacturer has gone to a huge amount of trouble for nothing.

If one does it, they all feel they have to do it!

It is not that I refuse it, IT IS JUST THAT I DON'T NEED IT.
However, I understand that some may need it.

Unless you're made of stone, or dead, that's another less than helpful comment.

…from you Richard, really?

 

[sk66]

I tend to not use IS. Mostly I try to use settings which negate any possible benefit... and then I forget to turn it on when it might.

A significant issue I have with IS is all of the varieties there are... which lens am I using, which version does it have, which mode of that version should I use in this situation? I have Sigma lenses (OS), Nikon VR, Nikon VRII, and another version (Nikon1). Plus Nikon's VR and VRII label can indicate the same system!

 

[johnf3f]

I found the benefit of the "OFF" switch on IS lenses about 9 years ago. I went to the Red Kite Center at Llandeusant and banged off about 300 frames at these lovely birds. 100% failure rate! Not a single sharp shot out of the lot. Baffled and befuddled I searched the web and found a few who suggested not using IS, so the following weekend I revisited and tried again with IS off. Result? About 60% pretty sharp and 30/40% really sharp - this got me thinking......... I subsequently tried IS off on varying subjects from rocks to birds in flight and found that IS was costing me a lot of shots.

Things have moved on since then and my current gear has much better IS and my cameras far superior AF systems - but I still find that (on the odd occasion that I try IS) I get a higher keeper rate on static subjects (eg. medieval church interiors) and a MUCH higher keeper rate on moving subjects. For subjects like waterfalls then IS is a complete no no for me - a tripod is the only solution here.

Just my experiences, but if you want an instant and free improvement then turning the stabiliser off is a very good place to start!