Camera Labs

hi folks

I only have a compact panasonic lumix at the mo - 7Mp. took it out today and tried the same pic with and without a tripod. I couldnt see a difference. Are tripods redundant in this age of 'image stabalisation', 'vibration reduction' and software which can easily realign your horizon?

A tripod will help only if you need the help. If the conditions are good enough, then you don't need a tripod.

A tripod will still help in the following situations:
* where you have to take many shots from exactly the same position
* where you want to take relatively long exposures. The longer the focal length of the lens, the more shake will tend to blur the image.
* where you need to have many shots aligned e.g. panning for panorama
* where you simply don't want to hold a heavy camera for a long time

While software can fix some faults, it's still generally better not to have them in the first place.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Until image stabilisation can hold cameras completely steady for hours at a time, I'd say no.

The need for tripods has been reduced slightly but even image stabilisation can't keep a camera completely steady for over 1/2 a second.

_________________
Graham
Flickr

The reason why you couldn't see a difference was that your shutter speed was fairly fast, which allowed you to handhold the image. Along with the IS system to steady your shot.

If your shutter was something like 1/4, then you might notice the camera shake.

But I don't think tripods are, or ever will be redundant.

_________________
-Blog- || -My Flickr-