"Richard Lane" <rql***@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:438009d2$0$1764$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The new
>Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
>such an unstable platform?
> Dick

"Dave Martindale" <da***@cs.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:dlqdbu$fuq$1@mughi.cs.ubc.ca...
> "Martin van derPoel" <martin***@arach.net.au> writes:
>>Until recently I used a Sony TRV520 Digital8 with digital image
>>stabilization and now I use a Panasonic GS400 with Optical stabilization.
>>The argument seems to be that the digital stabilization degrades the
>>picture
>>as it uses some of the CCD area, whilst optical stabilization uses all of
>>the CCD.
>
> It depends on how the Sony does its stabilization.  If the camera has a
> CCD whose full size is used in unstabilized mode, then when
> stabilization is turned on the camera will begin using a somewhat
> smaller area of the CCD and enlarge that.  If the CCD is only 720x480 to
> start with, using a smaller portion of it will reduce resolution
> somewhat.
>
> But many cameras these days use CCDs with more pixels, and either the
> full CCD area isn't used in non-stabilized mode (so there is no change
> in magnification or field of view when stabilized mode is turned on), or
> there are enough extra pixels that there need be no loss of resolution.
>
> But there's one remaining important difference between optical and
> digital stabilization: optical stabilization reduces or eliminates image
> movement during the 1/30 sec frame exposure time, so the sharpness of
> each image is the same as if the camera was not moving.  With digital
> stabilization, each frame is blurred by the image motion, but successive
> frames are re-aligned so that objects don't wander around over the span
> of many frames.
>
>>The picture quality aside it appears to me that the digital stabilization
>>works better over the complete zoom range than the optical stabilization.
>
> To work properly, optical stabilization needs to have the amount of
> correction matched to the focal length of the lens throughout the zoom
> range, since the focal length determines how much image motion is
> produced by a certain amount of camera shake.  Maybe the optical
> stabilization of that particular camera isn't quite set up properly, or
> maybe it just doesn't have enough corrective power at long focal
> lengths.
>
> Dave

> Hi Richard,
> Until recently I used a Sony TRV520 Digital8 with digital image
> stabilization and now I use a Panasonic GS400 with Optical stabilization.
> The argument seems to be that the digital stabilization degrades the picture
> as it uses some of the CCD area, whilst optical stabilization uses all of
> the CCD.
> The picture quality aside it appears to me that the digital stabilization
> works better over the complete zoom range than the optical stabilization.
>
> Regards,
>
> Martin
>
> Ps the GS400 is supposed to have a much better CCD than the Sony and the
> quality is better than the TRV520 but mainly in low light situations.
>
> "Richard Lane" <rql***@ieee.org> wrote in message
> news:438009d2$0$1764$8b463f8a@news.nationwide.net...
>
>>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
>>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The new
>>Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
>>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
>>such an unstable platform?
>>Dick
>
>
>

> In article <438009d2$0$1764$8b463***@news.nationwide.net>,
>  Richard Lane <rql***@ieee.org> wrote:
>
>
>>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
>>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The
>>new Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
>>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
>>such an unstable platform?
>>Dick
>
>
> I don't think the optical/digital divide is the issue--different camera
> makers and models have different approaches to IS. You need to try them
> out to see which ones suit your needs best. Some hold a scene well
> despite small jiggles, but jump visibly when movement becomes too much.
> Others give a constant 'swimming' smoothing of motion.
>
> Maybe you should consider a Steadicam-type accessory?

> Kent Clarke wrote:
> > In article <438009d2$0$1764$8b463***@news.nationwide.net>,
> >  Richard Lane <rql***@ieee.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
> >>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The
> >>new Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
> >>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
> >>such an unstable platform?
> >>Dick
> >
> >
> > I don't think the optical/digital divide is the issue--different camera
> > makers and models have different approaches to IS. You need to try them
> > out to see which ones suit your needs best. Some hold a scene well
> > despite small jiggles, but jump visibly when movement becomes too much.
> > Others give a constant 'swimming' smoothing of motion.
> >
> > Maybe you should consider a Steadicam-type accessory?
> Thanks for the information. Is the "Steadycam" a monopod strapped to the
> camera man or a separately stabilized platform?
> Dick

>>>>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
>>>>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The
>>>>new Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
>>>>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
>>>>such an unstable platform?
>>>>Dick

>
> Dick,
> Some info on camera stabilization can be found at
> http://www.rondexter.com/
> (go to the bottom of the page).
>
> You might try rec.video.production for an answer too. I seem to recall a
> discussion there with someone shooting a feature on a large boat. If you
> use a tripod or a clamp system, the video is locked onto the boat, and
> the action onboard is easy to follow, but the sea can tilt wildly. Or
> you can try to bob and weave while hand-holding the camera, and then
> both the boat and the water move. Shooting other boats could require a
> fairly effective stabilization tool--probably more than a camera's OIS
> can provide. I can't imagine doing it at 20X zoom.

> Kent Clarke wrote:
>
>
> >>>>I shoot many of my clips from a saiboat using an old Canon E-1000 Hi-8
> >>>>camcorder with 20:1 optical zoom and optical image stabilization. The
> >>>>new Canon digital camcorders are lighter but seem to use digital image
> >>>>stabilization. Would I be better off to stay with the E-1000 for use on
> >>>>such an unstable platform?
> >>>>Dick
>
> >
> > Dick,
> > Some info on camera stabilization can be found at
> > http://www.rondexter.com/
> > (go to the bottom of the page).
> >
> > You might try rec.video.production for an answer too. I seem to recall a
> > discussion there with someone shooting a feature on a large boat. If you
> > use a tripod or a clamp system, the video is locked onto the boat, and
> > the action onboard is easy to follow, but the sea can tilt wildly. Or
> > you can try to bob and weave while hand-holding the camera, and then
> > both the boat and the water move. Shooting other boats could require a
> > fairly effective stabilization tool--probably more than a camera's OIS
> > can provide. I can't imagine doing it at 20X zoom.
> Thanks Kent, it looks like a long pipe and counterweight might be the
> simple way to give more inertial roll stabilization without cluttering
> up the cockpit since I also am single handing the boat.
> Dick