But no image stabilization?

I wanna get a beginner dslr, i'm a beginner and this would be my first ever. I wanna get the nikon d5100, or d3200 or something but they have no image stabilization automatically. I don't know how to do that, so if i got one would all of images be blurs?

Nikon and Canon both have in-lens image stabilization, whereas Sony and Pentax have in-camera stabilization.

Which is better?

Nikon and Canon use in-camera image stabilization in their compact cameras, so they know how to do it. So on one hand Sony and Pentax use compact-technology in their DSLRs, and Canon and Nikon feel it is done better in-lens.

One thing for sure, focal length and shutter speed do affect how well image stabilization works. Simply put, image stabilization uses a sampling technique that samples the image at periodic intervals. The optimum sampling rate differs depending on the lens focal length. If the sampling rate is too low, fast shutter speeds will result in "hunting" by the VR system as it can't keep up with the fast shutter speed.

On one hand, if you have in-lens stabilization, the VR motor can be optimized for the optimum sampling rate, but this can't be done in-camera as this is a mechanical process (resonant frequency by the mass of the moving parts).

Since image stabilization is more expensive to do in-lens, and since Nikon and Canon know how to do in camera stabilization, you might conclude since Nikon and Canon do it in-lens, that in-lens is better.

And image stabilization is not always necessary or even useful. At high shutter speeds, where the sampling frequency is lower than shutter speed, image stabilization should not be used. It also should not be used on a tripod.

Bottom line - image stabilization can help, but it is no substitute for properly holding your camera.