How important is image stabilization for shooting video using DSLRs?
I have researched a bit more since my last question, which was mainly, what camera I should get to start serious filming with. Now I have come across a few models at different prices like, Nikon D3200, Nikon D5200 and the classic D7000, which all seem to have autofocus for video, although I reckon I would still have to buy a good AF-S lens for them… And then I see that their common weaknesses include "no image stabilization"… So it may sound silly but, what difference will image stabilization make to photos or video? Why is it that plain digital cameras have image stabilization and the newest or high-end models of Nikon don't?
How would I deal with lack of image stabilization, if I bought any of those? I'm still thinking about it, because they have a lot more pros than cons regarding video.
If video is your primary concern, then use a camcorder.dSLRs can capture great video, but video capture is a secondary "convenience feature". They should not be treated like a camcorder… Between the file size limitations and overheating issues, they need to be used very differently.
As for "stabilization", use a tripod or vest mount articulated, counterbalanced arm or dolly track or some other stabilizing method and don't shoot handheld. Remember, with stills, the camera is dealing with a single frame. Fast shutter, flash, all sorts of things to deal with that single frame. With video, there's motion - and humans were not built to remain steady for long periods of time.
Most DSLRs do not feature image stabilization inside the actual body because there are lenses that have stabilization and lenses that don't. In Nikon's lineup, look for Nikkor lenses that have the word "VR" in the name (Vibration Reduction). Canon calls it "IS" (Image Stabilization).
Just like with still photography, image stabilization can be important for some things, and worse than useless for others. If you have a decent tripod and you want to do mostly stationary shots, you probably don't need to make it a point to get VR lenses. If you want to do a lot of "free" or unsupported shooting, the VR would make a noticeable difference.
Well first if you're going to actually talk about this stuff get that word "filming" out of your photo vocabulary because digital cameras can't "film"… It's a completely different media. These cameras
shoot/record video.
Okay. I shoot all my video with my Canon t1i and I do it all with the widest lens I own at 18 and with the IS (VR for Nikon) always on. Both help to hide hand movement. I did a career in professional broadcast television videography and a steady camera is probably the most important part, right after focus, of any video production, professional or not.
I also use a view finder for my camera because it gives me a much better view of the screen for
manual focus, framing, etc. This is what I have and it works very well.
http://www.amazon.com/...004HD3G6Q/
I find using a tripod for video to be very limiting. Being able to shoot and move is extremely important to any video production. Angles make all the difference with video.
Image stabilisation can help a little, however it is not perfect. Absolute stability comes from the use of tripods or dollies. If you want the freedom to move then a gyroscopic stabiliser is the gold standard, whilst the simple counterweight system of the Streadicam is surprisingly effective.