Comments on: $1 Camera Image Stabilizer That Fits In Your Pocket

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 02:25:26 +0000

Brilliant! High-five from one Eagle to another!

By: Ray

Ray — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:53:42 +0000

I’m a travel writer and photographer, fulltime, and anything that makes the backpack lighter is a blessing. This is a great idea and would help in many (but not all) situations. In places where theft is a problem, this would be ideal for reducing camera shake, but as Mr. Goldstein rightly points out, it can’t replace a tripod. If one is taking bird photos at dusk with a 600mm lens, most photographers will opt for a tripod. On the other hand, Cobbler’s device should not be discounted as “MacGyver,” and he makes it clear that it is primarily for image stablilization — eliminating the need for expensive lenses. I’ve used trees, cars, the camera strap, and other things to reduce blur or shake (and have a very steady hand — I’ve taken clear, crisp shots at 1/4th of a second, which most photographers will agree is hard to do), and at times I’ve needed a tiny, ultraportable device like this. Kudos to Cobbler for sharing a great idea in a clear, easy to understand manner. I’ve yet to try it, but will keep it in mind for my next trip.

By: Dave Conrey

Dave Conrey — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:01:55 +0000

That’s Freakin’ Brilliant. Thanks for that tip!

By: Eric Skiff

Eric Skiff — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:42:29 +0000

Definitely interesting – I love how cheap and portable it is, I’ll give it a shot. Thanks for linking it up here :)

By: Jim Goldstein

Jim Goldstein — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:38:52 +0000

This would not replace the need for a tripod. At best it might be an alternative to a monopod, but even then not recommended.

With Image Stabilization or Vibration Reduction lenses you can avoid the need to do this and in the process look a bit more together when in public.

Then again if you like being MacGyver…

Here’s why this approach doesn’t help…
1. at a slow enough shutter speed even your breathing or pulse can move the camera.
2. if you’re shooting slow shutter speeds then this solution is completely irrelevant.
3. although this addresses horizontal and vertical movement it does not address rotational movement of the camera. If you’re hand is tired and your lens dips forward or backwards you still get movement.

Regarding my monopod reference… monopods are designed to give people the ability to lean forwards, backwards, sidways and pan all while holding the weight of the lens/camera. Mostly monopods and tripods alike are used to alleviate the weight of your gear… getting the shakes from holding heavier gear seldom allows you to capture sharp images and if you’re looking to capture long exposures at night this isn’t even in the realm of possibilities to use.

By: terry chay

terry chay — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 19:33:01 +0000

Hehe, a poor manâ€™s strap pod. Nice.

http://www.kirkphoto.com/accessories.html#strappod

(I use Arca Swiss brackets so this is out of the question.)