I do understand the difference between the two.. but I am not convinced this method is really much better than traditional way.
It is only potentially cheaper (for consumer) because there is no need for correcting hardware (inside the lens.. apart from movement sensors).
The reason is, we start post-processing with already blurred picture (with known "history" of how the blurring occurred - how the camera was moving), and the deconvolution software can help, but there are limitations here.
Well, maybe it will be OK for sufficient number of typical cases...
BTW, there are only two axis to compensate, X, and Y
Quote:
Originally Posted by rally
Bojan,
Image stabilisation removes image blur caused by small vibrations by repositioning the sensor or the projected image to compensate for the jitter - usually only in X or Y or sometimes XY
This one removes or rather deconvolves wholesale motion blur in many different axis (pretty much all of them).
Its quite a different process.
Rally
|