Lens or body stabilisation?



An article from Nikon UK on why they think lens stabilisation is better than in body.

Personally I've always thought it was better in the lens. The two lenses I've used that allowed me to shoot with the lowest shutter speed at the longest focal length are the Panasonic 14-140mm and Nikon 16-85mm VRII. I've never felt I was getting the same advantage with in-body IS.

Obviously in certain cases, when lenses have no IS, in-body stabilisation is the only answer. 

Interestingly, though many say you shouldn't do it, I've had remakable results from a stabilised lens on a stabilised body. My Panasonic Leica 45mm macro on Olympus m4/3 bodies produced no problems with both lens and body IS turned on. Quite the reverse in fact, razor-sharp images at low shutter speeds.

It does of course depend on how good the IS system is.