Timeline for Image Stabilization or Vibration Reduction
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.photo.stackexchange.com/ with https://photo.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jul 27, 2010 at 22:30 | comment | added | ex-ms | I googled dpreview.com and a few other sites with numerous camera reviews, and 'image stabilization' definitely seems to be a fairly generic term, regardless of the model being described. I'd say it's pretty safe. | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 13:38 | comment | added | Edd | @Eddie Deyo - I agree on both counts, as I mentioned in the speedlight/speedlite thread (meta.photo.stackexchange.com/questions/118/…). Is there any set way that we decide what we're going to go with on these matters? There doesn't seem to be any clear winners in either thread. | |
| Jul 26, 2010 at 20:04 | comment | added | Eddie Deyo | +1 for [image-stabilization]. I know it's Canon's term, but it seems to describe the concept best. Similarly, I voted for [speedlight] for flash questions, even though it's Nikon's term. | |
| Jul 19, 2010 at 18:20 | comment | added | Reid | Important to use the terms people use - I suspect Nikon-heads won't think to seach for [nikon] [image-stabilization]; instead, they'll search for [vr]. | |
| Jul 19, 2010 at 15:18 | history | edited | Edd | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Added suggestion about using [canon] and [nikon] etc tags
|
| Jul 19, 2010 at 13:56 | history | answered | Edd | CC BY-SA 2.5 |