I did the same thing yesterday,while using a tripod I had switched off the SSS and forgotten to turn it back on,its sure shows how good a feature it is.

Yep I've done the same, alternately I've forgotten to turn it off when on a tripod..but so far didn't notice any problems generated from it.

What I'd wish they add, is a sensor where the tripod screws in that can detect when you're using a tripod, and thus disable it for you. That combined with a setting to enable or disable that feature, seems like it would be cheap and pretty much do the trick.

Maybe they'll see this message and steal the idea? ;/ haha

Hahaha Eric, we all wish, but it actually doesn't hurt that much to keep it always on. You read the testimonial on the A700/350's battery life in that other thread, right? I forget who wrote it, but it's so true. Even with the SSS on, I've gotten over a thousand shots without it dying on me. I shot the whole graduation, at least 300+ pics in raw over a week ago, took it out again for a few erratic shots here and there every day, and it hasn't even dropped past 50. Oh, and I connect it to my PC to transfer photos, something that I've noticed to drain battery life almost as fast as Vista drain's my VAIO's battery :P.
--Kiran

I occasionally forget what state I left the SSS in, but I generally leave it on in all situations. Only recently have I noticed a benefit to turning it off (with a 300mm lens).

You could say the same thing for many settings, at least in my case. Sometimes I pick up the camera take several photos only to realize later that the previous time I used it I had it set to, say, +1EV. Doh! Or, only on rare occasions do I use the 5m or smaller photo sizes -- that's really annoying, as, just as above, you can snap away for quite awhile before realizing the problem! The pics look pretty sharp too! :-)

I think the 5m is even worse because you can't see it. The worst part is, the SSS switch is looking at me in the face and I'm completely oblivious to it haha. The 5m and SSS aren't fixable in lightroom, so, that's why I sweat it more. Regardless, now that it's all over and done with, I'll make a mental checklist from now on.
--Kiran

I always have my sss on. What is wrong with leaving it on for a tripod shot?

haha yeh actually it's not the battery usage I'm worried about it's more the picture being affected.

In the manuals for all the cameras I've had with some form of image stabilization (Canon, Panasonic, Sony, Ricoh), it says to turn off their respective image stabilization when using a tripod.

Ex a700: "When using a tripod, deactivate the Super Steady Shot function as it will not be fully effective."

They've all given various reasons why, none really very specific. It almost sounds like the mechanism gets confused when it's rock steady. Perhaps because this never happens with a person holding it. I don't really know why.

So far that I can tell none of the pictures I've taken with it on, camera mounted on a tripod, suffered any ill affect. I still try to always turn it off to be sure.

It's a rule of thumb I learned in the Digital Photography book.

It is assumed that all anti-shake mechanisms on camera will look for shaking, and as such, the smallest breeze or fly landing on the lens could cause the anti-shake on the camera to over react. Then the exposure happens, it could come out blurry.

That said, I've never had that problem with anti-shake on my A100. I think the rule applies mostly to canon and nikon camera's where the Anti-Shake or Vibration Reduction (VR) is in the lens. If I'm outside and it's windy, and I have my 75-300mm lens on, I turn on Anti-Shake because that lens catches the wind, and the camera is shaking.

But the general rule of thumb about not having blurry photos, is to have Focal Length = Shutter Speed. If you're shooting at 300mm, make sure your shutter speed is atleats 1/300th of a second. It's a good rule and it's saved me on many family outings where a tripod is just not feasible..

HI

Much has already been said on the topic and it's all good advise. I believe the reason why SSS should be off when the camera is on a tripod is because the camera will be looking for/expecting some movement. When there is none it's easy for it to get confused and overcompensate.

I like Eric's idea of a sensor on the camera to automatically detect when the camera is on a tripod. However it would need to be reliable and also able to be overridden in case it failed as the last thing you'd want is SSS that is permanently disabled! Perhaps if they had a sensor similar to the one used in eye start?

Anyway, I leave SSS on all the time, unless I'm taking pictures with a tripod (I keep it on when I use my monopod though).

Andrew

If somebody is thinking, that should one use the sss or not, here's an answer with 1sec shutter speed handheld:

On one other forum people first said, that I've changed the exif-information, then they said, that it's not possible to take 1sec pictures with, or without the stabilizer without tripod/monopod. :D

You mentioned motion blur. I'm assuming you mean motion of the camera and not motion of the subject. Obviously motion blur of the subject cannot be corrected with image stabilization. Only a good old fashioned fast shutter speed can fix that.

This just goes to show you how well Sony has done the image stabilizer in cameras. I for one believe a good steady hand and ssm really can produce some sharp photos. If you like falls, as I do, North Carolina has more waterfalls than any other place in the world. This is not an opinion, it’s a fact. See below.

http://www.ncwaterfalls.com/

True, motion blur could be fixed with a faster shutter speed, but the kind of motion blur about which I was talking involved movement of the camera body itself. With SSS on, I can take a sharp shot of any subject (with mediocre lighting indoors using the kit lens) as low as 1/13th even with the uncertainty of a shaky arm; I assure you, my arms could qualify me to be a surgeon. However, with the SSS off, getting a good shot at a shutter speed that low is half luck and half breathing practice. This wasn't the case with any of the shots I took using the 50/1.7 prime lens I had. Shots on those weren't phenomenal, but they weren't as susceptible of motion blur because even in lower light, I could shoot at higher shutter speeds.

Also, to avoid flaming, my standard disclaimer applies: I'm new to dslr photography, so, all the statements above are true only as far as how much I know. I could be completely wrong, but all my observations in my experiences seem to confirm my statements I made above.
--Kiran