Many people ask me how important it is for me the lens stabilization, also by virtue of the fact that a lot of my business concerns action and sports.
In reality, and maybe this one will amaze, do not use very often the stabilizer.
For landscape and architecture I simply forget it, often working with the tripod (where stabilization systems are harmful) and, using generally short lenses, I have no such problems. All the better for sharpness, of course.
In action shootings, however, although use tele lenses, I disable the stabilization, for two reasons: to get greater clarity and to avoid delays in autofocus (who serves me pretty quick and responsive!).
I use the fastest shutter speeds, raising the ISO if necessary (the quality of modern cameras also work well in medium to high ISO values).
This is, among other things, one of the themes of my Sport & Action workshop.
In aerial photography I reason in the same way, moreover, the amount of light, often very high, also allows me to keep low the ISO.
I rely on stabilization, however, in one case: when I have little light and, therefore, to take advantage of the focal’s aperture that I need, being not penalized by slow shutter speeds.
Using Nikon lenses, it’s also available on some optical the VR Active (which theoretically should be used when shooting from a vehicle): to ber honest, I have not ever used in my life.
All this concerns only photography, for the videos, however, stabilization is used!