Flying Tiger said:
Nikon are really missing a trick here - huge numbers of photographers would be willing to immediately buy a 24 MP D300s replacement and the 80-400mm lens replacement is so overdue it is laughable. Canon almost built their company on the back of the success of their 100-400mm f5.6 lens and a Nikon lens of a similar quality would be a real cash cow for them. As a profit making business, surely Nikon should drop everything in favour of the much requested D400 and 80-400mm replacement!
Best wishes
Frustrated Nikon fan from Lancashire

CaryTheLabelGuy said:
I picked up a AF Nikkor 80-400mm 4.5-5.6 last week and have noticed a very strange annomoly. It seems that any shutter speed over 500th/sec with VR on, I'm getting blury shots. If I turn VR off, the shots are perfectly sharp, even at 400mm. I searched the interwebs and found no data that supports this issue.

Furthermore, I noticed that after a shot is fired, with VR on, I can see the VR element move abruptly in the viewfinder, which is showing up as blur in the shot. At slower shutter speeds, VR does seem to help with camera shake which does allow sharper images, but only slower than 1/500th sec.

Has anybody experienced a VR malfunction and does this indicate VR is actually malfunctioning? VR is working great until the moment the shutter is released.

Problem is you picked the lens up and then didn't immediately put it down again. The best thing for this lens is to place it in front of the car wheel and drive forward.

msmoto, thank you for the excellent comparisons.

The slight difference in center sharpness to me is inconsequential unless you are planning to print bill boards, lol.

The main difference between the lenses is the higher edge softness in the 80-400mm which can be a plus or minus depending on what you are shooting. In these shots the edge softness is actually a plus to me because it accentuates the feeling of speed.

BTW, that D4 is in a world by itself msmoto! It is great to see you having fun with it!

adamz said:
@Tao - indeed there is some difference in sharpness but it's IMHO not what You would expect for 8 grant difference

I agree. Not a single shot would be discarded if someone wanted to publish them Only due to sharpness.

Great Test Msmoto! That is very interesting to see. Makes me a bit more comfortable moving to FX with TCs rather than having to upgrade to some "big guns" for the little work I do that calls for them.

framer said:
Just my late 2 cents,

I've seen this problem w/my 70-200 AFs vr using faster than 500th/sec and having vr active. Its rare but I've seen soft or blurred images and shut the vr off and gotten perfect images. It seems to happen more with close focus shots than over 100' shots.

This is a 1st generation vr lens.

framer

There is another thread or two where we discussed this. Basically above 1/500th you reach a the limit where the capture is so fast, there is almost no opportunity for shakes. The VR actually thinks there should be so it compensates causing shakes. This happens also with a tripod as well. Each VR is tuned specifically to the lens so this varies a bit.

Shooting above 1/500 it is advisable to turn off the VR.

So, the final set of "in practical use photos"

2000Px http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7420187230/sizes/o/in/photostream/

2000Px http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7420187580/sizes/o/in/photostream/

My thoughts, after having done this rather unscientific experiment....and it involved an estimated total of fifty plus exposures, is, that for shooting at 400mm on FX, the lens is not going to be the primary factor in the final quality of the image. These are shot at 1/1000th at f/11, this to get some blur in the wheels, some degree of DOF, and to get the lens near the "sweet spot". This is not intended to be anything but a pragmatic example of the fact that is shown everyday on PAD. The photographer's technique is the important factor if at least minimal quality equipment is utilized for the job.

A little note as I looked at the Mustang...400mm f/2.8 vs, the 70-200mm f/2.8 +TC-20EIII...the latter is sharper in the 2000Px comparison IMO. However, as a car had gone on its roof, in another part of the track, a minute before hand, this exposure was taken with the car moving slower. Note the wheel blur difference.

Second note when shooting motorsports....it is helpful to have earplug speakers and to listen to race control. This lets one know what is happening when the track announcer may not tell all that is occurring at another part of the track.

Hope all enjoyed this.

I don't believe VR seems to have any negative impact that I can tell...maybe old versions? But I never experienced on my 18-200 VRI. I shoot all my VR lenses with it on always and I have never seen any impact from it. I have even left it on at night with long shutter speeds and I still haven't noticed it. Maybe all my pics are blurry and I just don't notice LOL ;)

Just my late 2 cents,

I've seen this problem w/my 70-200 AFs vr using faster than 500th/sec and having vr active. Its rare but I've seen soft or blurred images and shut the vr off and gotten perfect images. It seems to happen more with close focus shots than over 100' shots.

This is a 1st generation vr lens.

framer

OK, today I should have an opportunity to try the TC-20E III w/ the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII Nikkor. And if really lucky, will find the same cars to catch. It is interesting to try this stuff. Last night I was out with the 400 + TC-20E III and looking at the International Space Station. LOTS TO LEARN...got some interesting little blurs...

Tommie - please do a comparison with N70-200+TC2.0III, I'll be eager to see the differences; pity that You don't have N200-400 as I'll be eager to see the differences with that one too :)

@Tao - indeed there is some difference in sharpness but it's IMHO not what You would expect for 8 grant difference

adamz said:
@tao - if You look closer ther's a slight difference in bokeh on this shots. 400/2.8 is more smooth while 80-400vr is more irregular, and that-s all:)

Yeah I always noticed that but the question was always about sharpness. I can see a bit of a difference - not sure how much processing accounts for it. I'll leave MSmoto's observation to determine that.

The bokeh on my TC 1.7 on my 70-200 vrI gets really funky and can be distracting at times. Might show up in a comparison if you use that MSmoto. Just a thought.

Always trade-offs with everything.

Well, it was an interesting experiment... and I do see a difference in the 400mm f/2.8, very subtle details the zoom just does not capture. But, the difference in cost...

The real big faster here is that the 400mm f/2.8 can accept the teleconverters and makes a sweet 800mm on FX. The 80-400....well that is the end of the story. Just thought I would put up some fun stuff as long as I had both along. Maybe I should look at the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII with TC-20E III and compare to the 400mm f/2.8.

@tao - if You look closer ther's a slight difference in bokeh on this shots. 400/2.8 is more smooth while 80-400vr is more irregular, and that-s all:)

Other than some processing variation as you pointed out, I can't see any real difference between the two.

I think the comparison is good way to show two things; 1) Proper settings to capture the subject & 2) Those that say the 80-400 is soft at 400mm are probably pushing it beyond it's limits. If you work within the limits of the tools (body and lenses), then the tools will perform brilliantly.

I would add having a D4 and being able to shoot super clean 800iso images helps extend those limits for sure. That is one hell of a camera!

thanks for sharing Tommie, indeed the differences are small, which only confirms my findings about this lens; if only they could put af-s on it, it will be a perfect travel companion

Comparing 400mm performance at f11 doesn't really accomplish as much as you would hope it would. There is a reason that the 400mm 2.8 is so expensive and its that little "f2.8" on the end. We could do all the same tests with 50mm or 85mm lenses at f11 and likely see almost no difference whatsoever between any of the shots. Set them to their respective widest apertures and the extra cost starts to justify itself.

Relighting this thread....In some threads the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR Nikkor has been given some "bad press" So, I thought today I would shoot some "pragmatic" in-the-field comparison shots with the 400mm f/2.8. Shutter speed was 1/1000th and aperture f/11 for both shooting the D4 in Manual mode. So, for those interested, here are the shots, you be the judge. To avoid influencing opinions, the small photo is shown with its 2000px link, so you can jump right to the link and then after guessing which is which lens, look at the Exif data.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7415833014/sizes/o/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7415834402/sizes/o/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7415832360/sizes/o/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/7415834776/sizes/o/in/photostream/

Take a look and see how well the "cheap" 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR holds up against the benchmark 400mm VRII. I found it interesting and please excuse the post processing variations.

Thanks for the clarification on this particular lens, TaoTeJared!

Always keep in mind VR takes a sec or so to kick in. The mode is not a switch for when the VR engages but what the VR compensates for. You just see the effects in the viewfinder. Mode 1 should start to compensate in the view finder with the release button half depressed.

This is from the manual Nikon's site:

Setting the vibration reduction mode switch
Mode 1
Vibration is reduced at the instant the shutter is released and also while
the shutter release button is lightly pressed. Because vibration is reduced
in the viewfinder, auto/manual focusing and exact framing of the subject
are easier.
Mode 2
Vibration is reduced only at the instant the shutter is released. In this
mode, vibration of the image in the viewfinder is not reduced while the
shutter release button is pressed lightly.
Vibration is not reduced.

•In Mode 1 and Mode 2, wait at least one second before fully depressing the shutter
release button after lightly pressing the shutter button. In Mode 1, it’s recommended to
release the shutter after the image in the viewfinder has stopped vibrating.
•The vibration reduction mechanism reduces camera shake. However, if you move
the camera quickly, vibration in the direction of that movement may not be affected.
For example, if you pan the camera horizontally, only vibration in the vertical
direction is reduced, making smooth pans much easier.
•Characteristic of the vibration reduction mechanism, the image in the viewfinder
may blur after releasing the shutter.
•When the lens is mounted on a tripod, set the vibration reduction mode switch
to OFF. Set the vibration reduction mode switch to ON, when using a monopod or if
the lens is mounted on a tripod without the head being locked in place.
•This mode may be less effective when pictures are taken from a moving vehicle.
•The vibration reduction mode does not work when the AF start (AF-ON) button is
turned on with cameras so equipped.

The main reason I'm not sure what each VR mode does, is because I bought this lens used at an unbelievable price. It didn't come with a box or manual, unfortunately. This is where the confusion sets in, because there isnt a lot of info on what each mode is, for this lens, on the net. This was one of the first lenses to ever get VR, so the tech is fairly old compared to the newer VR models.

Just to clarify; In mode 1, VR does not have a visual effect in the viewfinder at all, but only works during the shutter release. In mode 2, VR is on at all times, while you have the shutter button depressed halfway and obviously during the shot.

According to Thom Hogan, if VR is used at shutter speeds faster than 1/500th sec, VR can cause blurry shots from frequencies being slightly off. Sometimes it doesn't blur the shot, but sometimes it does. If I turn VR off at these shutter speeds, I get a vastly better keeper ratio. What he stated on his sight is exactly what I am seeing and the conclusion I came up with, before I even read this article. Maybe it effects the older VR and not the newer versions.

The 80-400mm 4.5-5.6 is a amazing lens, as long as you know its limitations and stay within them. It's not my 80-200mm 2.8(or 70-200 2.8 VRII), but when I need that extra super tele range, it's there and can deliver super sharp images with great contrast and very little chromatic abberation, as long as you're shooting in the daytime with plenty of light. The D7K's high ISO performance does help make this lens a little more useful then it otherwise would be.

I shoot all my VR lenses with VR always on and I haven't ever noticed any blurring from it even at fast shutter speeds.

VR is designed for each lens, for it's intended use. VR is not the same from lens to lens but is similar within it's group - Tele, macro, standard, etc. Example, the 105vr Nikon states to turn VR off when using a tripod. The 400mm VR is designed to utilize VR on a Tripod.

Your manual will describe the Active vs Normal well. Typically Normal is for 99% of shooting. Active is generally just for panning from side to side.

kanuck said:
Yes I agree with Adamz this doesn't sound right because VR should not cause this to occur. I have never used the 80-400mm but with the 70-200mm VR it never happened and shouldn't. Do you shoot on tripod? You are not suposed to use VR for landscapes when shooting with VR as I'm sure you already know. Do you have a Nikon repair shop near where you live?

Adamz I thought this was one of your favourite lenses? Did you get rid of it? I remember seeing some wonderful jet fighters shots at an airshow from you and different wildlife as well. You also got into a discussion regarding when the 80-400mm refresh will take place. I believe the 80-400mm is still the most significant Nikkor out now due for a refresh.

Either that or the 85mm 1.8 and the 10.5mm fisheye.

Yes I agree with Adamz this doesn't sound right because VR should not cause this to occur. I have never used the 80-400mm but with the 70-200mm VR it never happened and shouldn't. Do you shoot on tripod? You are not suposed to use VR for landscapes when shooting with VR as I'm sure you already know. Do you have a Nikon repair shop near where you live?

Adamz I thought this was one of your favourite lenses? Did you get rid of it? I remember seeing some wonderful jet fighters shots at an airshow from you and different wildlife as well. You also got into a discussion regarding when the 80-400mm refresh will take place. I believe the 80-400mm is still the most significant Nikkor out now due for a refresh.

Presuming the VR on your lens is the same as the system on the VR equipt lenses I own, level 1 VR helps against "human" movement like panning & hand holding wobble, level 2 is designed to help cancel out "mechanical" motion, such as taking a shot from the back of a vehicle whilst on safari for instance. If you have the instruction booklet that came with your lens new, it explains the two modes in greater detail. Basically I think the first mode deals with horizontal motion, while the second deals with both (or primarily vertical motion). I think that's what my manual says.