Nikon Rumors Forum

where there’s smoke there’s forum fire

1. 

   TaoTeJared
   

   preferred member
   Joined: Apr '10
   Posts: 2,422

   offline

   looon said:
   Awhile back I researched whether I should keep VR turned off while at high speeds. There seems to be 2 schools of thought about whether or not it can actually hurt rather than help at those speeds. All this physics theory is cited on both sides, but no actual test data..

   Got to add some info on this one. First, each lens has it's own VR design that is specific to that lens. If you read Nikon's articles, you will see them say that, so you can not have a rule of thumb for all VR lenses. Basically you have to read the lens manual.

   There was a Nikon support thing once (that I can not find on their site - google "nikon VR shooting above 1/500" byThom probably is the most detailed - but I didn't read it. He always is very detailed,) that said to turn off VR when you are above 1/500th. The VR may actually kick in and degrade the image.

   Now there is a whole thing on panning (Active mode) that it should/could be used.
   Also, Tripod use seems to be different for each lens and is listed in the manuals.

   Looon is correct, physics is at play - Nyquest I think is what the term is.

   My experience: 70-300VR - above 1/500th Turn off the VR for sure. When people talk about this lens being soft, I'm willing to bet they have the VR on over 1/500th. 70-200vr (ver I) never have noticed any issue above 1/500th except for when it is on a tripod and not panning, then I do see the fuzz come to visit. 24-120vr ver1 - who knows that lens always was soft for me.

   Posted 12 months ago #
2. 

   PAG
   

   member
   Joined: Oct '10
   Posts: 36

   offline

   I agree with all here that Nikon just doesn't seem to be too interested in the birding, wildlife, and amateur sport photography markets. If they did we'd see updates to the 300mm f/4 (add VR), the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 (AF-S, sharper long end), and introduction of a 400mm f/5.6. They've updated the 300mm f/2.8 TWICE over the past decade, but that's a well over $5,000 lens. It also weighs nearly 6-1/2 pounds.

   @breezes: I went from Nikon's 70-300mm (which I still use at shorter range) to the 80-400mm and have settled mostly on the 300mm f/4 + TC1.4. It focuses more quickly than the 80-400 and is very sharp. The lack of VR means that 1/800 is about my slowest shutter speed when hand held. That hurts shooting songbirds in semi-shady conditions, but for flight photos I'd never shoot under 1/1000 anyway. If you go the 80-400 route, two things help a lot; stopping a bit to f/7.1 or f/8 and backing off of 400mm a bit. I got some nice flight shots with it but it is tough due to the slow focus speed.

   @looon: What I've read from multiple bird photographers (including those who actually know the guts of these cameras) is that VR doesn't hurt the accuracy of the AF at high shutter speeds but rather slows the AF down without improving accuracy. So if you're shooting perched birds you might never really notice the difference, but if you're trying to shoot speedy hawks or waterfowl in flight you may have more trouble obtaining focus.

   Posted 12 months ago #
3. 

   PAG
   

   member
   Joined: Oct '10
   Posts: 36

   offline

   SquamishPhoto said:
   And from what most people seem to say the 200-400mm f4 is the poorest performer of all the exotic telephoto lenses, so if you do decide to blow the wad one day you might want to rethink your decision making.

   Moose Peterson is a highly respected wildlife photographer. His take on the 200-400mm f/4: "Since its introduction in 2004, the 200-400VR has become “the” lens for wildlife photographers and for very good reasons." This lens is probably the most coveted by Canon wildlife shooters, though Canon has now announced they'll be delivering one of their own at some point. Does it perform quite as well at a prime? Probably not, but that's because ... well, it's not a prime.

   Posted 12 months ago #
4. 

   framer
   

   preferred member
   Joined: Aug '10
   Posts: 160

   offline

   Forget the VR for 95% of birds, You need to get your shutter speed up, 1/1500 at a min 1/3000 is better. Low cost solution AFs 300 f4 w/TC14E 420mm f5.6. Get focus and take a burst. I like 4-5FPS for birds. I shoot this combo at F8 or one stop down. My body is a D3s I adjust ISO to get my speed where I want it.

   framer

   Posted 10 months ago #
5. 

   DaveyJ
   

   preferred member
   Joined: Jun '10
   Posts: 452

   offline

   I agree with Breezes wish and feel it would prove far more useful than many realize. Nikon is clearly looking right now at the 80-400VR and that lens DOES need to be revamped. It is in the hands of Nikon Research and Development. That was Nikon's answer to me. Do not think that great photography needs to be done by 400 and 500 2.8s as I abandoned my super expensive lens buying habits based on results from lens like the 70-300 VR. Breezes does have a point for sure according to me as a field user (NOT Studio) but the wait is the real issue. Another is pent up demand. Nikon demands that this exist. So the 80-400VR is getting close. I cannot say more.

   Posted 10 months ago #
6. 

   SquamishPhoto
   

   preferred member
   Joined: Feb '10
   Posts: 1,076

   offline

   Next you'll be telling us that a D40 and a kit lens is all I really need for wildlife.

   *face to the palm*

   Posted 10 months ago #
7. 

   PAG
   

   member
   Joined: Oct '10
   Posts: 36

   offline

   framer said:
   Forget the VR for 95% of birds, You need to get your shutter speed up, 1/1500 at a min 1/3000 is better. Low cost solution AFs 300 f4 w/TC14E 420mm f5.6. Get focus and take a burst. I like 4-5FPS for birds. I shoot this combo at F8 or one stop down. My body is a D3s I adjust ISO to get my speed where I want it.

   Agree that the AF-S 300mm f/4 + TC 1.4 is a great combo (I use it constantly) but very much disagree that people should forget VR for 95% of birds. VR is not important for tripod shots and flight shots, but there are plenty of sub-1/1000 opportunities in bird photography. Additionally, shooting in poor light with a low power flash for micro contrast in the feathers and fill can really be aided by VR since you're often shooting at your top flash sync speed or perhaps just a little more. There are plenty of opportunities I could take advantage of with VR in the 300mm.

   Posted 10 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.