View Full Version : Nikon VR, does it really work?
shakey c
04-07-2009, 08:16
Just bought a Nikon 70-200mm, my first VR lens. I get better results with the VR switched off, when its on most of the images are soft no matter what shutter speed I use.
I tried a friends Sigma 170-500mm OS and had the same problem. With both lenses the pictures have noticable camera shake which seems to be caused by the VR/OS system, the image in the viewfider moves during exposure.
Does this technology actually work in the real world or is it a sales ploy?
Or is it me!
ITS YOU!!!
Sorry, but its actually a great bit of "technology" and always gains me an extra 2-3 stops of ability handheld.( im canon so its IS not VR, but both systems are the same )
Just a thought, but your not shooting from a tripod are you, as the VR system needs to be off for any tripod work.
TheBionicDan
04-07-2009, 08:25
VR works well on the 70-200 as long as it's handheld... sorry :)
Dangermouse1964
04-07-2009, 08:32
:shrug:I had the 70-300vr and used it once with the vr on and then without vr ....vr never got used again must be my style of panning
if you don't like it you could always leave it off but whatever system you using be it Nikon, Canon or Pentax (or any of the others) they all have limitations but can give excellent results.
V8burble
04-07-2009, 08:38
If you are getting better results with it off then the situation you were using it in did not require VR. :shrug:
:...vr never got used again must be my style of panning
I'm not sure about Nikon's VR sytem, but I do know that Canon has a different forms / versions of IS - earlier IS systems you had to switch off manually if you were using a tripod or panning, later version has a mode 2 switch which allowed for panning and removed vibration / movement in the opposite frame, but again needed manually switching off when using a tripod and a further version, basically was fully automatic for all situations, had an automatic tripod mount detection and allowed panning.
Worth trying to find out what version the Nikon VR system is like and accordingly adjust the VR system. Hope this helps to sort out your problems, as IS / VR systems really do work well :thumbs:
Martyn...
04-07-2009, 09:00
Shakey .. once you start hitting higher shutter speeds over 1/250-1/500 on your zoom I would switch it off.
I am sure that is VRII on that lens which will detect if it is on a tripod, however I would always turn it off on a tripod.
Last point are you giving the VR system time to stabilise before firing the shutter.
Scotty B
04-07-2009, 09:04
VR is a fantastic piece of technology and really does work.
You have to wait to VR to 'settle' before pressing the shutter all the way.
I get sharp shots at 1/25 @ 250mm with my 70-300VR.
I found that with my 70-300 VR it is possible to shoot with a much lower shutter speed (2-3 stops) with VR on. At higher shutter speeds and a shorter focal length lens I have not noticed much difference with it on or off.
geoffd70
04-07-2009, 09:13
Just bought a Nikon 70-200mm, my first VR lens. I get better results with the VR switched off, when its on most of the images are soft no matter what shutter speed I use.
I tried a friends Sigma 170-500mm OS and had the same problem. With both lenses the pictures have noticable camera shake which seems to be caused by the VR/OS system, the image in the viewfider moves during exposure.
Does this technology actually work in the real world or is it a sales ploy?
Or is it me!
It must be me as well then - I have had my 70-200 for about 2 years and feel the same way.
Just bought a Nikon 70-200mm, my first VR lens. I get better results with the VR switched off, when its on most of the images are soft no matter what shutter speed I use.
I tried a friends Sigma 170-500mm OS and had the same problem. With both lenses the pictures have noticable camera shake which seems to be caused by the VR/OS system, the image in the viewfider moves during exposure.
Does this technology actually work in the real world or is it a sales ploy?
Or is it me!
Can't speak for the 70-200 VR since I don't have one but I can say that the VR on the 70-300 works very well. I'm not sure that the 170-500 Sigma has OS. In fact, I know it hasn't, since I part exchanged mine against the 150-500 OS - again, the stabilisation works very well.
The only thing I can think is that you're using VR/OS while the camera is mounted on a tripod or otherwise supported too rigidly - in situations like that, the stabilisation can adversely affect sharpness.
As a final point, how can you tell that the image is moving in the viewfinder during exposure - the mirror will be up so the viewfinder will be blacked out during the exposure...
Yes it does...in both active and normal modes...allows hand-held speeds down to about 60th sec at 200mm on my 70-200 and even slower if i'm very careful.
It's a tool which is useful in some situations and unnecessary in others.
desantnik
04-07-2009, 11:54
It must be me as well then - I have had my 70-200 for about 2 years and feel the same way.
Yup make that x3.
If you want a nice soft image set the VR switch to "ON"
And no, its not because I am some kind of retard or "don't understand VR" or even that I haven't worked out it doesn't come on if you are using the AF-ON button....
Canon's IS works, Nikon VR just doesn't.
Think thats the only time I've found something Canon does better so far!
you guys must be doing something wrong then because I get pin-sharp images with mine...
shakey c
04-07-2009, 12:33
Only tested handheld, you can tell the image has moved its in a slightly different place when the mirror returns.
Glad I am not the only one who is not too impressed, as I am looking for a longer lens I probably wont bother with VR now and can save a few pennies!
P.S desantnik how does the 1.7x TC perform?
BlackCloud
04-07-2009, 12:49
I have had the same issues sometimes with my 55-200 VR, some shots just not sharp. Pics have been handheld but still appear to shake. Others have been pin sharp as it's a good lens for the money. I think it must just be in some situations it just doesn't suit it.
I have the 70-300 VR too and I have never had the same issue with that. That said, I haven't used it as extensively as the 55-200 so maybe I just haven't been in an unsuitable situation.
Yup make that x3.
If you want a nice soft image set the VR switch to "ON"
And no, its not because I am some kind of retard or "don't understand VR" or even that I haven't worked out it doesn't come on if you are using the AF-ON button....
Canon's IS works, Nikon VR just doesn't.
Think thats the only time I've found something Canon does better so far!
You need some strong factual evidence for a statement like that to have any credibility whatsoever. Assuring us that you are not in fact a retard may not be sufficient in this case.
You need some strong factual evidence for a statement like that to have any credibility whatsoever. Assuring us that you are not in fact a retard may not be sufficient in this case.
Ouch... :woot:I mean I was thinking the same, but you beat me to it - I'm supposed to be the 'Soft and Cuddly' one on here... :lol:
Like I say I have no problems using the VR facility on my 70-200, so I was thinking it was more a case of pilot-error than a fault in the VR-system, which a lot of other pro-photographers use very successfully...I think I'd have heard by now from my colleagues if it was as crap as is being suggested by some on here...
desantnik
04-07-2009, 14:05
You need some strong factual evidence for a statement like that to have any credibility whatsoever. Assuring us that you are not in fact a retard may not be sufficient in this case.
Go on then, what would you like in the way of factual evidence...
I've never actually bothered to trial it in anything like a scientific way, the basis for that statement was that I've used Canon gear for several years with IS lenses almost all of the time. I took tens of thousands of images with IS enabled, tried IS off and could see a definite drop in my hit rates.
Moved to Nikon last year, started out with VR enabled and thought my brand new shiny Nikon gear had something wrong with it. Followed the advice of two of my friends (both of whom are prolific photographers with high end gear), disabled VR, never looked back. The combo of 70-200VR and D300 gives near faultless results with VR turned off.
Occasionally I try switching it back on again, still no improvement.
The thing is, IMHO I am more than capable of getting a sharp shot, why does VR f*** it up? I'm not actually doing anything different....
I wondered whether there is some kind of design envelope that VR is designed to work in that is not documented anywhere. I mean, how long does it take to start up? Does it shut down if the shutter speed is too high? Can it actually stabilise horizontal AND vertical movements simulataneously?
It works better at low shutter speeds...otherwise why turn it on?
I generally find that if I'm hand-holding below 60th at 70mm I need to turn it on and below 125th at 200mm...
I have not used Canon's system so I'm not qualified to comment on them, but I do know Nikon inside and out, having been involved in some of the development work on the VR system (in the form of extensive testing and feedback - sorry: can't tell you where or why).
I can say that it doesn't work if supported in any way - it has to be used hand-held, unsupported... it works better on lenses with shorter zoom-ranges than with longer zoom ranges, so a 70-200 is good whereas a 70-300-ish wouldn't be so good...
You have to pick the right tools for the job in other words - there's no 'magic bullet' lenses here...
desantnik
04-07-2009, 14:17
Static or moving subjects are we talking about here?
Both...from both static and moving platforms - cars and helicopters...
desantnik
04-07-2009, 14:23
Well, I have some time it seems this afternoon and my camera gear is all ready to go for tommorow so I'll try and do some testing a bit later - maybe something scientific ;-)
Its only going to be static subjects (and static me too, I'm not running around in this heat!)
I'll go with your suggestions of below 1/60th at 70mm and below 1/125th at 200mm - I don't think I'm any better than that, so it should be quite obvious if its working!
I could even get out the old 30D and try the same with the trusty 70-300IS for comparison.
Try going very slow as well - 15th and lower - see the difference with it on and off and in active and passive modes...
bsmotorsport
04-07-2009, 14:42
I doubted it to begin with but swear by it now, 70-200VR by the way. :thumbs:
desantnik
04-07-2009, 16:03
Ok, test #1:
Using D300, 70-200VR, 9 focus points, continuous focus mode, centre focus point with focus assist points active, 50 shots at 200mm at 1/100th (well under the rule of thumb for hand holdability and right into the territory this should work at). Squeezing single shots off in continuous low drive mode, looking to the focus confirmation light each time.
Comparing in lightroom at 100% view
VR off # Sharp: 21/50
VR on # Sharp: 28/50
Obviously my opinion of "sharp" is not scientific, but I'm using the same subjectiveness I do when I pick out my shots of anything else...
Maybe for static subjects it does work then.... or maybe I got my eye in as I shot the second lot with VR on... anyway, so far I am proving myself wrong :D This bit can't be scientific because you might be better than me (I wouldn't say I am good with slow shutter stuff anyway), but feel free to post your own results - it would be interesting.
Just for scientific completness, here is my test photo subject :
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e239/AIKozlov/vrtest.jpg
PS I don't want C&C on my composition there thanks :D
jordanogrady
04-07-2009, 16:04
I hope it does... just bought 1
DiddyDave
04-07-2009, 16:18
Got to say that although I'm a real steady sod - as my rifle range buddies once commented on to their intense surprise - VR does indeed work for me on my D2Xs & 70-200 VR, as I've had occasion to use it as low as 1/30th @ 200mm with acceptable results for album use
At the 1/over rule I do turn it off though for speed of focusing
DD
desantnik
04-07-2009, 16:49
Test #2
Setup as before, only at 70mm and 1/40th, once again below the "rule" for holdability.
VR off # Sharp: 25/50
VR on # Sharp: 23/50
Ok, I am sick of looking at photos of that matryoshka now :D
What I really need to do is to test it on moving subjects, because that is what I normally shoot and what my experience to date is from.
I'll try and give that a go tommorow....
Maxathos
04-07-2009, 17:40
In my honest opinion I don't think it is really usefull at all (in my work, and the conditions I'm in) I have bought the 70-200 f2,8 prime nikkor lens, without the VR they are 1,200, the newer, VR version costs over 2,000 !
I mean, if you can afford it get it, if you are doing photojournalism and you get suck in photo spots where you have to blind shot pictures over your head, Vr is certainly usefull in longer focal lenghts and lens which has a lot of bulk.
Otherwise I just use a monopod in 20-60th of a sec exposures, and a tripod anything below a 20th of a second,
VR won't be any usefull with moving subjects, unless maybe you are indoor shooting sports.
I guess it's a matter of what kind of photography you do, then it will come more or less usefull for you, budget wise, I go for non VR Version and I get really sharp shots.
bsmotorsport
04-07-2009, 20:21
VR won't be any usefull with moving subjects, unless maybe you are indoor shooting sports.
not sure I agree with that one, Ive used it for some 1/30th pans that I know I wouldnt have got without VR turned on.
desantnik
04-07-2009, 20:22
Well, Canon's IS definitely does work for panning... the VR I shall be testing tommorow!
VR won't be any usefull with moving subjects, unless maybe you are indoor shooting sports.
:nono: Not true,..................VR works for me using the 300mm 2.8, and with a 1.4TC attached (420mm), I shoot prop planes at 1/160 with excellent results
You need to give VR time to work/spin up
My 18-200 VR works perfectly.
kingbling11
04-07-2009, 21:50
i had the 55-200 VR, VR was brill
I now have the 70-300 VR, VR is brill
My dad has the 70-22 VR, VR is brill
Its you. There is nothing wrong with VR
In my honest opinion I don't think it is really usefull at all (in my work, and the conditions I'm in) I have bought the 70-200 f2,8 prime nikkor lens, without the VR they are 1,200, the newer, VR version costs over 2,000 !
I mean, if you can afford it get it, if you are doing photojournalism and you get suck in photo spots where you have to blind shot pictures over your head, Vr is certainly usefull in longer focal lenghts and lens which has a lot of bulk.
Otherwise I just use a monopod in 20-60th of a sec exposures, and a tripod anything below a 20th of a second,
VR won't be any usefull with moving subjects, unless maybe you are indoor shooting sports.
I guess it's a matter of what kind of photography you do, then it will come more or less usefull for you, budget wise, I go for non VR Version and I get really sharp shots.
I've found it to be very good with moving subjects...very, very good...
Both with me shooting from static positions (hides) and from moving vehicles (helicopter doorways and out the side of C-130's doing low passes over the targets...
Also in low-light conditions where both my movement and the subject movement is fast and unpredictable (er...war-fighting).
Just because you or anyone doesn't find to be a useful tool, that isn't to say that it doesn't work. You may not find it useful, but other might well do. The point of this thread was to determine whether it works, not whether you necessarily need it... Individuals can make that decision by the kind of subjects they shoot...
Maybe it is as a result of weapons training - applying the 'marksmanship principles' -lol...
Are you saying that you will actually get better results with the VR turn off when using a tripod even if you are taken shots of flying birds etc?
Newbie question!
thanks
jim
wilsnunn
05-07-2009, 10:20
If VR isn't working for you, then you are doing something wrong! I had the 18-55 non VR, when i replaced it with the VR it was amazing VR rules!
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/image-stabilization.htm
READ THAT!!!
Daniel
Only tested handheld, you can tell the image has moved its in a slightly different place when the mirror returns.
I used to see this problem with my VR lenses, the solution ( for me ) was to make sure i had a really firm grip of the camera and squeezed the shutter release rather than press it.
Then, it works perfectly.
Heres one I took handheld with a Nikon 70-300 VR, a couple of days ago, those wind turbines were 8 km away, the forts, another 7km.
You can almost read the writing on the turbines
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3647/3689136109_9eab4bd2f3.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/allans/3689136109/)
Click on pic for other sizes
Allan
puddleduck
05-07-2009, 11:06
Allan - That turbine shot was 1/1600 - in other words 5 times the safe shutter speed limit for most folks (1/300 for 300mm)
VR didn't do anything for you in that shot. It would have been sharper with VR off.
Are you saying that you will actually get better results with the VR turn off when using a tripod even if you are taken shots of flying birds etc?
Newbie question!
thanks
jim
Nikon's VR does NOT work on a tripod - the gyro sets up an interference against the tripod...we tested extensively using the old 70-400mm VR Nikkors and if you lightly touched the camera with VR switched on you could feel the camera vibrating...
VR is only for hand-held applications...
If you're using a tripod to shoot birds, use a good head and an electronic cable release instead...
Allan - That turbine shot was 1/1600 - in other words 5 times the safe shutter speed limit for most folks (1/300 for 300mm)
VR didn't do anything for you in that shot. It would have been sharper with VR off.
Take your point about VR not being of any benefit in that situation Pudders, but would it have been sharper with VR off? I think I know where you're coming from, from a theoretical stand point, but I've never seen any evidence of this. I think on balance it is still better to leave VR on.
Not wishing to have any argument, but if you have some practical results, that would be very intersting ;)
Copied from Nikon Websire and adapted slightly due to loss of compatibility tables:
What is the difference between the Normal and Active VR modes ?
Normal mode on the Nikon VR lenses reduction camera shake, the lens will automatically detect if you pan the camera horizontally and only vibration in the vertical axis is reduced.
Active mode should be used when taking images from a moving vehicle or vessel. The frequency of camera shake experienced during handheld shooting is different from that encountered when trying to shoot from a moving vehicle or vessel. The VR active function is designed to be able to compensate for severe vibrations encountered when you're in a car, boat, on a train or airplane, and even aboard a helicopter. The active mode does not automatically distinguish panning from camera shake unlike normal mode. If you wish to pan it is recommended you use normal mode.
Monopod: Nikon recommends turning it on when using a monopod or when using a tripod on which the panhead is not locked.
Tripod - Not Recommended:
AF-S VR 200-400, AF-S VR 200 and AF-S VR 300 only, VR can be turned on. The lens can automatically detect when it is mounted on a tripod and reduce camera shake accordingly.
Tripod - Can be used but may cause problems:
AF-S VR 400, AF-S VR 500 and AF-S VR 600 only, t he lens should be set to tripod mode when mounted on a tripod. VR operation will occur at a reduced amount.
What are the differences between the two VR modes of the Nikon 80-400mm VR lens?
In mode 1, VR system starts when the cameras shutter release button is lightly pressed and allows the user to see that any camera shake is reduced by looking through the viewfinder. Of course, VR operation carries on during exposure
In mode 2, to conserve battery power VR operation is only executed during taking of the image. You cannot see the VR operation through the viewfinder in this mode. This mode is designed for those who feel uncomfortable with compensated viewfinder images caused by the vibration reduction mechanism and conserves battery power. Actual photo results are the same as for mode 1.
Nikon's VR system claims to offers the equivalent of shooting at a shutter speed three or four stops (eight times) faster. Could you explain this?
While Nikon's VR system offers the user the possibility to shoot at a shutter speed several stops slower than the user could normally hand hold a lens without camera shake occurring in the images. Please note that the possibility of camera shake occurring will be the same when you use a faster shutter speed or a shutter speed 3 stops slower (4 stops for the Nikon VR II mechanism) in same situation with VR activated. For example, if the possibility of camera shake is 30% when using a 400mm lens at 1/250 sec, the possibility of camera shake remains the same 30% at 1/30 sec if the VR is activated (thus about 70% of shots taken should not suffer with camera shake). The quoted number of stops is an average figure and it does not mean shooting is possible with a shutter speed about three stops slower than recommend shutter speed to prevent camera shake at a given focal length - 1/f (1/focal distance e.g. 1/500th of a second for a 500mm lens).
Exposure time, the photographer's ability, shooting conditions and such will also effect the amount of reduction which can be performed by the VR system. (The effects of reduction is Approx. 4 stops at maximum and 1 to 2 stops at minimum.)
Allan - That turbine shot was 1/1600 - in other words 5 times the safe shutter speed limit for most folks (1/300 for 300mm)
VR didn't do anything for you in that shot. It would have been sharper with VR off.
Your probably right, i'll have another go next week, same shot with and without vr at lower shutter speeds
Allan
towershot
05-07-2009, 21:06
At the end of the day ,good camera technique are more help than VR, but VR with good technique are better than with no VR IMHO
Newbies when holding a camera cradle the lens with the left hand (from there you can zoom or manual focus) Lock you're elbows into you're ribs
giving you a more stable grip.
And NEVER JUST PRESS THE SHUTTER, tickle the shutter till it goes of.
A good way for the shutter is to roll the finger across the release,takes some getting used to but when you get it right ,the shutter going off should surprise you.:eek:
I took some quick comparison shots with and without VR on my 70-300 vr. At low shutter speeds, shots were sharper with vr on. I took some at higher speeds too to see if there was a difference in IQ.
All the shots were hand held on a windy hill late in the afternoon, so there was some heat haze coming up.
They are on My Flickr below, make your own mind up which were sharper if you want to have a look.
The windfarm is 8 km away, the forts 15km, the towers on land, about 4 km, all shots are jpeg and straight out of the camera, all at 300mm
Allan
desantnik
07-07-2009, 07:37
Didn't get a chance to check the VR on panning at the weekend... will have to have a go in 2 weeks time... not giving up on the test though!
Didn't get a chance to check the VR on panning at the weekend... will have to have a go in 2 weeks time... not giving up on the test though!
I'm sure that if you test it enough, you'll get the answer you're looking for. Against global opinion ;)
desantnik
07-07-2009, 12:48
Thats not true actually Hoppy, this thread inspired me to do what I should have done ages ago and test it...
I will say so far its proved it makes no odds for me... but then again the moving stuff is what I shoot 99.9% of the time, so will check with that.
Would be far easier if VR (or IS) status was reported in the EXIF...
puddleduck
07-07-2009, 13:16
Would be far easier if VR (or IS) status was reported in the EXIF...
It is....
desantnik
07-07-2009, 13:18
As what? Can you show me?
I've just looked at both my motorsport shots from the weekend (posted in the motorsport section) with VR definitely OFF and my sample shot in this thread with it definitely ON and can't see anything...
puddleduck
07-07-2009, 13:47
Open the NEFs in Capture NX or ViewNX.
Only Nikon software understands the VR On / Off tag.
desantnik
07-07-2009, 13:52
NEF?! I shoot jpg :D
I did have a look around actually with google just now and there are some tools which display the Nikon specific fields in the EXIF (just as you describe), but thats not much good really - I was looking more to use Lightroom's attribute filtering to give me a survey of my photo library to date...
puddleduck
07-07-2009, 13:59
The field is embedded in JPEG as well, and you can see the VR status on the image review screen as well.
ShawWellPete
07-07-2009, 14:07
On the Sony in body system you can see how much the VR is working through the viewfinder which I found quite usefull. It's one of the things I miss since moving to Nikon.
On the Sony in body system you can see how much the VR is working through the viewfinder which I found quite usefull. It's one of the things I miss since moving to Nikon.
It's the opposite :thinking: You can't see in-body working as it's behind the mirror - one of the main drawbacks of Sony etc.
puddleduck
07-07-2009, 14:33
It's the opposite :thinking: You can't see in-body working as it's behind the mirror - one of the main drawbacks of Sony etc.
The viewfinder has a small graph that illustrates how hard it has to work (1 bar, nice and steady, 5 lay off the coffee!)
ShawWellPete
07-07-2009, 14:43
:agree:
It's the opposite :thinking: You can't see in-body working as it's behind the mirror - one of the main drawbacks of Sony etc.
How do you see the VR working on the Nikon?
:agree:
How do you see the VR working on the Nikon?
Through the viewfinder! The image is stabilised before it comes in, not after it hits the sensor. Can't believe you've not noticed this - fit a long lens and hold it at a steady, before activating IS/VR with the shutter release. The image dances about. Half-press the release and bing! it all goes smooth. Major advantage of in-lens.
Not sure how Sony manages to get their viewfinder display thingy - it can't be reading off the sensor so it must be picking up some into off the AF system, as a guess. Clever, and I imagine quite useful - quite a good clue abouit how fast a shutter speed you should be looking at I imagine. But of course the image itself still moves, making it harder to track fast moving stuff with a long lens.
desantnik
07-07-2009, 15:01
I'd have thought the little scale indicator is just driven off of the accelerometers that are used to measure the vibration in the first place...
I'd have thought the little scale indicator is just driven off of the accelerometers that are used to measure the vibration in the first place...
Yeah, could be I guess, I suppose they don't need an image to do that :thumbs:
This sounds like a handy feature (the viewfinder indicator) though I've not used it. I wonder why Canon/Nikon doesn't run a display off the lens accellerometers in the same way? I guess they think it's just one more distracting bit of info we don't need with their system, but you could always turn it off.
desantnik
07-07-2009, 15:16
I think its missing from Canon/Nikon because the functionality is seperated from the camera body - it would mean another stream of data being passed back over the lens mount and probably there isn't spare channels for that, which would mean a change to the mount - something neither will want to do as the mount system is the strength of both of them!
I think its missing from Canon/Nikon because the functionality is seperated from the camera body - it would mean another stream of data being passed back over the lens mount and probably there isn't spare channels for that, which would mean a change to the mount - something neither will want to do as the mount system is the strength of both of them!
Probably. Just looking at my Canon 40D, it has eight contacts inside the lens mount, and checking a couple of EF-S lenses, they both have seven (although one is clearly two, doubled into one. And my EF 70-200 4 IS has a rather splendid TEN! What do they all do? I know some do clever stuff like tell the flash gun the focusing distance, but what else? (Calling Canon Bob :) )
Found this on another thread a review of the 70-200 VR .
some interesting references to the VR
http://www.camerahobby.com/Review-70-200mmVR.htm
Found this on another thread a review of the 70-200 VR .
some interesting references to the VR
http://www.camerahobby.com/Review-70-200mmVR.htm
Like what? It's a million words long!
john crossley
07-07-2009, 16:27
Just bought a Nikon 70-200mm
Does this technology actually work in the real world or is it a sales ploy?
Or is it me!
Not being a Nikon user I can't comment on the VR, but in my experience:
Don't use VR/IS if the camera is mounted on a tripod/monopod
Don't use VR/IS if the shutter speed is greater than the reciprocal of the focal length
Whilst VR/IS is an invaluable aid, it is not a magical panacea, and does have its limitations.
desantnik
07-07-2009, 21:39
Well, thats an interesting article and it says a lot about the 80-200 vs the 70-200VR but not a lot really about the subject of VR itself, other than:
Shooting styles will have to change slightly when using VR, as one cannot simply rattle off a series of motor driven shots the moment you want. You need to wait for VR to engage first in order to utilize it and that requires a brief delay.
Which may of course be the problem I was experiencing, mind you, as I said earlier, I'd used Canon IS for several years and never turned it off - so its not like I'm not used to the idea that those little gyros need to spin up and the system stabalise.
Something I did notice the other day during my test which I'd never seen before with the Canon is that the image in the viewfinder "jumps" when I click the shutter release. I guess thats the moving VR element pinging back to the default centre position each time.... I don't think Canon's IS does that - if you still have the button mashed the system keeps on stabalising until you release the button - could this be the issue?
of John's two points above:
1. Don't use VR/IS if the camera is mounted on a tripod/monopod
2. Don't use VR/IS if the shutter speed is greater than the reciprocal of the focal length
Well, 1 is true of the 70-200VR, but not true of all VR/IS systems if you read the manufacturers manuals.
Point 2, I'm not quite sure what you mean, do you mean that you should turn it off just because you don't need it or because it actually impedes the shot?
From the article Pics not copied
VR Comparisons - Handheld Shots
Here we have some handheld shots at 200mm of a car in the shade. The images were processed through Photoshop's Camera Raw Converter from Nikon NEF to JPEG-High with a 300% USM applied before conversion to JPEG. The crop of the car's door handle is at 100% magnification from the D100's output.
Because of my ability or luck at being able to handhold the lens at relatively slow speeds, I used the very slow f22 shots to clearly show the advantage that VR provides.
At f22 the shutter speed was 1/8 of a second. Of the three images shot at f22, the VR Normal shot is the best of the three and although it is still soft in absolute terms, it could certainly be usable if push came to shove. The shot at f2.8 with a fast 1/500 shutter speed with VR off is for comparison purposes for a sharp image.
We can also see that using the VR Active mode is actually detrimental to the image quality when used for normal static shooting situations.
Also, keep in mind that with the D100 camera being used, the smaller CCD results in a cropping factor that turns the 200mm to a 300mm equivalent for the long range of the lens. While not a true 300mm magnification, it has all the problems of vibration and shake of a 300mm lens.
--------------------------------
VR and Tripod Use
While Nikon's implementation of VR betters Canon's IS in incorporating panning detection without the need to flick a switch, it is worse than Canon's in not being compatible when a lens is tripod mounted. Nikon recommends turning off VR when the lens is mounted on a tripod and I agree for the most part. When I took the first sample shots below, it was quite bright out and comparing the shots with VR off, on and active at f8 @ 1/320, saw no difference at all, but not at f22 where the shutter speed fell to 1/40. The second set of shots were indoors and were at f5.6 @ 1/10, but they still confirm the results of the outdoor shots. In both sets of shots a Gitzo 1345 tripod and Arca Swiss B1 head were used.
Why isn't VR compatible with tripod use? My guess (educated or not) is that the VR element is like a gyroscope that is always active in trying to repel vibrations when you have VR on. If you tend to shake in one direction, the VR element will shift the opposite direction to counteract the shake and provide a sharp image. However, on a tripod with VR on, the VR element is still active and in this current generation from Nikon, it is not yet "intelligent" enough to recognize when it is on a stable platform and when it is not, thus blurred images with VR on. So VR continues to attempt to counteract vibration and shake even when not necessary.
Strangely though, the Active mode of VR presented an image that was a little less clear than with VR off, whereas the VR normal mode is very blurred. So, yes, do follow Nikon's recommendation to turn off VR when using the lens on a tripod.
-------------------------------------
VR on a Weak Tripod
VR is not advised for use when the lens is mounted on a tripod; however, not all tripods are created equal. I dug out my father’s ancient tripod that no self-respecting serious photographer would ever want to use due to it being short with thin diameter legs and being very wobbly. So wobbly that I had to wait several seconds between exposures during the testing whereas I only had wait a second or two for the lens mounted on the Gitzo 1345 to settle down. And yes, I even used the centre column of the wobbly tripod, a practice anathema to those that care about sharpness.
This was to confirm the notion that VR does not work well on a good, solid tripod because of the stability provided versus VR working well with weak tripods or monopods because of the inherent instability.
As with the shots taken on the Gitzo 1345 tripod, the shots taken on the weak tripod at fast shutter speeds showed no differences between VR off, on, or active.
At slower shutter speeds, VR On was still detrimental to the image with a slight blur being revealed, but certainly not as bad as with the Gitzo shot. I found the Active mode though, provided a subtly better image than with VR off. I suspect that with slower shutter speeds, the flimsy tripod will definitely benefit from VR being on Active mode than off and only within the danger zone of speeds of 1/60 to 1/2 of a second for cameras without benefit of mirror lockup.
-------------------------------------------
When VR is on one can hear the little click of the VR motor engaging and the viewfinder image shifts slightly. There is no waviness causing seasickness, as I’ve heard of for older VR/IS lenses. It is simply amazing to see the trembling of the viewfinder caused by one’s own hands shaking being counteracted by the VR mechanism and it is even more amazing to see the sharp images appear on the computer screen and comparing it to non-VR shots at the same slow shutter speeds.
However, as other experienced users of IS/VR have noted, one should really not use VR as a crutch for bad technique. Your percentage of sharp images at slow shutter speeds will certainly improve, but in order to obtain the best advantage that VR has to offer, good technique is still required.
In some of the test shots I did, I surprised myself at how well I was able to handhold the lens with 2x TC attached (400mm @ 1/60), with the results matching the quality offered with VR on, but that was only when I made a conscious effort to be steady. At other times when I was particularly sloppy in technique, not even with VR on would the shot be usable.
Normal VR mode is suitable for the majority of photographic opportunities with this lens with Active VR really only required during very shaky situations. Using Active VR in normal situations can result in blurred images due to the aggressive implementation of VR by the lens in this mode.
Shooting styles will have to change slightly when using VR, as one cannot simply rattle off a series of motor driven shots the moment you want. You need to wait for VR to engage first in order to utilize it and that requires a brief delay. In quiet moments you can hear it and know when to start shooting, but in noisy environments, best to give a half-second pause before releasing the shutter.
There were references made on one of the Nikon lists that VR was not functional with the AF-On feature of current Nikon cameras. Without knowing more details and specifics, I made an automatic presumption I could no longer use the AF-On button to focus the lens and would have to use the shutter release to do so in order to enjoy the use of VR at the same time.
This was an incorrect presumption on my part and I take the curses uttered at Nikon back. VR is indeed only engaged by the shutter release button; however, this does not preclude one from continuing to use the AF-On button to focus. While you can choose to have VR and focusing both on the shutter release button, using the shutter release for focusing has become so alien to me that during the brief period of time I had the AF-On disengaged, I found that I instinctively had my right thumb reaching for the button instead of focusing via the shutter release.
I prefer not to have the AF via the shutter release because focus is not locked while I continue to have the meter active. As I compose and meter the scene, the subject focus shifts as I move the focus away from it. With the AF-On feature, I can lock focus first, release the thumb on the AF-On and compose the scene or meter other parts as desired.
It really is quite simple and effective to have focus on the AF-On and meter-lock and VR on the shutter release. I could also use AF/AE button to lock focus, but this was awkward for me to keep the index finger engaged at the same time, as I was engaging and dis-engaging the AE/AF lock button when I wanted the focus locked.
Point 2, I'm not quite sure what you mean, do you mean that you should turn it off just because you don't need it or because it actually impedes the shot?
I've done quite a few comparison shots at most speed /aperture combinations and in all but a very few ( probably to do with me not VR) cases, VR got me the sharper shot.
I posted an image of the Kentish Flats Windfarm earlier in the thread at 1/1600th at 300mm with VR on. I tried the shot again with VR off a couple of days later and the image wasnt as sharp. 10/10 for VR there! The same shot on a tripod with VR off looked the same as the original VR assisted image.
My hands, and I guess many others', arent as steady as they used to be. VR for me isnt just about getting a steady shot in lower light, its about reducing vibration in everyday shots, and it works for me.
Allan
desantnik
07-07-2009, 22:05
And that was my expection based on my Canon IS experience to be honest Allan, but it might just be down to the "issues" I described in my last post :D
I got the jumping image in the viewfinder and thought there was a problem, but I have had other vr lenses that did the same, it seems to be a "feature" of Nikons vr. I minimised this with changing my technique, a good solid grip of the camera and squeezed the shutter release. I probably should be doing this anyway, but it made a big difference in the sharpness of my vr images. The image in the viewfinder doesn't jump anymore
Allan
...Something I did notice the other day during my test which I'd never seen before with the Canon is that the image in the viewfinder "jumps" when I click the shutter release. I guess thats the moving VR element pinging back to the default centre position each time.... I don't think Canon's IS does that - if you still have the button mashed the system keeps on stabalising until you release the button - could this be the issue?...
Canon IS makes noises and can also jump slightly when switched on.
If you don't let the system settle momentarily before shooting, yes you might well get problems.
I just did another quick and dirty comparison today - hand held using 70-200 VR f/2.8
Outdoors: 500th at f/2.8 @ 200mm with and without VR - the images with VR are noticably soft...
those without are pinners...
Indoors: 15th at f/2.8 with and without VR - the images with VR are fine and those without are rubbish (surprise...lol)
puddleduck
08-07-2009, 15:43
I just did another quick and dirty comparison today - hand held using 70-200 VR f/2.8
Outdoors: 500th at f/2.8 @ 200mm with and without VR - the images with VR are noticably soft...
those without are pinners...
Indoors: 15th at f/2.8 with and without VR - the images with VR are fine and those without are rubbish (surprise...lol)
I did the same thing with a 70-300 VR over the weekend, and past 1/2000 shutter I could spot the degradation (even on my D700 which is low res really)
But this doesn't surprise me - at these shutter speeds its clear that VR can only negatively impact IQ as you have an element moving around that doesn't need to be moving.
...right you are - I hadn't used this particular lens with VR on at high shutter speeds before, so I thought I'd better check...
I know this was the case with the 'old' 80-400 VR lens but I hated that bloody thing and used any excuse to leave it behind...
puddleduck
08-07-2009, 15:52
I rarely use VR. Certainly on my 70-200 VR it was always off - not only does it impact sharpness, it also impacts bokeh.
Ironically the best VR is probably in the 18-200 VR, but as that is **** to begin with its hard to do much damage there :)
sometimes i have to - like I said: 15th wide open at 800iso
I just did another quick and dirty comparison today - hand held using 70-200 VR f/2.8
Outdoors: 500th at f/2.8 @ 200mm with and without VR - the images with VR are noticably soft...
those without are pinners...
It would be interesting to see these results as my findings are different.
Allan
200sec @ 200mm-ish with VR off
http://arkady001.deviantart.com/art/33-Med-Reg-Ex-002-128731936
Didn't process a soft one for obvious reasons...lol
Take it from me though it is noticable...
Indoors: 20th sec @ 160mm-ish with VR on - blurring due to subject movement rather than camera-shake...
http://arkady001.deviantart.com/art/33-Med-Reg-Ex-001-128732035
StewartR
08-07-2009, 18:58
Copied from Nikon Website
What are the differences between the two VR modes of the Nikon 80-400mm VR lens?
In mode 1, VR system starts when the cameras shutter release button is lightly pressed and allows the user to see that any camera shake is reduced by looking through the viewfinder. Of course, VR operation carries on during exposure
In mode 2, to conserve battery power VR operation is only executed during taking of the image. You cannot see the VR operation through the viewfinder in this mode. This mode is designed for those who feel uncomfortable with compensated viewfinder images caused by the vibration reduction mechanism and conserves battery power. Actual photo results are the same as for mode 1.
I always smile when I see this. The VR implementation on the 80-400 is eccentric, to say the least. It was probably Nikon's first VR lens and they probably hadn't worked out the practicalities. Mode 2 is a complete waste of space, though I guess it might have sounded clever at the time. And I love the way Nikon have tried to rationalise it - "designed for those who feel uncomfortable with compensated viewfinder images". Yeah, right. I'm sure there must be loads of people out there who prefer a bit of visible shake. :shrug:
desantnik
08-07-2009, 20:11
But this doesn't surprise me - at these shutter speeds its clear that VR can only negatively impact IQ as you have an element moving around that doesn't need to be moving.
Can you (or anyone else) explain this then?
I rarely use VR. Certainly on my 70-200 VR it was always off - not only does it impact sharpness, it also impacts bokeh.
Ok, so you seem to agree with my statement back on page 1 that it sucks, which is nice, but can you give us any idea why this would be the case?
puddleduck
08-07-2009, 20:19
Well I wouldn't say "it sucks" but its clear that it needs to be turned off when not needed.
Nikon says 2 stops for VR on the 70-200 VR so I'd suggest they mean that once shutter exceeds 2 x focal length (maybe 2.5x for crop) its time to turn it off.
Have a read here:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html
Clearly seen also is that VR mode does have a bearing on bokeh. The more active the VR, the less attractive the bokeh...
I imagine that once shutter speeds get so high, VR can no longer compensate, and indeed degrades the image. No surprise.
desantnik
08-07-2009, 20:41
Why would VR have anything to do with shutter speed though? As far as I know it doesn't take that into account at any time.. its just accelerometers detecting unwanted lens movement and shifting a moveable element to account for it.
And I don't get it about the bokeh either!
I agree 100% that VR should not be needed at faster shutter speeds, but equally, why would it fail?
puddleduck
08-07-2009, 21:02
I can't answer "why" - I can only report by observation. I don't think the "Why" actually matters tbh.
I imagine if Nikon wanted to, it would be easy to disable VR via "D" information vs. shutter speed. But then they don't tie in AutoISO to lens focal length vs shutter speed, which for a firmware engineeer is a 3 minute job to code.
In the meantime, to maximise IQ, we need to turn off VR while on a tripod, and also turn it off when it exceeds around 3x focal length / shutter speed ratio.
desantnik
08-07-2009, 21:25
Googling around, there is an interesting thread here:
http://community.compuserve.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=21&nav=messages&webtag=ws-photography&tid=32830
Reading that the conclusion seems to be:
1) That VR is only useful below 1/60th (although I'd have said that was dependent on focal length...)
2) At "high" shutter speeds VR degrades the image (no idea what "high" means, but presumably around/just above the reciprical ratio)
3) Canon's IS does not exhibit this issue
All of that probably describes exactly what I was talking about in my very first post. I'd never have thought to have turned off VR for my 1/160 - 1/320 motorsport shots with my 70-200VR, why would I when my old Canon gear was more than capable of doing it and yielding positive effects....
I therefore re-conclude, VR sucks, IS works :D
I'll do some Canon tests to further validate this later this week....
In the meantime, to maximise IQ, we need to turn off VR while on a tripod, and also turn it off when it exceeds around 3x focal length / shutter speed ratio.
I agree about VR off when using a tripod, the VR lens manuals state that anyway, but turning it off at other times? well thats really only of benefit if we find it affects the images that we alone produce. I for one don't see a detrimental effect on my images at high shutter speeds with VR on, certainly not on any of my VR lenses and to suggest everyone follows this rule of turning VR off without question is wrong.
I think this is a case of personal experimentation and choice, the best answer to the original question is suck it and see. If it works for you, use it, if not, turn it off.
I notice that there is still a lack of images to properly evidence that IQ suffers with VR turned on at high shutter speeds :shrug:
Allan
desantnik
08-07-2009, 21:52
I notice that there is still a lack of images to properly evidence that IQ suffers with VR turned on at high shutter speeds :shrug:
Yeah I still haven't done that bit of the experiment yet - I'll try to get round to it. However, if you google something like "vr high shutter speeds problem" you do find pages of people saying just that.
I'd have found it quicker had I thought this might have been the case, but it wasn't exactly leaping to the top of the pile as the reason for my dissatisfaction with VR...
I will do some tests though (and some Canon ones just to be complete)
puddleduck
08-07-2009, 21:56
I did a test on Sunday and I can see the degradation on a couple of frames (not all of them)- I'm sure the "evidence" won't be acceptable (because its impossible to prove VR was the cause) but in just a few instances, around 1/2000 when really shots should be pin sharp there is an unaccountable loss of sharpness when VR is on. Again this is widely reported, and well known in Nikon circles.
My very quick google on vr problems came up with nothing obvious. Can you post any relevant links?
I've just done a test with two Canon IS lenses, 70-200 4 L IS, and 100-400L IS. IS works superbly on both lenses at all times. The former has Canon's latest 4-stops IS (and it costs a freakin fortune more than the non-IS version) and the 100-400 has one of Canon's earliest 2-stops IS incarnations. Camera is 40D. Everything at 200mm.
I shot a bare light bulb from across the room and exposed for the writing on it - only way I can get really high shutter speeds ATM. At 1/4000sec, no difference with IS on or off, ditto 1/2000sec, and 1/1000sec, with either lens.
To see how the IS worked at the other end of the scale, with IS off I was getting sharp images with the 70-200 down to 1/125sec with acceptable results and a decent hit rate (I was leaning against a wall). With IS on, everything was sharp down to 1/30sec, but I didn't try any longer speeds. What was also noticeable was how hard it was to maintain the centre AF point exactly on target with IS off - it dances about too much.
I'm still finding it hard to believe that Nikon can't make as good an IS system as Canon, especially since they appear to have been doing it longer according to Wikipedia :thinking:
Chaz Photos
09-07-2009, 00:24
Only tested handheld, you can tell the image has moved its in a slightly different place when the mirror returns.
This line worrys me HOW are you testing it?
It stop small movmet not you moving the camera as you take it?
desantnik
09-07-2009, 06:36
My very quick google on vr problems came up with nothing obvious.
C'mon, I gave you the keywords further up the thread...
Your tests... how many shots did you take and what was the success rate - like I demonstrated further back up this thread.... just to keep it scientific. Nothing strange about your results btw, you have proven exactly what my several years of experience with Canon have shown - IS does work.
But thanks, one less thing for me to test to get you doubting Thomas's seeing the light :D
My very quick google on vr problems came up with nothing obvious. Can you post any relevant links?
Same here, just speculation in a couple of articles that it could cause softness of images under certain conditions but no evidenced articles anywhere that it actually does. It certainly doesnt seem to be a major problem in any forums I have searched through.
I think panning with high shutter speeds using VR may cause softness as the VR system wouldnt have time to stabilise before firing off the shot but I think this is more a user or usage problem than a fault with VR in general.
Allan
puddleduck
09-07-2009, 06:57
What about the evidence regarding bokeh? (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=1695202&postcount=84) - if VR can have an influence out-of-focus areas, it doesn't take a rocket scientist genius type to figure that the in-focus areas are going to be affected as well...
it doesn't take a rocket scientist genius type to figure that the in-focus areas are going to be affected as well...
I couldnt find the reference to Bokeh in your link, can you be more specific?
In the post you linked to you said you "imagine that once shutter speeds get so high, VR can no longer compensate, and indeed degrades the image. No surprise."
Well, in my case, I just dont find that is true on any of the comparison images I have produced. I think if we are going to answer the OP question, we need to look at facts and real life situations so the OP can make up his own mind whether VR is worth getting
Allan
puddleduck
09-07-2009, 07:31
I couldnt find the reference to Bokeh in your link, can you be more specific?
http://www.naturfotograf.com/AFS70-200VR_rev04.html#top_page
The more active the VR, the less attractive the bokeh.
What about the evidence regarding bokeh? (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=1695202&postcount=84) - if VR can have an influence out-of-focus areas, it doesn't take a rocket scientist genius type to figure that the in-focus areas are going to be affected as well...
Yes, I understand how this technology works, and what we're looking for, and frankly I still find it amazing that it works anything like as well as it does. But it does for me.
I also understand how and why it could affect sharpness at higher shutter speeds, or indeed longer ones, too. The theory is that there are moving elements in the light path at all times, so it should potentially show up at all times. In which case the best way to show it would be on a firmly tripod mounted camera, to actually eliminate the camera shake aspect, but we know this has associated problems.
Having said that, my 70-200 manual makes no reference to this, other than saying to turn it off to conserve battery power. The 100-400 is less clear, but I do use it on with a tripod with IS on (I know others that do the same) and it is very beneficial, however, it occasionaly throws a wobbly so you have to watch it (not hard to spot).
It would maybe be relevant to find out at what frequency/frequencies it moves?
BTW, for the tests I did above I must have taken almost a couple of hundred images, in sequences of six for each setting.
Edit: away from PC now. Won't be back today :( :D
puddleduck
09-07-2009, 08:05
This thing is Hoppy, this question is about VR, not IS..... I don't think what your 70-200 IS does or does not do is really relevant. AFAIK there is not a well documented high shutter speed issue with Canon IS...?
desantnik
09-07-2009, 08:26
we need to look at facts and real life situations so the OP can make up his own mind whether VR is worth getting
You don't get much choice really. If you want any of Nikon's newer/better lenses then you get VR whether you like it or not.
Its only Canon who still make a stabalised and non-stabalised version of some of their lenses.
heidfirst
09-07-2009, 18:05
And I love the way Nikon have tried to rationalise it - "designed for those who feel uncomfortable with compensated viewfinder images". Yeah, right. I'm sure there must be loads of people out there who prefer a bit of visible shake. :shrug:
there are some people that feel physically ill (like motion sickness) with stabilised viewfinders.
This thing is Hoppy, this question is about VR, not IS..... I don't think what your 70-200 IS does or does not do is really relevant. AFAIK there is not a well documented high shutter speed issue with Canon IS...?
I like to check these things for myself, and since Nikon VR works in exactly the same way as Canon IS, it follows that what happens with one system is likely to happen with the other. So there it is. I didn't mean to waste anybody's time.
ditchdigger
10-07-2009, 09:36
it works, i never use 300mm zooms for dark concerts
last night i thought i would practice before i go to cornbury to shoot in daylight.
my hands are a bit shaky which dosent help
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q36/johnnyrep/050c372c.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q36/johnnyrep/2396a4ee.jpg
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.