70-200 VRII vs 70-200 VR

Messages
24
Edit My Images
No
citylo.jpg

70-200 VRII
citysoft.jpg

70-200 VR

d3 F/2.8 1/13second 200MM iso 400 photo by Cliff Mautner
 
He means they're not coming up at all
 
Yeah seen these on his website. I would say that the old 70-200 blurry shot was more to do with bad technique rather than the VRII being that much better!
 
I have had issues with the VR on the standard 70-200 though. To the point of going through 3 of the damn things to find one that really does work. It is still a bit random - but you can learn to fiddle the system.

The thing with moving subjects and slow shutters is that they must ONLY move in one plane if you have the VR set to normal. ANY movement (like a bike hitting a bump, however slight) in the vertical plane and the shot will be lost, depending on how slow a shutter you are running - put the thing in ACTIVE and it will dial out quite a lot of that upward movement too - saved loads of duff shots by doing this on the standard one.

Having said all that, I still get the safe shot with a fast shutter - as insurance. Then play with dragging the shutter to create streaks, a bit at a time. Quite a lot of failures. I don't use the VR to take static shots at slow speeds, like an lens tripod if you like (when you should use a tripod but don't) - it does work well when used for this though. I have had a play just to try.

Not sure I can justify swapping to the new one - maybe I can get a trial with one and see.
 
Lensflare has hit the nail on the head. One of the biggest quirks to Nikon's VR implementation is that NORMAL mode isn't for normal use. ACTIVE mode is for normal use and NORMAL mode is only for panning. Doh!
 
Back
Top