AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR - Performance & VR

xmh

xmh

Messages
271
Name
Jerry
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Picked up a copy of the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR last week and used over the weekend at RIAT.

The lens is really light and a pleasure to use, however knowing that there had been a recall on Nikon's web site about VR issues with the lens, I checked that mine was outside of this range before purchasing. LINK to Nikon. It indicates that there may still be issues even after the firmware update, with D8xx bodies.

Well after many hundreds of shots with a D7200 & D810 body the problem would seem to still exist and is very noticeable at 1/125 and really bad at 1/160. At 1/250 it seems to what you might call normal i.e not every shot a keeper but you get some decent ones ( I know very unscientific).

I'm quite happy to expect a fair number of bad shots when shooting moving subjects hand held as I'm know my technique could be improved, but I was not expecting the numbers of duff images I got. Some images do indeed look like camera shake and some look like almost like a double exposure. It's not every image but quite a large percentage.

Maybe I had to much / not enough caffeine that day.

Image 1 shows what I think could be VR D7200 1/160 f11
Image 2 shows what I think could be VR D7200 1/125 f13
Image 3 shows what I would call camera shake / motion blur D7200 1/125 f8
image 4 is at 1/250 and hand held where the problem seems to be gone. This was the pick from that sequence, none of the others showed anything like examples 1-3 although they were not what i'd call keepers.

Any one else having this experience ?

#1
View attachment 42184

#2
View attachment 42185

#3
View attachment 42187

#4 in rubbish light drizzle / light rain.

BBMF : Spitfire TE311 (Mk LF XVIE) by Jerry Hawker, on Flickr
 
*Depending upon the way the camera is held when shooting, or the shooting conditions, images may be blurred even after this lens firmware is updated.
Click to expand...

Ah, so that will be down to you then! :thinking:

If your findings are correct this is very disappointing for a lot of people, (not to mention those who already have the lens), as many have seen this as a very worthwhile alternative to long lenses, if it's used with TC's.
 
gramps said:
Ah, so that will be down to you then! :thinking:
Click to expand...

Most likely.

Would be nice if Nikon explained the circumstances that the lens is likely to blur your images, the last thing I need is my equipment blurring the images for me.
 
Last edited:
xmh said:
Image 1 shows what I think could be VR D7200 1/160 f11
Image 2 shows what I think could be VR D7200 1/125 f13
Image 3 shows what I would call camera shake / motion blur D7200 1/125 f8
image 4 is at 1/250 and hand held where the problem seems to be gone. This was the pick from that sequence, none of the others showed anything like examples 1-3 although they were not what i'd call keepers.
Click to expand...
Those shutter speeds seem pretty low for shooting aircraft to me.
 
@Ed Sutton Thanks for that.

@frod Agreed they are on the low side, just trying to get some prop blur. Not expecting to get many keeper, it's just that they are about the worst I have taken. So being the completely paranoid chap ;) that I am, I wondered if the lens with a warning from Nikon could be part of the issue.
 
We all make mistakes mate, I made one once. I remember it well. It was that time I thought I was wrong and I wasnt! :):)
 
Hi Jerry

TBH, no I am not seeing the effects observed in your images with my D7200/300PF combination.

I am no expert on airshows but the shutter speeds look pretty slow to me unless you have perfect panning technique (?).

Have you tried your lens with a static subject ?

By way of comparison I shot a tenner (of which I have few left) earlier and below is a 100% crop from this image at 1/160th, so comparable to your shots. The top image is SOOC, the bottom image has been sharpened a touch. Pardon the crappy exposure I did these in a rush.

DSC_1044_zps6y6bjxxj.jpg



DSC_1044sharpened_zpsedww6xf1.jpg


I appreciate that we are comparing chalk and cheese here but I am just separating out the effect of subject motion blur. My images do not show your effects.

Might be worth you doing a similar test shot ?

BTW, image 4 is superb !

Regards

Gary
 
Last edited:
Hi Gary,

Thanks for that much appreciated. No problems with the lens at all on static shots with VR on & 1/160. I also just tried the 10er test :).

I was just surprised how good some of the shots were at 1/250 & how bad the majority were at 1/160. Think I have found the limit for my (needs much improving) panning technique :).

Cheers

SOOC no sharpening or other PP 100% crop 1/160 VR on (normal)
View attachment 42245
 
Hi Jerry, at those low shutter speeds I think getting moving subjects is hit-and-miss. The static test shot above looks full of detail so that is a relief ! Do update if you continue to have issues. Alternatively, I really hope it performs flawlessley for you. IMVHO, it is an amazing lens.
 
Hi Jerry

As mentioned, I do not really do planes; although weirdly I do get to carry out projects with Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier Aerospace and BAe Systems, all airframe manufacturers, in my job.

That said, the example above looks spot-on to me. I would be highly delighted with this image.

I am sure others here are better qualified to comment on such shots though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top