Mitsubishi Eclipse 3G Club banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Went out and took a few pictures yesterday with a new lens. It's a 55-200mm nikkor but it has been very speedy to AF and good so far. I was pretty much just pointing and shooting, but so far i like it.
<a href="http://s49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/?action=view&current=DSC_0076.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/DSC_0076.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>



<a href="http://s49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/?action=view&current=DSC_0081.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/DSC_0081.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

<a href="http://s49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/?action=view&current=DSC_0085-1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f279/lilmatt13579/DSC_0085-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
It is the VR version. I actually don't know a whole lot about their vibration reduction technology. Do you have any information for me about it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
It is the non VR lens. I actually don't know a whole lot about the technology. I was reading this, but do you think you could put it into simpler terms for me?

VR is specified by Nikon as being VR II--this new variant supposedly gives a bit more range to the VR usefulness. In Nikon's literature, they claim that VR II manages to get you four stops beyond what you'd normally be able to handhold. As far as I can tell, that's a valid claim at 200mm. But, be forewarned that VR is often much less useful than you might think. When you start hand holding a lens at 1/30 or lower, you're definitely going to be fighting subject motion. If your subject is absolutely static, fine, no problema as my South American friends like to say (sorry Brazil--I haven't been there to make friends yet ;~). But most of the folk that'll be using this lens aren't shooting completely static subjects with it, I think. The primary use for VR on this lens in my mind is to keep you from having to significantly boost ISO in common situations at 200mm (which would be f/5.6 maximum aperture). If the choice at that focal length were between shooting at f/5.6, 1/300, and ISO 1600 versus perhaps f/5.6, 1/60, and ISO 400 and I wasn't shooting a moving subject, I'd pick the latter just to keep noise under as much control as possible.
 

·
Bicoastal Traveler
Joined
·
8,555 Posts
VR moves lens elements to counteract camera shake and stabilize the image. The end result is generally less blurry photos, and it allows you to use slower shutter speeds handheld.

It should be noted that this does not really help with moving subjects, since it only reduces movement on your part (shaky hands, wind, shooting from a moving platform, etc.).
 

·
Bicoastal Traveler
Joined
·
8,555 Posts
The VR version is generally said to be the better of the two, but I don't know personally, as I haven't used either one. With that said, I'm considering buying the VR version of the 70-300 lens.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,967 Posts
"Better" would depend on what you shoot...

If you are say normally outdoors with bright skies, and have a steady hand or a tripod, then you likely have no use for it and it may be a waste. On the flipside, if you shoot indoors a lot, tend to shake, or don't own a tripod then it may be a great investment. It's value changes from one person to the next.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top