Jul 312007
 

pdlester_20070730_113.jpg
Hummingbird 1/60 sec, 200mm f/5.6 VR (on) hand-held

I’ve never owned a VR lens before, but after experimenting with the one that I just bought, I think that I’m convinced! I used to own a camera that had anti-shake technology. My Minolta A1 had a sensor that was mounted on an anti-shake mount. If your hands moved, which they always do, the anti-shake mechanism would counter it. Honestly, I never used it much because I always had my camera on a tripod.

VR lenses work the same way, expect that the anti-shake component is inside of the lens. The cool thing about a VR lens is that you can see it working. If you press the shutter partially, you’ll see the lens shake smooth out and the image will become quite stable. Nikon claims that with VR, you can get an extra 3 stops of exposure. That said, using the rule of thumb for shooting for acceptably sharp pictures of 1/focal length, if I have a 200mm lens, I would have to shoot at 1/200 second or higher to get a reasonably sharp picture. Nikon says that I can shoot 3 stops less than that, or 1/25 of a second! We’ll see.

My Nikon 50-200mm f/4-5.6 arrived on the doorstep on Monday. I couldn’t wait to get it out into the field. I headed for my favorite shooting location, Reedy Creek. My intention was to shoot some flowers just to see how it worked. However, I found better material as the sun was heading below the treetops, very dense shadows began to fill most of the park. I set my ISO at 400 to ensure that I had some low shutter speeds. I was shooting with my D40. Yikes, it’s been a while since I’ve shot with my D2X :-( Probably about a week! :-)

Here is the result of one of my experiments. First the VR:
pdlester_20070730_177.jpg
200mm f/5.6@ 1/13 second hand-held VR(on)

Now, the non-VR. This is the best that I could do under the same conditions, same lens, without VR turned on. I took about 6 shots and chose the best one.
pdlester_20070730_184.jpg
200mm f/5.6@ 1/13 second hand-held VR (off)

As you can see, there is a marked difference in the shots. VR could mean the difference between getting the shot and not!

Heres another: 1/6 second @50mm f/5.6 hand held VR on.
pdlester_20070730_170.jpg

Mind you, I’m not saying that you should go out and buy one, but … it is a worthwhile investment to spend an extra $80 to get the VR rather than the regular lens, if you can afford it. Your mileage may vary. The sharpness of the shot depends on how good is your technique and how much your hands shake. Mind shake a lot, but I have decent techniques including a soft shutter press and decent breathing. It’s not a cure-all and won’t work for all situations, but it sure gives you a lot more breathing room to shoot!

If you are interested in how the technology works, here is a link to an explanation.

Related Posts :

  • I've written before about my propensity to sell equipment that I've not used in while. Sometim ...

  • In a previous post, I spoke about the aperture. Now, I'd like to talk about the other half of ...

  • It's usually about this time of year when I have a look in my bag and see if there is anything t ...

  4 Responses to “VR”

  1. Paul – I have VR on a few of my lenses now. In buying new lenses, I definitely try to go for having that feature, but I would debate on if I would sell my big lens just to have it. Good examples of its benefits!

  2. Thanks for that. I always wondered but seem in too much of a hurry to make the comparison shots. For some reason I’m always in a rush when taking pictures. Wonder why; it’s not necessary. I digress.

    Anyway, I recently bought the Nikon 105 VR micro. Yep the VR makes a huge difference especially for someone like me who’s always in too much of a hurry to set up my tripod. :)

  3. Paul, those are some amazing and convincing comparisons. (I really, really like the beautiful green photos with the seating in a circle. Takes me back to childhood, when I’d attend a one-week summer camp every year.

    I think you’ve just sold some lenses here!

  4. I don’t have any of the VR lenses either. I’ve been tempted a few times even recently but I decided to go for the better glass and use the monopod where I need stabilization for “handheld” shots. The monopod works well for me and doesn’t eat precious battery life.

    Great comparison shots and demos.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

   
© 2011 Paul Lester Photo Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Bad Behavior has blocked 229 access attempts in the last 7 days.