200-400 VR on or off?

[vandrv]

I just swapped my 300 2.8vr for a 200-400vr. I am planning on using it for the first time this weekend and was wondering whether when shooting off a monopod at fast shutter speeds should I leave the vr on or shut it off? I almost never turned on the vr on my 300, but it seems somewhere I read that even on a tripod or monopod the 200-400 was better with vr left on. I was looking for opinions from those familiar with this lens. Thanks for any help.
Joe

 

[trenchmonkey]

Over 1/1000th I turn it off...but I'm using a BushHawk 90% of the time. Did the same
swap myself as I was always using the 300 f2.8 with the TC-14E II. So much nicer to have
almost instant AF again and be able to back off to 250mm or 300mm with a flick of the wrist. :biggrin:

 

[DaMavs]

I always use 1/500" as the breaking point for VR ON or OFF. Anything faster than 1/500" and I turn it off. Thom Hogan has a good essay on it at his site which formed the basis for my behavior: http://bythom.com/nikon-vr.htm

 

[trenchmonkey]

I take better BIF/Rodeo shots than Thom. :tongue:

 

[gugs]

I keep VR on 99% of the time, but I mostly shoot handheld, sometimes with a gimbal head on a tripod.

 

[Maji]

I take better BIF/Rodeo shots than Thom. :tongue:

After seeing your work, I agree with you. :smile:

 

[vandrv]

Over 1/1000th I turn it off...but I'm using a BushHawk 90% of the time. Did the same
swap myself as I was always using the 300 f2.8 with the TC-14E II. So much nicer to have
almost instant AF again and be able to back off to 250mm or 300mm with a flick of the wrist. :biggrin:

Thanks for the advice, Will. Actually, you are one of main inspirations for making this swap. I also shoot horse events, and it seems like the 300 was always too long or too short. Hopefully this will be a great solution, but it sure is a lot more unwieldy than the 300.
Joe

 

[LSUDVM]

Thanks for the advice, Will. Actually, you are one of main inspirations for making this swap. I also shoot horse events, and it seems like the 300 was always too long or too short. Hopefully this will be a great solution, but it sure is a lot more unwieldy than the 300.
Joe

All the professional horse show photographers I know use the Sigma 120-300/2.8 Non OS version.

 

[phillip 200]

I never use the vr on my 200-400 thats what tripods/monopods are for.


Phil.

 

[colincarter]

just a shame that the 200-400 is not optically as good as the 300VRII+1.4x especially for distant subjects.

the af on the 300+1.4x is still as fast or faster than the 200-400 naked aswell in my opinion.

 

[phillip 200]

just a shame that the 200-400 is not optically as good as the 300VRII+1.4x especially for distant subjects.

the af on the 300+1.4x is still as fast or faster than the 200-400 naked aswell in my opinion.

It worsens even more with a converter on, on a crop camera after 50m or so,but for wildlife/sport it's a great lens, the D3/s/700 do help it keep some IQ with a TC, I still find the 200 f2 the best for distant subjects i.e. landscapes.

Phil.
:smile:

 

[colincarter]

It worsens even more with a converter on, on a crop camera after 50m or so,but for wildlife/sport it's a great lens, the D3/s/700 do help it keep some IQ with a TC, I still find the 200 f2 the best for distant subjects i.e. landscapes.

Phil.
:smile:

Hi Phil,

i sold my first 300Vr for the 200-400 thinking it would be better, for me it wasnt. I sold the 200-400 and got a 500Vr, then recently picked up another 300VRII. Ive lost abit of flexibility but gained a lot in IQ which is the key for me.

hopefully Nikon will bring out an updated 80-400 AFS VRII Nano which will fill the flexibility gap for me especially if its optically as good as the current one just with better VR and aF speed.

 

[phillip 200]

Hi Phil,

i sold my first 300Vr for the 200-400 thinking it would be better, for me it wasnt. I sold the 200-400 and got a 500Vr, then recently picked up another 300VRII. Ive lost abit of flexibility but gained a lot in IQ which is the key for me.

hopefully Nikon will bring out an updated 80-400 AFS VRII Nano which will fill the flexibility gap for me especially if its optically as good as the current one just with better VR and aF speed.

Hi Colin yes I know what you mean it's flexibility is great, I have not had much luck with the 500's ?(I think they just don't like me) so I may get another 600 some time, I did miss my 300vr when I sold it after getting the 200f2 so I picked up a 300 f4 AFS but find myself using the 200 more, I find the 200-400 is a jack of all trades but master of none so to speak.

Phil.
:smile:

 

[colincarter]

Hi Colin yes I know what you mean it's flexibility is great, I have not had much luck with the 500's ?(I think they just don't like me) so I may get another 600 some time, I did miss my 300vr when I sold it after getting the 200f2 so I picked up a 300 f4 AFS but find myself using the 200 more, I find the 200-400 is a jack of all trades but master of none so to speak.

Phil.
:smile:

Ive got another 500 on order Phil, i sold the first one to sort some other stuff out.

I was going to get a 600, but after trying one i prefer to be able to carry the 500 and 300 in my Kiboka. The 600 is just too unweildy and big for what i want it for and i didnt really think the slight increase in object size was worth the tradeoffs in weight, size and "carryability" for me.


new 500VR should be here in less than 10 days. I really do miss it, I found it as sharp as any other ive ever had
best wishes

Colin

 

[Commodorefirst]

200-400VR on 98% of the time, up to around 1/1500

I find the older VR models more forgiving than the newest VR II versions, plus I really like VR on when panning with slow shutter speeds, the old VR does a nice job of sensing the panning, and only compensating for the vertical bobbles when shooting at slow moving aircraft, and at shutter speeds under 1/500,

Of course, I half press ahead of time, and don't use the AF-On button so my VR is activated sooner and I don't have the jumping around many see when using the AF-On button.

Cheers, and happy shooting.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

If I was shooting hand-held I'd use VR. No point using it if you have good support.

 

[colincarter]

If I was shooting hand-held I'd use VR. No point using it if you have good support.

it can help with strong winds, even on a 5 series gitzo and wimberly II.

 

[Lance B]

Just had a good look at your gallery, Colin. I must say that your galleries are stunning to say the least!

What lenses are you primarily using on the bird pics and do you also always use a tripod or monopod?

Thanks for any info.

 

[ourabmen]

I take better BIF/Rodeo shots than Thom. :tongue:

From what I've seen of your shots I agree 100%:smile: nothing against Tom. He may just not a rodeo kind of guy.

 

[colincarter]

Just had a good look at your gallery, Colin. I must say that your galleries are stunning to say the least!

What lenses are you primarily using on the bird pics and do you also always use a tripod or monopod?

Thanks for any info.

Hi Lance

thank you for the compliment, must appreciated.

my bird pics are mostly taken with the Nikon 300 F2.8VR or the 500 F4VR but there are some in there with the 70-200 F2.8VRII or 300F4.

As for tripods, i like to handhold wherever I can, especially with the 300F2.8.

The 500VR is mostly shot on a beanbag where possible, like a hide or out the car window, tripods are great but they slow you down sometimes but I use a Gitzo GT5541Ls and Wimberly II where i have to or in windy conditions.

The 70-200 or the 300F4 are never tripod mounted, i use them handheld.

Ive actually sold the 300F4, it was a great lens but the lack of VR was not helping over here in the UK. It was a great lens for Florida, but our light levels are not like Floridas. It Nikon bring out a 300F4VR, then ill have a look at one of thoes for a lightweight carry around lens, which, by the way, was great for macros.

hope this helps

best wishes

Colin