Some tele lens tests with TC's (200VR, 300VR, 300 F/4 AFS...)

[Tom Gresham]

The photos are interesting, and the impressions are helpful, but I can't help but wonder what information can be gained about image quality when you are hand holding.

This introduces the variable, and certainty, of camera movement.

This would, it seems to me, make any comparison worthless, since you don't know what the lens can actually do.

Am I missing something?

 

[trenchmonkey]

Am I missing something?

Yeah, if you're a wildlife shooter and stalk your subjects on a regular basis...
you don't have the luxury to set up sticks to get the sharpest possible shot.
Handholding brings home the bacon for me. Same goes for candids/concerts
and why we work for years on our long lens technique. My 200 f2's never seen
support and I have thousands of captures that'd make your eyes bleed. Different strokes! :biggrin:

 

[Tom Gresham]

I fully understand the need for hand-holding, and I am amazed at the ability of some to get great photos when hand held (especially yours, Trench), but . . .

That's completely immaterial if the goal is to compare lenses against each other. From a logical testing standpoint, you have to eliminate the variable of the shooter so that you know you are comparing the lens performance.

Now, the issue of being able to get great photos handheld is something completely different -- no doubt there.

BTW, loving my 200 f/2 VR. And you are right. Even with the 2x tele, it's amazing.

 

[trenchmonkey]

Comparing lenses is fine, Tom...and I see your point. For me, performance in the field
is what counts so while lens X may be better than lens Y on sticks w/MLU...that's not how I shoot.
The 400 f2.8 is better than the 300 f2.8/TC1.4 combo, but I can't handhold the former for hours at a time.
The 200 f2 VR is a freak of a lens, THAT we can agree on! :wink:

 

[Chris Fabbri]

Thanks a lot Tom, well said.
Just to take the oportunity to clarify it again : this is not a "X versus Y" optical test.
I don't even have the proper scientific knowledge and tools to make it.

This is basically an amateur test to find the best combo that suites my own shooting style and real use (no tripods here) based on handheld use, weight, handheld performance with TC's, etc.

Nothing more.

Thanks.

 

[ATL Jack]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

You had me at Stella. :Love:

Man, am I thirsty! :biggrin:

 

[Chris Fabbri]

lot's of... lol..

 

[flashram]

Cool thread. What strap were you using on the Nikon? I need something with clips like that for quick removal.

 

[Chris Fabbri]

you got me... don't know since it's not my camera.
I'll try to ask the owner and let you know.

 

[general]

300mm

Chris,
I just read this thread for the first time and your tests and evaluations cause me to ask a question: You imply the the 300 f/4 is too heavy to handhold but you praise the 300 f/2.8 for handholding. Would you explain what brought you to that conclusion. I have the 300 f/4 and I use to have the f/2.8 and my memory recalls that the f/2.8 was heavier. ??????????? Thanks.

 

[Chris Fabbri]

Hi Don,

my argument is about stability, not weight.
the lack of VR can turn things difficult to handhold it with a TC (extra care with the speed).
300 2.8 is a lot heavier... btw I got a f/4 also for my light walks, it's a fantastic optics on a light and small package.

Thanks

 

[general]

Thanks, Chris

Thank you; now I understand.

 

[Chris Fabbri]

You are welcome Don.

 

[threecats]

great thread and love the Markins in red!!! I was dangerously close to ordering mine in a color

I have a long way to go handholding my 300/4 without going nuts with iso

 

[Chris Fabbri]

Thanks Glenn.

 

[Lens]

Can anyone post some pictures of 70-200 VRII or/and 300 VRII with TC-20E III combos wide open? I would be grateful so much