New To Mac-Forums?

Welcome to our community! Join the discussion today by registering your FREE account. If you have any problems with the registration process, please contact us!

Get your questions answered by community gurus Ľ Advice and insight from world-class Apple enthusiasts Ľ Exclusive access to members-only contests, giveaways and deals

Join today!

 
Start a Discussion
 

Mac-Forums Brief

Subscribe to Mac-Forums Brief to receive special offers from Mac-Forums partners and sponsors

Join the conversation RSS
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography Discussion of all things graphics.

70-300mm VR (Nikkor)


Post Reply New Thread Subscribe

 
Thread Tools
Jordanjez193

 
Member Since: Nov 02, 2008
Posts: 66
Jordanjez193 is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: MacBook 2.2 ghz, iPhone 3G, And g5 iMac

Jordanjez193 is offline
Im looking at the 70-300mm telephoto lens for my d60

is it worth it to pay the $400 or whatever for the vr or just go with the non vr?

Ps: link to my stuff in sig...
QUOTE Thanks
BlueMac

 
BlueMac's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 01, 2008
Location: Rhinebeck, NY
Posts: 1,056
BlueMac is a jewel in the roughBlueMac is a jewel in the rough
Mac Specs: 20" iMac 2.66 GHz... Running 10.5.7

BlueMac is offline
The lens sucks, if you really want an honest opinion. I really recommend getting the 18-135mm instead.

Flickr

Last.fm
Si, hablo Espa˝ol. Oui, je parle franšais. Yes, I speak English.
QUOTE Thanks
Jordanjez193

 
Member Since: Nov 02, 2008
Posts: 66
Jordanjez193 is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: MacBook 2.2 ghz, iPhone 3G, And g5 iMac

Jordanjez193 is offline
dont you shoot Cannon?

and I dont have that type of money to blow....
QUOTE Thanks
mmatalis

 
mmatalis's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 08, 2009
Posts: 3
mmatalis is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: iMac 20', Macbook 2.4 Ghz

mmatalis is offline
I have a 70-300 Nikkor and get excellent results with it. The only problem is not with the lens itself, but the fact that if you are shooting something any great distance away, the heated air between you and your subject is going to trash your sharpness.

As for the VR factor, I use it, but as for its effectiveness, since I shoot action subjects I've never had a chance to try with it both on and off to see if there's any difference.
QUOTE Thanks
Jordanjez193

 
Member Since: Nov 02, 2008
Posts: 66
Jordanjez193 is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: MacBook 2.2 ghz, iPhone 3G, And g5 iMac

Jordanjez193 is offline
I hear with the VR it has a harder time focusing, when panning. I talked to a woman at a local Ritz Camera and she says she uses it for sports and she usually has it switched off and sees no difference.

Interesting. If you find yourself shooting with it switch it off and let me know how it goes if you please.

Thanks.
QUOTE Thanks
Village Idiot

 
Village Idiot's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 04, 2007
Location: Durtburg, WV
Posts: 2,641
Village Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of light
Mac Specs: Sooper Fast!

Village Idiot is offline
VR does nothing to stop motion. If you're shooting people at 1/60 at a focal length of 200mm, motionless objects won't be blurry from camera shake but moving objects may be blurry because of motion and the slower shutter speed.

Chaotic Evil, Level 1 IT-Tech

Slough Roast Blog
Capitol Sound Blog
QUOTE Thanks
Jordanjez193

 
Member Since: Nov 02, 2008
Posts: 66
Jordanjez193 is on a distinguished road
Mac Specs: MacBook 2.2 ghz, iPhone 3G, And g5 iMac

Jordanjez193 is offline
Ok I understand But when she is moving the camera to get action going on like she is following a player running or a ball in flight.
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueMac View Post
The lens sucks, if you really want an honest opinion. I really recommend getting the 18-135mm instead.
That's such a horribly general statement with nothing to back it up at all. I can show you not only a 45 page thread at nikoncafe.com with incredible results from that lens, but you can also look at pixel-peeper.com for many other fantastic shots with it. I can also add my own shots to prove that this lens does anything BUT suck.

The only other lens which is as tack sharp for its focal range as well as price range is the 55-200 (yet another amazing budget lens if you don't mind its slower speed).

As for the VR, it has two modes. Normal and active. Use active for when you're panning and normal for still objects. And of course, when using a tripod, you don't want to use VR at all.

This lens has been amazing for me, and has achieved razor sharp results across the focal range. I have yet to see any CA or vignetting, I absolutely love it. You also have to take into consideration that someone complaining about it might have gotten a bad copy, or hasn't taken the proper steps in order to tweak the focus settings (in camera) if that feature is available. (AF fine tuning)

I personally feel that VR is worth the extra cash for two reasons. For one, you absolutely will be able to get shots in dim light situations which would normally call for lower shutter speeds... and where you can't open the aperture any further. Plus, it's always usually good to go with newer technology. It's likely more well built than its predecessor to boot. But that's just an assumption, so can't speak to that as being a truth.

Great lens, well worth it.

Doug
QUOTE Thanks
IanCT

 
IanCT's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 25, 2004
Location: California
Posts: 497
IanCT will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: iMac 24" 2.66 C2D, 13" MacBook i7 2.9GHz, iPad 3, iPhone 4

IanCT is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug b View Post
That's such a horribly general statement with nothing to back it up.
...
I personally feel that VR is worth the extra cash for two reasons. For one, you absolutely will be able to get shots in dim light situations which would normally call for lower shutter speeds... and where you can't open the aperture any further. Plus, it's always usually good to go with newer technology. It's likely more well built than its predecessor to boot. But that's just an assumption, so can't speak to that as being a truth.
I agree. I have the 18-200mm VR and in low-light the VR helps quite a bit. I can say I have personally tested it with VR on and off for the same shots and VR can help quite a bit (and I don't have a shaky hand). I use mine indoors too with a bounce flash but I usually lean to my 35mm f/2 most of the time.

My father-in-law has a 70-300mm Tamron lens, he tried my 18-200mm and is now looking for the same lens you are looking at with VR.

All-in-all it depends on what you're shooting. Sporting events? You'll more than likely be shooting at a fast shutter rate anyway and VR probably won't help you. Where it comes in most handy is at mid to full zoom. I recommend you rent one and try it out before you buy.
QUOTE Thanks
Village Idiot

 
Village Idiot's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 04, 2007
Location: Durtburg, WV
Posts: 2,641
Village Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of lightVillage Idiot is a glorious beacon of light
Mac Specs: Sooper Fast!

Village Idiot is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordanjez193 View Post
Ok I understand But when she is moving the camera to get action going on like she is following a player running or a ball in flight.
Your sentences confuse me.

She? Woman at Ritz?

What's the point of your statement?

Will VR help with panning?

The focusing speed is going to be depend on the lens and the camera. Does the 70-300 have an AF motor in the lens or is it dependent on the camera? What type of focusing is it? I'm sure Nikon has some type of HSM or USM equivalent focusing system for that lens.

Generally though, unless you're buying the expensive stuff, the cheaper lenses won't focus as fast as an expensive lens.

Depending on your budget, you may even take a look at a used Sigma 70-200 f/2.8. Not quite the same reach, but it's a much faster lens and you'll get more light and again, depending on other factors like how many stops Nikon's VR on that lens claims to get, you may still walk out with having the same power as the 70-300 with the wider aperture of the 70-200.

Edit: And the Sigma 70-200 has HSM, which is their version of a fast AF motor. Should work with the d60 and focus fast.

But then again, you can get panning shots with manual focus, it'll just be a lot harded. But that's why pros use $3000+ cameras and $1500+ lenses.

Chaotic Evil, Level 1 IT-Tech

Slough Roast Blog
Capitol Sound Blog
QUOTE Thanks
Doug b

 
Doug b's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 22, 2008
Location: Forest Hills, NYC
Posts: 3,344
Doug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond reputeDoug b has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: 15-inch Early 2008; Processor 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo; Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM; 10.7.5

Doug b is offline
The bottom line:

Yes, VR will absolutely improve panning shots. But you also have to consider the type of panning which is being done. Example:

Panning with or without a monopod. If you're using a monopod, chances are that you're attempting to capture a fast moving object such as a vehicle or perhaps someone running. However, if you are panning and tracking an object with variable height and depth, then you likely won't be using a monopod (unless your lens is fairly wide and can encompass both depth and height for a variable object such as a ball flying through the air).

I did my research on the Sigma and Tamron 200's and did not like them for various reasons. The Sigma was a hunt machine. Hunt, hunt hunt, and more hunting with that lens. The Tamron didn't focus fast enough in dim light when compared to the Nikkor, and was also very noisy. My research wasn't rushed and I made a very solid decision, and am VERY happy with the results. The range, sharpness, bokeh and speed of the 70-300 is right on in my opinion. Sure it's not super fast (not talking focus, because that IS very fast) but the VR makes up for that fact, and its price is right on the money.

You also should take this last thing into consideration: Resale value. Take care of the Nikkor stuff, and you'll be able to trade or sell it with a lot more ease than a Tamron or Sigma. BTW, I"m not biased either, I absolutely adore my Sigma 17-70. The macro on that thing is stellar.

Doug
QUOTE Thanks
BlueMac

 
BlueMac's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 01, 2008
Location: Rhinebeck, NY
Posts: 1,056
BlueMac is a jewel in the roughBlueMac is a jewel in the rough
Mac Specs: 20" iMac 2.66 GHz... Running 10.5.7

BlueMac is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordanjez193 View Post
dont you shoot Cannon?

and I dont have that type of money to blow....
I shoot with a Canon digital point and shoot and a Nikon EM.

Save your money instead of trying to buy all this crappy, cheap lenses. Learn to live with what you have, you don't need all this stuff right away.

I make great photos with my fully manual Nikon EM and 50mm 1.8 lens.


BTW, here is the link to the 18-135:

Nikon | 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX Lens | 2162 | B&H Photo

Flickr

Last.fm
Si, hablo Espa˝ol. Oui, je parle franšais. Yes, I speak English.
QUOTE Thanks
IanCT

 
IanCT's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 25, 2004
Location: California
Posts: 497
IanCT will become famous soon enough
Mac Specs: iMac 24" 2.66 C2D, 13" MacBook i7 2.9GHz, iPad 3, iPhone 4

IanCT is offline
I got to play with the 70-300mm VR on a D90 today that a friend at work had gotten - I really like the sharpness, bokeh and overall quality of the lens.

I can't wait to "rent it" from him.

Hopefully one day I will be able to afford one.
QUOTE Thanks
nikonjin

 
Member Since: Jan 21, 2009
Posts: 35
nikonjin is on a distinguished road

nikonjin is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordanjez193 View Post
Im looking at the 70-300mm telephoto lens for my d60

is it worth it to pay the $400 or whatever for the vr or just go with the non vr?

Ps: link to my stuff in sig...
I would recommend the VR lens over both previous versions of 70-300s. Besides the VR you get AF-S which gives you faster focus and the full time ability for manual focus. The optical formula has been upgraded as well. Images are very sharp with good contrast.
QUOTE Thanks
nikonjin

 
Member Since: Jan 21, 2009
Posts: 35
nikonjin is on a distinguished road

nikonjin is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueMac View Post
The lens sucks, if you really want an honest opinion. I really recommend getting the 18-135mm instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueMac View Post
I shoot with a Canon digital point and shoot and a Nikon EM.

Save your money instead of trying to buy all this crappy, cheap lenses. Learn to live with what you have, you don't need all this stuff right away.

I make great photos with my fully manual Nikon EM and 50mm 1.8 lens.


BTW, here is the link to the 18-135:

Nikon | 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED-IF AF-S DX Lens | 2162 | B&H Photo
Hummm.

Didn't see this around the first time but I'm feeling the need to respond. (:

1. I've owned the 70-300VR as well as the 70-200VR, 180 2.8, 80-200s. It compares quite well at comparable apertures which is a decent feat considering the F2.8s are stopped down a few stops.

2. The 18-135 and 70-300 are very different in their applications. The OP asked if the VR is worth the extra. I would feel safe assuming he already has an 18-xxx zoom.

3. "Save your money instead of trying to buy all this crappy, cheap lenses."
And you recommend the 18-135? It is a very sharp lens and good for the money, but cheap and crappy would first describe the 18-135 before the 70-300VR.

4. "Learn to live with what you have, you don't need all this stuff right away.
I make great photos with my fully manual Nikon EM and 50mm 1.8 lens."
Good advice. But it also seems the OP is ready to get a longer focal length because of whatever reason. An EM and a 50mm make great images but will hardly help you at a soccer game or the zoo where you cannot foot zoom.
QUOTE Thanks

Post Reply New Thread Subscribe


« 256 colour mode | Need help to make photo book into a slide show »
Thread Tools

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Do Nikkor lenses only work with Nikon CEN7272 Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography 2 09-28-2006 11:21 AM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
X

Welcome to Mac-Forums.com

Create your username to jump into the discussion!

New members like you have made this community the ultimate source for your Mac since 2003!


(4 digit year)

Already a member?