Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D90/D80/D70 (Public) topic #237922
View in linear mode

Subject: "Yearly maintenance?" Previous topic | Next topic
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Mon 02-Nov-09 02:42 AM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"Yearly maintenance?"


Bronx, US
          

It's coming up on a year since I bought my D90 as well as my 18-200mm lens and I was just wondering if there is any sort of a "checkup" I should be having Nikon perform for me. I think I've read of some people having their equipment periodically sent in for adjustment.

I have no particular problems with the equipment. Sometimes I'm not thrilled with the focus on the 18-200, but that I *think* that is more a reflection of the inherent compromises of the lens combined with my less than expert technique. (For a period of time I wondered if the D90 had a slight back-focusing problem, but I could never pin it down so I think that was just me.)

I know I should dig out the documentation to see what's covered, but I thought I'd try the easy way first and ask here.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
blw Moderator
02nd Nov 2009
1
Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Samizdat
02nd Nov 2009
2
     Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
RRRoger Silver Member
02nd Nov 2009
3
          Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Apalach Silver Member
02nd Nov 2009
4
          Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Samizdat
02nd Nov 2009
5
          Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Ellis Feibush Silver Member
03rd Nov 2009
6
               Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Samizdat
03rd Nov 2009
7
                    Reply message RE: Sharper images
RRRoger Silver Member
03rd Nov 2009
8
                    Reply message RE: Sharper images
Samizdat
03rd Nov 2009
9
                         Reply message RE: Sharper images
RRRoger Silver Member
03rd Nov 2009
10
                              Reply message RE: Sharper images
Samizdat
03rd Nov 2009
11
                    Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Ellis Feibush Silver Member
04th Nov 2009
12
                    Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
elec164 Silver Member
04th Nov 2009
13
          Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
lrdave Silver Member
08th Nov 2009
14
               Reply message RE: Yearly maintenance?
Samizdat
08th Nov 2009
15
                    Reply message VR Off?
lrdave Silver Member
08th Nov 2009
16
                         Reply message RE: VR Off?
Samizdat
08th Nov 2009
17
                              Reply message RE: VR Off?
Apalach Silver Member
08th Nov 2009
18
                                   Reply message RE: VR Off?
dnf777
08th Nov 2009
19
                                        Reply message RE: VR Off?
Apalach Silver Member
08th Nov 2009
20

blw Moderator Awarded for his high level of expertise in various areas Nikonian since 18th Jun 2004Mon 02-Nov-09 03:05 AM
26716 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to send message via AOL IM
#1. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 0


Richmond, US
          

No periodic maintainance is required or suggested (or offered, by Nikon). If you aren't getting sharp photos from your 18-200 at any focal length less than 135mm, it probably isn't the lens or the camera. The lens is not as sharp as the legends in the 18-135 range, but it's PLENTY sharp to be very nice.

_____
Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member

My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Mon 02-Nov-09 03:21 AM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 1


Bronx, US
          

Thanks. Re the 18-200, sometimes I am very pleased with the results, and sometimes I scratch my head wondering what exactly went wrong. At the risk of creeping away from this thread's original subject, here's an example (attached.) It's a 100% crop of a hand-held shot taken with the 18-200 at 46mm, focus mode AF-C (and it would appear to have found focus based on the red box in ViewNX,) F/4.5, 1/400s, ISO 800. Clearly the subject I thought I was focusing on could be much sharper. So what's the cause of the problem? Too large an aperture? Focus not locked in? Not enough time for VR to stabilize? ISO too high? I'd love to get your opinion.


Attachment #1, (jpg file)

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter MemberMon 02-Nov-09 01:41 PM
3170 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 2


Monterey Bay, US
          

I do not recomend yearly maintenance.
If it isn't broke don't fix it.

Looks like you did not wait for the little dot to appear in the viewfinder.
Try a tripod, turn off VR, use the remote.
If that does not result in a sharper image,
try reseting the camera to default settings.

I use AF,
Aperture priority
single point (spot)focus
wide zone
Auto ISO 3200 @320s
Fine, large JPEG

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Apalach Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd May 2009Mon 02-Nov-09 02:10 PM
275 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 3


Tallahassee, US
          

RR wrote:
>I do not recomend yearly maintenance.
>If it isn't broke don't fix it.

I have to agree. I have Nikon range finders (SP), several Nikon Fs of various models, several Nikonos underwater cameras, and now a D90. The only maintenance I ever felt was necessary was to re-silicone the O-rings of the Nikonos about once a week when used daily in the field. All are still working fine, mostly with prime lenses, but I have always stored and/or transported them in cases or padded refrigerator-type bags. No problems to date, but hey it's only been a little over a half-century since I got my first Nikon--the SP--so I guess the jury may still be out...
Cheers,
Dick


Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Mon 02-Nov-09 02:57 PM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 3


Bronx, US
          

Thanks, I should have added that I was in shutter priority mode at 1/400sec because I was shooting kids running around at a soccer party and they weren't standing still for a moment. I figured shutter priority would be best for that situation; maybe that's not true. Tripod is not really feasible in that situation; I am just shooting casually at someone else's party. Perhaps I should be using continuous shutter release in the hopes of getting one sharp shot?

I get sharp images (at least they look sharp to me) under more "static" conditions but I'm having trouble with these shots of kids running around -- which is an awful large percentage of the photos I take these day. In lieu of a tripod, I'm often not sure what's best to adjust -- Smaller aperture? Continuous shutter release? Better hand-holding technique?

You're absolutely right, I should pay more attention to the in-focus dot. I also think I was shooting with a narrow zone; maybe I should switch to wide. I was using single-point focus as I was trying to center the shot on one kid at a time; would I be better off with Dynamic or Auto-Area for this kind of situation?



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Ellis Feibush Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Sep 2009Tue 03-Nov-09 04:48 AM
264 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 5


Summit, US
          

Just a small thought...is your AF priority set to "Focus" or "release"? That might be part of the problem. I also had an 18-200mm zoom and found infinity focus to be soft. That wide focal length is wonderful but sometimes you pay a price in other areas for that type of lens. It does some things very well in some areas and poorly in other situations. At best it's a good one-lens-does-it-all "compromise" lens that can do many things fairly well, especially used as a travel lens if you only want to carry one lens. It all depends on what type of photography you do and your expectations of that product.

efeibush

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Tue 03-Nov-09 11:24 AM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 6


Bronx, US
          

It was set to release priority, i.e., continuous servo AF (AF-C.) I figured that was more appropriate for moving subjects. Of course as that doesn't guarantee the subject will be in focus, I now think I also should have been using continuous frame shooting instead of single frame. Maybe then one of them would have been in sharper focus. Also it sounds like using a wide area focus setting might have helped.

Then there's the question of how sharp I expect the image to be out of the camera. I've taken to using Capture NX to sharpen any images I think of as "keepers" so I tend to set in-camera sharpening to 0. Even so, I don't think it's just a matter of lack of in-camera sharpening in the sample I posted; I think the focus is really off.

I have taken pleasingly sharp images with the 18-200 when shooting relatively stationary subjects, or in situations when using a tripod or a speedlight, so I really don't think it's the lens per se, just my lack of proper technique with using this particular lens with fast-moving subjects. I assume there are other lens that are faster-focusing than the 18-200; I'm tempted to rent one just to see how they are different/better at acquiring focus rapidly.

I appreciate your comments about the 18-200 and agree completely, it is a lot of fun to travel with it (I've taken it on several trips in the past year.) I have been giving thought to purchasing a "better" lens some time in the next year, and it really does make me think about what my needs are. Realistically most of the shots I really care about are of my five year-old, and I expect many of these will be in relatively low-light situations. I am considering the 70-200mm f/2.8 but want to make sure that focal length will really meet my needs before ponying up that kind of money. Maybe a 24-70 would be better? Though as I seem to like to step back and zoom in more often, it seems like the longer lens would be more up my alley. In any case I want to get better with what I already own first.!

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter MemberTue 03-Nov-09 01:00 PM
3170 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#8. "RE: Sharper images"
In response to Reply # 7
Tue 03-Nov-09 01:04 PM by RRRoger

Monterey Bay, US
          

The 18-200 is capable of much sharper images than the one posted.
I have used mine on a D90 for sports with a high percentage of keepers.
I would expect your technique and settings to be off, not the lense.
How do your 35 and 50mm pictures compare?
Although, generally you will get your sharpest images at f/8,
Have you tried shooting the 18-200mm in Aperture (upper left dial A)
with the f/stop wide open 3.5-5.6?
Have you tried shooting with the VR on when hand held?
Have you tried holding the AF-ON button down with continuous focus,
instead of the shutter button half down?
Do you prefocus your shots?
Have you practiced your panning?
One more tip: You generally get what you see thru the ViewFinder,
so don't shoot until the subject is in focus.

On the selection of a future new lense.
Check the EXIF on the pictures you like and shoot most to find the focal range.
If it is between 70-200 you will have the added advantage of leverage and an anchor to help steady you.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Tue 03-Nov-09 02:44 PM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#9. "RE: Sharper images"
In response to Reply # 8


Bronx, US
          

Thanks for the reply, as well as the change of subject line. I had strayed pretty far from my original topic. In answer to your questions:

>How do your 35 and 50mm pictures compare?

I haven't shot many rapidly moving subjects with either. I use them mostly for low-light indoor shots. I'll give them a try them with moving subjects.

>Although, generally you will get your sharpest images at f/8,
>Have you tried shooting the 18-200mm in Aperture (upper left
>dial A)
>with the f/stop wide open 3.5-5.6?

I have, and the images do seem less sharp wide open. In this case I figured I'd be better off shooting in shutter priority mode so I could freeze action (not that the kids are even moving much in the particular sample shot I posted!) The camera chose a fairly large aperture of f/4.5. It was an overcast day and the sun had passed behind a tall building. I thought if I used aperture priority and stopped it down, I wouldn't get a fast enough shutter speed for running children (and I was already at ISO 800.)

>Have you tried shooting with the VR on when hand held?

Yes, I always shoot with VR on when handheld, off when tripod mounted.

>Have you tried holding the AF-ON button down with continuous
>focus,
>instead of the shutter button half down?

I have tried shooting that way (I've read it's the "pro approach") but I was not shooting that way in this case because, well, it's just one more thing to think about. This raises an interesting point though: I had thought the advantage to focusing via AF-ON was just that it obviates the need to switch between AF-S and AF-C, meaning you can easily focus continuously or lock focus just by pressing/releasing the button. But is it any better in terms of acquiring focus to shoot one way versus the other? Will the lens achieve focus faster or more reliably if I use AF-ON to track focus as opposed to using a half-shutter press?

>Do you prefocus your shots?

I'm not sure how to answer this. I certainly didn't prefocus to a certain distance and leave it set there. I think I was tracking kids (with shutter release half-depressed) as they moved around and shooting when I thought the composition of the image look good. I guess this raises a potential problem: frankly, when in AF-C I find it a little hard to concentrate on both the image in the Viewfinder (I never use Live View) and the green focus dot. I guess I should pay more attention to when the camera tells me the image is actually focused (and maybe using continuous shutter release would help me here too.)

>Have you practiced your panning?

No. Another thing I should practice!

>One more tip: You generally get what you see thru the
>ViewFinder,
>so don't shoot until the subject is in focus.

Yes, as I described above, I don't think I've been paying enough attention to this with moving subjects. It's easy to focus on a bowl of fruit in AF-S. Nice little focus beep makes it simple. I think I've just been assuming that the camera has achieved focus with moving subjects when maybe it really hasn't yet. Also been reluctant to take lots of shots and throw bad ones away.

>On the selection of a future new lense.
>Check the EXIF on the pictures you like and shoot most to find
>the focal range.
>If it is between 70-200 you will have the added advantage of
>leverage and an anchor to help steady you.

I think they're generally in that range but need to examine them more closely before I buy anything. As this is just a hobby for me I can't justify buying too many expensive lenses. Then there's the question of whether I should pony up for a Nikon 70-200mm or go with a much cheaper Sigma that lacks VR, but that's a subject for another thread.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
RRRoger Silver Member Fellow Ribbon awarded for his long history of demonstrated excellence and helping other members with equipment, technique and DSLR video in the true Nikonians spirit. Charter MemberTue 03-Nov-09 03:39 PM
3170 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#10. "RE: Sharper images"
In response to Reply # 9
Wed 04-Nov-09 02:05 PM by RRRoger

Monterey Bay, US
          

For me the AF-ON button is a GodSend as I have trouble holding the shutter half down.
Generally if I lock on, a moving object while keeping the AF-ON button down, I get a higher percentage of keeper.
The advantage of continuous shooting while holding the AF-ON button down is that at least some of the burst will be in perfect focus.
Try using spot focus with the center spot.
It is the most active and fastest to achieve focus.

The Sigma is supposed to be very close in image quality to the Nikkor 70-200. Generally the VR only helps in very low light or when you are moving.

Have you tried setting your D90 to Auto ISO 3200 with 320 or 500 minimum speed and then shooting in Aperture Priority?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Tue 03-Nov-09 03:58 PM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#11. "RE: Sharper images"
In response to Reply # 10


Bronx, US
          

>The advantage of continuous shooting while holding the AF-ON
>button down is that at least some of the burst will be in
>perfect focus.

Thanks, I will definitely practice continuous shooting and AF-ON. I liked the flexibility AF-ON gave me anyway (focus and recompose was easier that way.)

>The Sigma is supposed to be very close in image quality to the
>Nikkor 70-200. Generally the VR only helps in very low light
>or when you are moving.

Thanks again. It's also a whole lot cheaper. I need to learn more about VR to see if I would really need it given what I'd be likely to shoot.

>Have you tried setting your D90 to Auto ISO 3200 with 320 or
>500 minimum speed and then shooting in Aperture Priority?

I usually use either Auto ISO 1600 or 3200, though at the moment I'm not sure what my minimum speed is set to. Re Aperture Priority, if I am shooting kids running around on an overcast day, am I better off going wide or stopping down to f/8 or 11? I know, I can try both for myself and see, but sometimes it helps to know what I *should* be doing first.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Ellis Feibush Silver Member Nikonian since 08th Sep 2009Wed 04-Nov-09 01:09 AM
264 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#12. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 7
Wed 04-Nov-09 01:11 AM by Ellis Feibush

Summit, US
          

Have you tried shooting your five-year-old with the 50mm f/1.8? It's a great lens, very sharp with excellent resolution. You might want to bump up the ISO and shutter speed to get some DOF, but a little old fashioned moving in and out with your camera works well with that lens. It's very sharp and of course, becomes a 75mm (in 35mm terms with 1.5 image factor).I love using my 50mm f/1.4. It's like shooting the old fashioned way, with film, jolly good fun! Cheers

efeibush

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
elec164 Silver Member Nikonian since 15th Jan 2009Wed 04-Nov-09 03:06 AM
2094 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#13. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 7


US
          


>
>Then there's the question of how sharp I expect the image to
>be out of the camera. I've taken to using Capture NX to
>sharpen any images I think of as "keepers" so I tend
>to set in-camera sharpening to 0. Even so, I don't think it's
>just a matter of lack of in-camera sharpening in the sample I
>posted; I think the focus is really off.
>

I agree it is a focus issue, the red box indicates the focus point you selected. But it appears to me that the plane of focus is actually on the macadam just beyond the railing and concrete area which is about some 12 or so feet past the children.

Shooting action shots is tricky. As you know AF-C will fire the shutter without focus confirmation. Have you tried using dynamic area mode with AF-C. Select a focus point that allows proper framing then use it to acquire focus on the moving subject. Dynamic area is supposed to enable the camera to switch points to track the subject if it should leave the selected focus point.

Just thought I would add my thoughts to the discussion in case they might help.

Pete

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
lrdave Silver Member Nikonian since 28th Mar 2007Sun 08-Nov-09 02:27 AM
8 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#14. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 3


Lake Luzerne, US
          

VR off? How does that help to make the image sharp?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Sun 08-Nov-09 04:50 AM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#15. "RE: Yearly maintenance?"
In response to Reply # 14


Bronx, US
          

>VR off? How does that help to make the image sharp?

I think he meant that in order to get sharper images I should try mounting the camera on a tripod, in which case VR should be switched off as per Nikon's own instructions:

Using VR Lenses on Tripod

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                    
lrdave Silver Member Nikonian since 28th Mar 2007Sun 08-Nov-09 01:18 PM
8 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#16. "VR Off?"
In response to Reply # 15


Lake Luzerne, US
          

Thanks.

My understanding is that there is no downside to leaving VR on, except for power usage. Does anyone disagree with that?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                        
Samizdat Registered since 04th Nov 2008Sun 08-Nov-09 03:36 PM
201 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#17. "RE: VR Off?"
In response to Reply # 16


Bronx, US
          

I've read elsewhere that VR always "looks for" vibration even in situations where there is none (because the lens is locked down on a tripod) in which case its constant attempt to compensate for vibration will actually degrade image quality. But I don't have a definite reference to that effect; I'd be interested in learning more about it too.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                            
Apalach Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd May 2009Sun 08-Nov-09 04:51 PM
275 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#18. "RE: VR Off?"
In response to Reply # 17


Tallahassee, US
          

Yes--Samizdat is correct in suggesting that you turn off the VR when on a tripod. Why? Apparently the VR continually looks for vibration, even when there is none due to using a tripod. Thus the VR mechanism is continually trying to correct for the non-existent vibration, and it is the continual seeking of the vibration by the VR system "motor" that causes (paradoxically) the induction of the vibration! Weird, but true. I have seen references to this in various pubs and online.

With reference to the D90, the manual (p. 26) says to turn off VR when using a tripod, but doesn't really explain why. However, here is a reference to some photo.net posts that explain this concept in a bit more detail. http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/008fcJ

Interestingly, VR works mainly to counter up and down movement of the lens and camera (i.e., vertical shake) but supposedly has no effect on horizontal movement, such as would be the case in panning--so pan away!
Cheers,
Dick

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                
dnf777 Registered since 08th Jan 2009Sun 08-Nov-09 09:48 PM
348 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#19. "RE: VR Off?"
In response to Reply # 18


Franklin, US
          

I spoke with Nikon's technical folks regarding the need to turn off VR when using a tripod. They said it would decrease battery consumption when off, but leaving it on would not in any way degrade performance or image quality.

I turn mine off when using legs, just in case the rumors are true?? Haven't really noticed any difference to be honest.

Dave F
Franklin, Pa

"Always do right. You'll gratify some, and astound the rest." Mark Twain

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

                                    
Apalach Silver Member Nikonian since 03rd May 2009Sun 08-Nov-09 09:59 PM
275 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#20. "RE: VR Off?"
In response to Reply # 19


Tallahassee, US
          

Dave,
Thanks for the update. I would assume that the Nikon folks know what they are talking about. However, there are a number of reports on the Web from folks who experienced camera shake on a tripod with VR on. Mebbe it's one of those "urban myths," or perhaps it only occurs with certain lenses, such as long (and heavy) telephotos(?). But I'm with you--why not turn it off, just in case...?
Best,
Dick

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D90/D80/D70 (Public) topic #237922 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.