Is anyone using the new VR nikon lens with a d1x or other d1xx model? What type of clarity are you getting on the photo's? my camera store says this is a "gimmick" lens and keeps trying to talk me out of it. Just wondering from someone who has used it. Especially for hand held shots. Thanks
Awesome lens! I'll scan some pics tonight if I have time. Just the other day I took some pictures at 1/125 and 400 mm setting.
My only problem with the lens is the autofocus (on a F100). It is a little bit too slow for some situations like parades. I'm hoping to see the 70-200 AFS VR soon, but I would actually prefer a 80-400 AFS VR.
Have a nice day
Learn more about me and the Nikonians team on ourTeam Page.
They keep saying that the clarity and sharpness is not there yet with the VR. They keep saying to go with the AFS 80-200 F2.8 for about the same money. Say the AFS is much sharper. Then they say to get a teleconverter and it will still be sharper than the VR lens. That's the recommendation from the store.
My photo's are mostly nature settings and my 2 year old daughter. Although I do use it for scientific forensic work also, traffic accident reconstruction.
Sure! Add a teleconverter to a 200mm lens and just try to get a steady, non-motion-blurred picture!
Although it is my least used lens, when you need it you really need it! I am happy as heck with my 80-400 VR. In fact, it is truly amazing what you can get photograph with this lens......hand held!
When I have it on my D1X, people often ask me about it. I put the neck strap around their neck and have them look through the camera viewfinder while they depress the shutter button halfway. Then I rotate the zoom ring out to full zoom. They are flabbergasted! Then, I reach up and turn off the VR (there is a switch on the lens for this) and they suddenly find that they can't hold the camera steady enough. Then, they are really amazed! It is a great demo.
The bottom line is, if you want to hand hold a long telephoto, the 80-400 VR is the ONLY lens to use. If it is going to be used on a tripod, exclusively, then you can consider buying some other brand. By the way, if using the 80-400 VR on a tripod, you turn off the VR.
Or, of course, buy a lens no longer than 200 mm focal length. However, you may still at times have camera blur. My "traveling lens", for those time when I only want to carry the camera and one lens (rather than the entire outfit) is a Tokina 24-200 f3.5-5.6. It is, by the way, an excellent lens, despite the low price, especially when used on a D1 series camera, which cut off the corners and hence any softness that would be there if the lens were on a 35mm body. Remember, you have a 1.5 ratio, thus the Tokina 24-200 is a 36-300 on a Nikon digital SLR, and the 80-400 VR is actually a 120-600 on the digicam.
Well, if by gimmick they mean you can handhold the lens at longer focal lengths and with longer shutter times, then yes, it is a gimmick. A very good one IMO. The only major detraction of this lens is it's price, when compared to other company's VR-type lenses anyway. Otherwise, I don't know why anyone that owns a Nikon that it would work on, wouldn't want one. (Purists aside)
_________________ Nikon v. Canon? = What brand of chisels and brushes did Michelangelo use?
Nikon v. Canon? = What brand of chisels and brushes did Michelangelo use?
Here we go. Just scanned a few pictures. At the 400 mm end and a slow shutter speed you are actually running into the problem that movement of the object might cause some blur. For example, in the first pic I checked the max size scanner output, the microphone head is sharp, but the person is slightly blurred. At f5.6 there is also limited DOF.
1. pic F100 + 80-400 VR 400 mm, handheld 1/125 @ f 5.6 ISO 400
2. pic F100 + 80-400 VR + SB28 fill 400 mm, handheld 1/125 @ f 5.6 ISO 400