18-200mm VR ??

A place for us to talk about Nikon related camera gear.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is. Please also check the portal page for more information on this.

18-200mm VR ??

Postby brentsky on Mon Sep 08, 2008 1:34 pm

Hi all,

This morning i was pleased to see my nikkor 18-200mm VR lens arrived. Keen to have a play of the VR, I took a few snaps, but honestly don't see any difference from a non-VR lens.. There is much blur, and Im not sure what's happening! I'm slightly frustrated. I'd be grateful for your comments - take a look at some of the photos.

Brent

Image

Image
User avatar
brentsky
Member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: St Kilda, Melbourne

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby Marvin on Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:10 pm

The first looks like motion blur. What settings are you using? Not sure what you were expecting but VR isn't some amazing device that lets you hand hold for very long exposures, it just helps when the exposures are a bit longer. I don't really know the technical terms or numbers.
Nikon D7000
User avatar
Marvin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1486
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Back in the hot Riverland, SA.

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby phillipb on Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:33 pm

According to your exif in the first picture, the shutter speed was almost 1 sec. No amount of VR is going to give you that sort of hand holding ability.
__________
Phillip


**Nikon D7000**
User avatar
phillipb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 10:56 am
Location: Milperra (Sydney) **Nikon D7000**

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby Oneputt on Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:13 pm

VR is not a panacea for an unsteady hand. Having owned this lens I found it superb on a DX camera. The VR will let you use it in conditions which were marginal otherwise, however it will not make any difference in really poor conditions.
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"

D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
User avatar
Oneputt
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Stuck in traffic Maroochydore.

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby StarForge on Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:10 pm

As I don't have a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR, I use the 18-200mm VR II all the time and when indoors with VR active.

This is a 1/33 shot at 170mm with VR on.

Image
User avatar
StarForge
Member
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:10 pm
Location: Croydon, Adelaide

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby Mr Darcy on Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:13 pm

The rule of thumb that I have always used (for non-VR lenses) is handheld is usually safe at 1/lens length in seconds. Thus a 200mm lens should ideally not be hand held at less than 1/200 and a 100mm lens at 1/100. Good technique and/or luck can give better figures, but these are not to be relied on.
VR is claimed to improve things by 2-3 stops so that would mean you should be able to hand hold at 1/50 to 1/25. Say 1/30 for convenience. and 100mm at about 1/10
Now your first photo is 95mm. Close enough to 100mm so the slowest you should be hand holding is about 1/10 Sec. You were actually using ~1Sec: Way too slow
Your second was 200mm so you should be no slower than 1/30. You were at 1/15. Too slow, but within possible tolerances if your technique was good. This photo is way better than the first, but still a little off. About what I would expect.

The 18-200 is capable of excellent results in low light, as demonstrated by StarForge, but you need to learn how to use it to achieve this.
Go out and practice.
Greg
It's easy to be good... when there is nothing else to do
User avatar
Mr Darcy
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:35 pm
Location: The somewhat singed and blackened Blue Mountains

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby brentsky on Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:45 am

Mr Darcy wrote:The rule of thumb that I have always used (for non-VR lenses) is handheld is usually safe at 1/lens length in seconds. Thus a 200mm lens should ideally not be hand held at less than 1/200 and a 100mm lens at 1/100. Good technique and/or luck can give better figures, but these are not to be relied on.
VR is claimed to improve things by 2-3 stops so that would mean you should be able to hand hold at 1/50 to 1/25. Say 1/30 for convenience. and 100mm at about 1/10
Now your first photo is 95mm. Close enough to 100mm so the slowest you should be hand holding is about 1/10 Sec. You were actually using ~1Sec: Way too slow
Your second was 200mm so you should be no slower than 1/30. You were at 1/15. Too slow, but within possible tolerances if your technique was good. This photo is way better than the first, but still a little off. About what I would expect.

The 18-200 is capable of excellent results in low light, as demonstrated by StarForge, but you need to learn how to use it to achieve this.
Go out and practice.


thanks to all for the replys.. espec to mr darcy.. ill have another play around with it and post some shots :)
User avatar
brentsky
Member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: St Kilda, Melbourne

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby Oneputt on Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:35 pm

I just realised that you used the 18-200VR not the 70-200VR (which I have owned) :oops: The 18-200 has always in my opinion been a little soft.
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"

D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
User avatar
Oneputt
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Stuck in traffic Maroochydore.

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby RDW on Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:25 am

When I got my 18-200VR I had a cheap daylight filter attached and got some spurious results that didn't seem to add up. I set up a controlled test with filter on and filter off and sure enough, the cheap filter was sending the VR crazy, particulary at the very long end of the zoom. Now I have an expensive drinks coaster and the VR works fine.
RDW
Member
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:53 pm
Location: Glen Osmond

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby brentsky on Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:39 am

RDW wrote:When I got my 18-200VR I had a cheap daylight filter attached and got some spurious results that didn't seem to add up. I set up a controlled test with filter on and filter off and sure enough, the cheap filter was sending the VR crazy, particulary at the very long end of the zoom. Now I have an expensive drinks coaster and the VR works fine.

interesting.. would a polarizer have an effect on this?
User avatar
brentsky
Member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: St Kilda, Melbourne

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby team piggy on Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:08 pm

I have used a few different ND and polarizers on this lens and have found no issues.
D3 | D700 | D300 x 2 | D200 X 2| D70s| 300 2.8VR| 70-200, 2.8VR| 28-70, 2.8|24-70 2.8 | 14-24 2.8 | 50-500| 50, 1.4| 18-200VR| 10.5 Fishy | Batt Grips| SB800 x2 | SB900 |Pocketwizards | Manfrotto's blah blah.
User avatar
team piggy
Member
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 10:19 pm
Location: Adelaide, SA

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby biggerry on Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:18 pm

interesting.. would a polarizer have an effect on this?


I have a Hoya Circ Pol which lives on my 18-200mm most of the time for outside stuff, I have not experienced any noticeable issues. I think if you stick with a decent quality one there should not be to many issues, I am open to correction here tho.
gerry's photography journey
No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.
User avatar
biggerry
Senior Member
 
Posts: 5930
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:40 am
Location: Under the flight path, Newtown, Sydney

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby brentsky on Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:50 pm

biggerry wrote:
interesting.. would a polarizer have an effect on this?


I have a Hoya Circ Pol which lives on my 18-200mm most of the time for outside stuff, I have not experienced any noticeable issues. I think if you stick with a decent quality one there should not be to many issues, I am open to correction here tho.


I have exactly the same on my lens.. I'd be interested to see if anyone experiences any issues with it.. :)
User avatar
brentsky
Member
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: St Kilda, Melbourne

Re: 18-200mm VR ??

Postby mickeyjuice on Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:19 am

brentsky wrote:interesting.. would a polarizer have an effect on this?

Polarisers eat light, so some of your stop-advantage will automatically go there.
cheers, juice
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mickeyjuice/
A bunch of Canon stuff (including Canon & Sigma lenses). Way more gear than talent.
User avatar
mickeyjuice
Member
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:48 am
Location: West Brunswick, Victoria


Return to Nikon