Is it true that Vibration Reduction (VR) is only effective for shutter speeds up to the focal length of the lens? When shooting wildlife I often use a shutter speed of 1/1000 on my 55-200mm zoom (usually at 200mm) to freeze the fast-moving critters and to offset camera shake. I turn VR on in most situations but heard that it won't help much at shutter speeds over 1/200. Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide.
VR limitations?
- Thread starter casablues
- Start date
I do not think that is true. Using the 16-35 f4 VR as an example, VR is definitly helping at speeds over 1/35. At some point, the shutter speed will overtake the ability of VR to help freeze the image, but that may be at a very high speed. I would use it in any hand-held situation. Taking any camera shake out of the equation, at any speed, only helps.
My personal belief, and take it for what it is, but shutter speeds over 500 are so fast that they are no longer capable of picking up any camera shake, the shutter is simply not open long enough to be affected. So by my reasoning, coupled with the way Nikon advertises their VR products, it's primarily geared for much slower speeds. Nikon uses terms like "..provides you up to four stops of "hand-holdability..."
Below taken from Nikon Site *Vibration Reduction from Nikon
What does this mean in practical terms? A rock-steady camera is essential to critical image sharpness, and Nikon’s exclusive Vibration Reduction technology offers the perfect solution for reducing the image blur caused by camera shake. It provides you with up to four stops of "hand-holdability," delivering dramatically sharper images in a wide range of conditions.
Below taken from Nikon Site *Vibration Reduction from Nikon
What does this mean in practical terms? A rock-steady camera is essential to critical image sharpness, and Nikon’s exclusive Vibration Reduction technology offers the perfect solution for reducing the image blur caused by camera shake. It provides you with up to four stops of "hand-holdability," delivering dramatically sharper images in a wide range of conditions.
LouCioccio
Senior Member
I am Old School in photography and this is my take on VR whether in camera or in lens; it tends to make one negligent in taking sharp images. Now I sound like an old timer (and I am) when I did not have tripod I would use an inanimate object like a doorway, telephone pole, tree etc to take an image. We used simple formula of 1 over the focal length. It does work. I truly miss split image focusing (my Nikon FM and Mamyia C330/C220) all had it and could easily focus in low light. If you note Nikons "up to four stops" sounds like double speak, so if I can only go two stops they are still covered because they said "...up to..". I turn off VR on my lenses and if I go to the Phipps in Pittsburgh I take my monopod. I know enough when I take images of animals (like geese or ducks) I have to be at a higher shutter speed as they can move at moment notice. I can be slower (shutter) when taking a person candid portrait (excluding children as they have other priorities). I will spend money for faster glass and probably why I eat Ramen Noodles.
Ciao,
Lou Cioccio
Ciao,
Lou Cioccio
Last edited:
That is about right. I leave mine off most of the time. Here is a good read from Thom Hogan.
I usually turn VR ON when my shutter speed is below 1/320 but that is just my preference.
Nikon VR explained
Glenn - thanks so much for the link to that article. It's a complicated subject and the article really helps give you a handle on what VR is and how it works in different situations. I will try some tests of my own but will be leaving it off when using high shutter speeds.
Thanks to all who responded!
RockyNH_RIP
Senior Member
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
Same here. Unless I have a specific reason for turning on the VR function, I have it turned off.
It's not a "Set It and Forget It" sort of thing in my experience.
also depends on the lens, so for example, I do turn it on for my 80-400 hand held, and have been pleased with the results. I like/prefer lower ISO (typically below ISO 500), and with slow lens, the VR is very handy.
But, as clearly stated, one has to keep track, and remember to turn off on tripod.
But, as clearly stated, one has to keep track, and remember to turn off on tripod.
AC016
Senior Member
Just scanend over the article by Thom. I have lenses with both VR and no VR (VC). I used the 18-55 that came with my D3000 that had no VR and had no issues - i did not even really know what VR was back then. I used my 55-200 with VR on at all times when taking the hundreds upon hundreds of aircraft photos. My shutter speeds were well over 1/500 and i had no issues. I don't use VR on my 35mm.... well, it does not have VR! Same goes for my 400mm. I really don't see how it would make people "negligent", since i put jsut as much effort in holding my camera with my 35 as i do with my 18-55 with VR. Unfortunatley, we tend to over analyze things a bit to much when in fact there is a simple answer: use it for what its worth or don't use it. Keeping it on at all times - except on tripod - does no harm. If you come away with a good, clear picture and then post it up online, will anyone know if you used it or not? Will anyone care? And no Thom, I never thought it was magic! What a goof.
Thom is most definitely not a "goof". The VR articles is fantastic for VR beginners and it goes into the differences between Normal and Active as well as when to use it and when not to. Just becasue you know and use proper techniques with and without VR doesn't mean everyone does. And keeping it on at all times does do one but of harm: it drains the battery faster.
Last edited:
AC016
Senior Member
A little to serious there JWSTL. Saying he was a "goof" was in jest. Just read his second to last paragraph and you will see that even he admits to nitpicking about the subject. Further, he states that the only people that should really worry about the microscopic differences, are the pros who are blowing up their pics and expect to have it perfect:
"Yes, there's some nitpicking going on here. VR not correcting right
is a bit like tripod mount slop (fixed with a Really Right Stuff Long Lens
Support) or ringing vibrations in the tripod legs (fixed by using the right legs
for your equipment): you don't see it until it's gone, and even then usually
only if you're pixel peeping. But someone using a 400mm f/2.8G VR lens on a D3x
spent a lot of money on equipment to get the best results. They expect to be
able to catch every bit of detail and blow it up into a large print. As always
on this site, you need to understand that I always write about the search for
optimal bits. If you're shooting with a 16-85mm on a D300 and putting 640x480
images on the Web from that, well, whether the VR missed doing its job by a
little bit probably isn't so important."
Therefore, for most people around here who only post pics online, this article is a great read. But, i don't think it is anything to lose sleep over. Pack extra batteries or get a battery grip
"Yes, there's some nitpicking going on here. VR not correcting right
is a bit like tripod mount slop (fixed with a Really Right Stuff Long Lens
Support) or ringing vibrations in the tripod legs (fixed by using the right legs
for your equipment): you don't see it until it's gone, and even then usually
only if you're pixel peeping. But someone using a 400mm f/2.8G VR lens on a D3x
spent a lot of money on equipment to get the best results. They expect to be
able to catch every bit of detail and blow it up into a large print. As always
on this site, you need to understand that I always write about the search for
optimal bits. If you're shooting with a 16-85mm on a D300 and putting 640x480
images on the Web from that, well, whether the VR missed doing its job by a
little bit probably isn't so important."
Therefore, for most people around here who only post pics online, this article is a great read. But, i don't think it is anything to lose sleep over. Pack extra batteries or get a battery grip
pistnbroke
Banned
Well the AF and VR on all my lenses are taped ON and after 30,000 shots I have not found one that has been adversly affected by VR being ON ,,,,,,I dont even think about it ,,,,
Click click click ,,,,money money money
Click click click ,,,,money money money
Pleased i found this thread but i think it still leaves me with a question,my next lens will be the 55-300 VR before winter i wanted a long lens possibly one of the sigma zooms this i would be unlikely to use hand held it would be on a tripod (no VR used) or on a bean bag will i benefit from VR on the bean bag or should i save a lot of money and buy a second hand pre VR/OS.
mike
mike
RockyNH_RIP
Senior Member
I would get the VR if you can afford it in that long range lens. You have good intentions to tripod/bean bag but often I find a surprise subject appears and I either shoot it now (handheld) or miss it... (I have the Nikon 55-300)
Pat in N