david vt Loc: Vermont

Hi all. I am posting thread in this sub-forum as I am interested opinions of professionals through enthusiasts whom shoot sports, and most particularly indoor sports like BB at the “younger than college” level.

Was reading today both a lot of sports photography posts on how to get better focus, as well as a thread on the VR vs non VR version of Nikon’s 24-70 lens, and the intersection got me thinking if VR was really needed, and if not, was there a downside to using it.

In general, one of the rules of thumb is your minimum SS should be 1/focal length for handheld shots, which are quite common in much (not nessarily all) sports photography, at least for me where I am tracking faster moving athletes. In general, I am shooting my either my 50-150 or 70-200, both f2.8, and generally shot between 2.8 and 4 due to indoor lighting and DoF. Both lens have the option of VR.

Often I am shooting at a minimum of 320, and frequently between 500 and 800, so I am not sure VR is really helping me much from a handheld perspective. Is it? If so, how/why (or why not)? That is really my first question.

The second question applies especially in the case of the answer above being “not much help”. Is there a downside in terms of focus acquisition and tracking? Generally shooting BBF-on, AF-continuous, and either S or D9 (nikon speak - sorry). Does having VR on slow down the lens/camera response time, especially when shooting a moving target handheld? If VR not needed from a “steadyness” perspective in terms of focal length vs SS, would the AF system be faster and/or more consistent tracking handheld moving action if the VR was off? If not needed at these SS, would it be better to leave it shut off?

Really interested to see answers to this and the thoughts/reasons behind. Might be yes, might be no, might be that the difference is so tiny that it, specially the VR on/off question, makes no measurable difference.

Thanks in advance

SkyKing Loc: Thompson Ridge, NY

...VR on...but don’t take my word for it...try it without VR and compare your results...I’m assuming you are unhappy with some of your shots and that’s why you are asking...I’ve come to the conclusion that because of the variation in lighting with indoor high school gyms and the speed of the sport that HS basketball could be the most difficult sport to photograph...the best results I’ve seen were with prime lenses...f/1.8 or f/1.4...

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

I think it all depends on the lens your using. On my 80-400 4.5 I use it, on the 70-200 2.8 for bb or vb I don't. Again you have to practice with or without.

david vt Loc: Vermont

Your answer, especially to Q1, makes sense. At 400mm, you have a longer lens for HH, and are closer to the “rule of thumb” for 1/focal length. With the extra movement of sports, likely of benefit. With th 70-200, you are probably 2-3 X over the “rule”, so maybe not as helpful

That said, especially for you (and our other experienced pros), for Q2, have you ever noticed a difference in time to get focus lock, or tracking ability, with VR on vs off, and was it enough of a difference so it make a noticeable difference in your captures.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...have you ever noticed a difference in time to get focus lock, or tracking ability, with VR on vs off?"
David you've already nailed this... Since you shoot with a D7200 you're likely to become keenly aware of the penalty VR extracts from this image equation... Even Nikon clearly states that VR will cause a lag in the processor to lock focus and/or track... While setting A1 to "Release" priority in Continuous High Speed and Focus Tracking to "Off" in theory this potentially should mitigate this however VR takes up lens processor cycles... and for action sports VR is virtually useless other than stabilizing your view finder... which does absolutely nothing for image quality...

That said there is indeed one active sports scenario in which VR is critical for success... That being panning... here you'll want to be around 1/25 to 1/40 (* depends on subject distance and speed). VR will increase panning success by several orders of magnitude... as will a monopod... experience is a brutal
teacher...

Hope this helps David...
And as Jules mentions... only you can answer this by testing your kit...

Possibly the best quote I've ever heard was...
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, however in practice there indeed is!

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

Well said Thomas

btbg

I agree with both Jules and Thomas. I see no reason to use vr for most sports photography. At best it will just slow focus time down. At worst it will slow frame rate down at a critical time and you will miss the shot you really wanted.

But as Thomas said, it really helps with panning. It also helps if you are deliberately using a slow shutter speed to show motion blur. Other than than don't use it.

picsman Loc: Scotland

I take mtb, canoe, snowsports and some horse trials. I never use VR always having the SS based on at least 1 over the FL. Mind I haven't checked using VR relying on what I have read and heard. I also prefocus at the point I expect the athlete to arrive at and using BB focus, auto ISO, AF-C on 3D in burst mode so I want the fastest response I can get from the lens and seems to work for me. If panning with a slower SS I don't even think of changing the VR. I sometimes use a monopod or tripod and gimbal but again no VR.