MtnMan Loc: ID

A couple of other things people often forget about VR.

1. On cameras where it is in the lens (most), it affects the image you see in the viewfinder as well. It is like buying image stabilized binoculars. It really helps. More so for longer lenses, of course.

2. MT shooter notes that with some lenses (and I suppose cameras) it can cause the camera to take longer to focus.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Unless using that 200mm lens on a crop sensor camera... in which case you need 1.5X, 1.6X or whatever faster shutter speed. 1/300 to 1/320 with Nikon and Canon.

Practice and certain handheld shooting techniques might allow some people to use slower than the inverse rules suggests.

On a tripod, it depends on the lens. Check with the manufacturer. Some must have stabilization turned off when locked down solidly on a tripod, or they can go into sort of a feedback loop that creates movement when there is none present. In my kit, I have a couple 28-135 lenses and a 300/4 that have this type of stabilization. These are normally handheld lenses for me anyway, so I've rarely had to turn it off.

Other lenses self-detect and turn off stabilization themselves automatically if and when they are locked down on a tripod (i.e., there is no movement), so there is no need to manually turn it off unless you just want to be sure. In my own kit two 70-200s, 300/2.8 and 500/4 all have this type of stabilization. Several of them I've used for over 10 years and don't recall ever turning stabilization off manually. But, again, the 70-200s tend to be handheld and the 300/2.8 and 500/4 tend to be used with the "loose gimbal" method mentioned above... in both cases leaving plenty to keep stabilization busy and out of trouble.

I agree that in-lens stabilization can be helpful stabilizing the viewfinder images...

But I disagree about it slowing focus... While it's possible that happens occasionally, a lot of the time I think stabilization actually helps focus speed and accuracy (i.e., it helps the camera "see" with its AF sensors, the same way it helps me see the subject in the viewfinder).

Stabilization does take a moment to occur... a very brief moment... and taking a shot too quickly might not allow time for it to "do its thing"... but focus and stabilization occur concurrently and most of the time by the time focus is achieved, so is stabilization... Still, as much as possible I start both focus and stabilization a bit before I take the shot, tracking moving subjects, for example.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If you do not have steady hands, VR or a tripod should solve the problem.
I do not tend to agree with you that zooms are of inferior optical quality compared to primes. Professional zooms are as sharp as primes at the same focal lenght.
I know of many professionals that use only zooms for most of their work and John Shaw comes to mind.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

But they sure have great beer. Try the "Bend Ale Trail".

http://www.visitbend.com/Bend_Oregon_Activities_Recreation/Bend-Ale-Trail/

Took me 5 days and I got a rubber beer cup for a completion prize.

roy4711 Loc: Spring Valley IL.

Before having a beer its not the camera that has camera shake it's me. :roll:

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

You mean the BPA free, unbreakable, customizable, microwave/dishwasher/freezer safe, 100% food-grade silicone Silipint? What a great idea and information we can all benefit from! :thumbup:

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Well, if you drop it on the patio, you don't have to worry about broken glass when your dear dog licks it up.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

"Professional zooms are as sharp as primes at the same focal lenght." ???
You surprise me - no! you astound me - so why are primes still made? Pros go for convenience too. They (often) don't always have time to change lenses. :)

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Primes are lighter and smaller...and likely the reason many consider them and why they are still being made..

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

If you look at ratings at DxO mark, the zooms don't show up till go go past several pages of fixed focal length lenses. Plus, a zoom is optimized for a certain focal length. They can't perform the same at all focal lengths... That said, the IQ on the "Pro" series is good enough that the difference is negligible in real world shooting ( a reason I don't don't put much stock in rating sites)

bewerner

Consider this: VR stops your movement but doesn't stop your subject's movement. I used to think VR was critical all the time. My revisionist thinking is that, unless you want some blur intentionally in your subject (movement blur for effect), you're better off using a fast enough shutter speed. Primes are perfect for this since they tend to be fast lenses.

RJNaylor Loc: Delmar, New York

I am a fan of vibration reduction since it helps me. But not all systems are equal ... My second generation Nikon 18-200 is much better than the first generation -- you can feel the VR kick in and see the image settle. My Sigma 105 2.8 VR not so much but still better than nothing. I also think VR helps at lower magnification, for example, I am much better with my Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS than I was with the Nikon DX equivalent with no OS -- so I sent back the Nikon before getting the Sigma. Result, many more sharp photos. Of course, with a fast enough SS we don't need the OS but at some point we do and i would rather keep the ISO down.
In terms of primes though, most of them don't have OS, too bad. Even if we only get one or two stops of effective control at lower magnifications that let's us shoot one or two stops lower ISO.

roy4711 Loc: Spring Valley IL.

roy4711 Loc: Spring Valley IL.

Drink a beer. :lol:

Wild Life Loc: Sunny Southern California

Is that with or without a beer?