300/2.8 VR1 vs VR2 - Tripod/Wimberley Use

Started Jan 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Jim F
Senior MemberPosts: 1,658
Like?
300/2.8 VR1 vs VR2 - Tripod/Wimberley Use
Jan 5, 2013

A Nikkor 300/2.8 VR1 vs. VR2 question with a different twist to it - not a totally new subject but I cannot find the answer (via search here) specifically with regard to use with a tripod and/or Wimberley Head/Sidekick. I've read countless threads that exclaim the 300/2.8 VR2 version has "better VR" than the VR1 (but they're optically the same), yet not much info specifying better in what way other than additional f-stops saved.

OK, assume for the moment that I want to use this lens exclusively with a tripod and a Sidekick and not handheld. What does the VR2 version offer me with tripod/Wimberely use that the VR1 version does not? I know that beyond a certain shutter speed VR should be off. But for "intermediate" speeds (wildlife in less than ideal light, for example, my primary interest), what are the performance differences between the two versions? The difference in the amount of "f-stops" gained by VR2 matters not to me since the rig is tripod-mounted anyhow (unless I'm overlooking something). My motive for posting this is there is a huge difference between the cost of the two versions (buying VR1 used, vs. buying VR2 new.) Thanks in advance for your responses. >> Jim

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow