mansod
Senior Member
Nice! Is it a 100% crop?
D5100, 300mm (equiv 450mm), f7.1, 1/1000
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
I'm not impressed yet with my Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6 FX ED VR
- Thread starter Peekas Pics
- Start date
the f/7.1 yes, the 1/1000 not so much. i know the reciprocal rule for handshake warrants 1/450s here, but the VR on that lens has allowed me to get away with murder.
Michael Benveniste
Veteran Member
Can you provide details about the shutter speed or an example? It may be that your expectations are a bit too high, especially for handheld shooting. VR is a partial substitute for a tripod or support. It's designed to reduce the effects of vibration so you get an acceptable shot for display or printing. If you're expectations of "acceptable image results" are for 100% crops, then you're going to be disappointed. The CIPA standard, for example, uses a CoC more suited to 8x12" or smaller prints than for crops.
As has already been pointed out, the 70-300mm is not really designed to be used on a tripod. It's possible to do so -- here's a shot I used to test this lens in combination with my Benro 1182T travel tripod. But with a lens of this size and weight, mounting the camera to the tripod mount is never going to be optimal. So my suggestion is to relax, don't worry, and use this lens to capture those shots of opportunity you can't get otherwise. Lenses of this class just aren't designed or built to ace so-called "IQ" tests.
Full Image -- Ye Olde Brick Wall Test
[ATTACH alt="100% Crop putting the "PUB" back in "Public Library""]870057[/ATTACH]
100% Crop putting the "PUB" back in "Public Library"
--
Such commentary has become ubiquitous on the Internet and is widely perceived to carry no indicium of reliability and little weight. (Digital Media News v. Escape Media Group, May 2014).
Attachments
Last edited:
...that is worthless without photos attached. the nikon 70-300mm vr isn't a world beater, but for the money, it's a versatile workhorse. yes, my copy was slightly softer at 260-300mm, but not as much as all the emotional outcry would indicate.
my first bird photos were taken with it before i moved to the 300mm f/4d af-s;
Last edited:
romfordbluenose
Veteran Member
If you click on the picture it should opnenin another window where you can look at it at 100%Nice! Is it a 100% crop?
D5100, 300mm (equiv 450mm), f7.1, 1/1000
Last edited:
zzzzzzzzzzz
Veteran Member
I've got an old 70-300ED (not the VR version) and it seems ok on my D800. This shot is handheld at 300mm.
Last edited:
mansod
Senior Member
It's hard to say anything about the lens sharpness since the image has been re-sized. Well, a least it doesn't look like a 100% crop to me.
Nice car though
To some extent it depends on your personality (imo). If you really look hard you will find some softness in most shots with any lens, if however you do not hunt for it then I think this lens at <200mm is sharp.
As a coincidence I spent a couple of hours yesterday comparing iq of the one I got last week against some images shot with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR and a 300mm f/4 that I used to have. At the bottom of our road is the River Mersey and I sometimes go down to take shots of ships entering Garston docks. They are around 250m away and make a good target for examining detail. There are quite a lot of shots with both of these high end Nikon lenses with and without a Nikon1.4 & 2x tc.
Admittedly the light was completely different with all the shots but when I got back to my house yesterday after a dozen or so shots with the 70-300 I was amazed how good they were. The originals were taken on a D200 which by coincidence shares the same sensor as I am using now on the D80. The 300mm f/4 delivered the sharpest images and there was a noticeable difference to the 70-300 but that was the exception. At 150-200mm I had to look really close to see any difference between the 70-200 and the 70-300. My feeling is that for the type of photography I do (a lot of which is on my boat) the convenience of having one lens outweighs the slight dip in iq. Using the 300 f/4 was just not feasible when we were sailing as it really needed a tripod and although with active VR turned on the 70-200 was just fantastic I am really looking forward to having VR assisted help at 200mm+ during this season's cruising.
Unfortunately i cannot post some of the three as my main computer has decided to expire and I am typing this on a tablet !
As a coincidence I spent a couple of hours yesterday comparing iq of the one I got last week against some images shot with a 70-200 f/2.8 VR and a 300mm f/4 that I used to have. At the bottom of our road is the River Mersey and I sometimes go down to take shots of ships entering Garston docks. They are around 250m away and make a good target for examining detail. There are quite a lot of shots with both of these high end Nikon lenses with and without a Nikon1.4 & 2x tc.
Admittedly the light was completely different with all the shots but when I got back to my house yesterday after a dozen or so shots with the 70-300 I was amazed how good they were. The originals were taken on a D200 which by coincidence shares the same sensor as I am using now on the D80. The 300mm f/4 delivered the sharpest images and there was a noticeable difference to the 70-300 but that was the exception. At 150-200mm I had to look really close to see any difference between the 70-200 and the 70-300. My feeling is that for the type of photography I do (a lot of which is on my boat) the convenience of having one lens outweighs the slight dip in iq. Using the 300 f/4 was just not feasible when we were sailing as it really needed a tripod and although with active VR turned on the 70-200 was just fantastic I am really looking forward to having VR assisted help at 200mm+ during this season's cruising.
Unfortunately i cannot post some of the three as my main computer has decided to expire and I am typing this on a tablet !
G
griddi
Guest
The " Dove " image is o.k. but the " Giraffe " Image I would not call sharp !
Both look good on my monitor!
zzzzzzzzzzz
Veteran Member
Check the gallery page. I posted a pretty large example. I said it was ok, I did not say it was pro level. The 100% crop details from that shot are pretty good and that is 300mm handheld with no VR. Bokeh isn't horrible either.
Last edited:
It's less than the Nikon 70-300 and the tamron VC really does work well.
G
griddi
Guest
Well, either your monitor do not show that the giraffe is not to sharp, or your eyes are weaker than mine........
ADerickson
Member
Well Ive got 20/15 vision and it looks sharp enough to me. Perhaps your monitor is not too good or you're blowing it up to 100%.
G
griddi
Guest
Well, it is all in the eye of the beholder, but my monitor is fine, besides I wrote that the Dove image looks o.k. so if my monitor would not be good, the Dove would not show up sharp either, but my monitor is wider than yours..........
But then it is no big deal..........
mansod
Senior Member
I thought it was the other way around...The Giraffe looks a bit sharper to me, as it should be at f/8 vs f/5.6. Both shots seems to be focused a bit behind the eyes though.
mansod
Senior Member
I'm looking at the 2500px wide image. I'm not saying it isn't sharp, I'm just saying it's hard to tell without 100% crop.
zzzzzzzzzzz
Veteran Member
I uploaded a 100% crop. As I said earlier in this thread, it is ok for a handheld 300mm 36MP shot with no VR. It is not pro level. This is the lens in question:mansod said:
Last edited:
G
griddi
Guest
I am getting with a Panasonic 100-300mm sharper images, this image of the bird was taken through a quite tight mesh fence, and handheld.........
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum