Reading mode: Light Dark

BIG DOUBTS about my 70-300 VR Unit

Go to last post
Your photo looks good and good to hear other people who think the lens is acceptable at 300mm. We have to understand 70-300VR can never give the sharpness of 300 2.8 or 4 but can yield usable photos.

If you nailed the focus in your dog’s picture it should look sharp at the pixel level. The depth of field is very thin at 300mm even stopped down; so some of the sharpness complaints originate from lack of good focus. Also VR is not a perfect solution; at 300mm slowest shutter speed that I can produce acceptable photos most of the time is 1/160. Slower than 1/160 my keeper rate suffers.

Recently I have been testing all of my vintage and new lenses on line targets. I went up to 240mm with 70-300 VR for now. It seems this lens outperforms 10Mpix (D80) at least at the center (and corners are not too bad) for all apertures up to 240mm.
 
If you have ANY kind of filter on the end, take it off and see if that makes a difference.

It did for me.
 
I love mine...



--
http://mitch.zenfolio.com/
Nikon D200
Nikon D80 w/18-135 DX Kit
Nikon 18-70 DX
Nikon 70-300mm VR
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6D
Nikon SB600
Nikon 50mm 1.8D

 
I was refering to manual focus primes , some Nikkor & Sigma ones I found second hand. Also comared to my Bronica ones, but then it's a smaller focal lengt for a heavier (but very sharp) piece of glas we speak about.

I especialy apreciate a lot my little Sigma 135mm 2.8, focus is easy at F4 and it's avery sharp lens. The best is that this lens is very small and becomes a 200mm on a 1.5 crop sensor.
 
tloon said:
how do you like your d80 i have a d40 thinking about upgrading to the
d80 ty mike
Click to expand...
I don't know the D40 well enough to compare. I feel the D80 is a great body and does (almost) all I could want. Looking back, I wish I had gone for the D200, but hey, we always want more ;)

My main reason for the D80 over D40 (although there are other big differences) was so that I could use it with my non-motored lenses. However, again, with the D200 I could have even used my older glass in manual focus with metering.

--
Lito
D80 + Mac :)

 
popeye69 said:
But yes. your image seems to illustrate perfectly the problem of this
lens. (I got the same kind of pictures). It seems that the software
sharpens the whole image , wich was a bit blurred at the moment of
the shot.
Click to expand...
Uh... This was shot RAW, so no software should have altered sharpness.
popeye69 said:
Results are weird and give something not really attractive (when you
zoom in 1X or 2X, but it's already visible as is).
Click to expand...
Well... If you look at the 1:1 I have to agree (although you should have a look at Morris's quote). However, at print size (300 ppi and up), I would have a hard time seeing any softness.
popeye69 said:
Global quality reminds me some jpeg artifacts and oversharpend effect
on something blurred.
(as if the software tries to join to unfocuses anchors by underlining
the pixels.)
Click to expand...
It sounds like your technical expertise surpasses mine, so I cannot comment on the specifics (going over my head ;), but of course, I did publish a JPEG for the web... The "original" RAW file is not identical.
popeye69 said:
I am more used to shoot with Primes, and got some for a half / quart
of the price of this lens. (less heavy also).
Click to expand...
Wow! Where!!! If you are talking about a 50 ƒ 1.8, then OK, but long primes (which tend to be heavier) are quite pricey.
popeye69 said:
I like the design and
the Fast AF , but did some tests last Hour (with focusing prism
installed, on a tripod and at F8), the lens doesnt find exactly the
right focus very often (at 0.2mm maybe, but that makes the difference
also).
Click to expand...
Well... It is not a pro's lens. I give you that for sure. However, out of the "budget" lenses I have owned (18-55, 18-70, 55-200 VR), this is the best one by far particularly on the 70-2XX range. Even the bokeh is quite pleasing IMHO. And as an added bonus, it is an FX and not EX, which means that A) You can take advantage of the sweet spot of the glass, and B) You'll be able to use it in the future on FF bodies.

--
Lito
D80 + Mac :)

 
Based on the cost factor I consider my 70-300 VR a bargain. It may not be equal to the 300mm f2.8 or even the 300mm f4 but cost much less and weighs a whole lot less.

Full photo from D70 with in Camera sharpening set to Normal and no additional sharpening, RAW converted to JPEG in Nikon NX. Wide open at F5.6 and 300mm. Pardon the cat subject.



100% crop of the above image.



100% crop of the same image after slight USM applied in NX.



As others have mentioned, the DOF at 300mm is so shallow that the eyes will be in focus but the tip of the nose out of focus.

CaseyJ
 
LitoD80 said:
popeye69 wrote:
But yes. your image seems to illustrate perfectly the problem of this
lens. (I got the same kind of pictures). It seems that the software
sharpens the whole image , wich was a bit blurred at the moment of
the shot.
Click to expand...
LitoD80 said:
Uh... This was shot RAW, so no software should have altered sharpness.
Click to expand...
Sorry for my bad english, what I ment is that there's surely a direct software application (from the lens , which is electronic, or the camera) on the pictures, just during the shot. The global quality of the image I get (@see) seem to be sharpened over a bit blurred picture. (directly when shooting).
 
The 300mm F/4 is an awesome lens, and yes you will notice a difference when pixel-peeping. Take a look at Hide Takahashi’s Hummingbird in this thread
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=28054668

Then go to his gallery and look at the same photo in its original size and check the detail, -- check out the feather detail.
http://www.pbase.com/coffee/image/97557672

The picture was taken with a D300, but I think the 300mm F/4 had more to do with the IQ than the camera body did.

This link is to a thread about the 300mm F/4 and there are many outstanding shots taken with the lens.
http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=91605

Keep in mind that the 300F/4 runs about $1125 (NIB) and a TC-14E II (or TC-17E II) will run an additional $400+.

--
Brooks
http://bmiddleton.smugmug.com/
 
popeye69 said:
popeye69 said:
popeye69 wrote:
But yes. your image seems to illustrate perfectly the problem of this
lens. (I got the same kind of pictures). It seems that the software
sharpens the whole image , wich was a bit blurred at the moment of
the shot.
Click to expand...
popeye69 said:
Uh... This was shot RAW, so no software should have altered sharpness.
Click to expand...
Sorry for my bad english, what I ment is that there's surely a direct
software application (from the lens , which is electronic, or the
camera) on the pictures, just during the shot. The global quality of
the image I get (@see) seem to be sharpened over a bit blurred
picture. (directly when shooting).
Click to expand...
popeye69, your English is as good as mine (then again, my native language is Spanish ;)

I think I now understand, and the answer is no. The only electronics in the lens are to control the AFS (motor for focusing), aperture blades, and the VR (vibration reduction) which as I understand it, is controlled by gyroscopes. So, there is no sharpening software.

And, if you shoot RAW as in my example, there is no sharpening happening either, regardless of lens used.

For a good page with some comparisons in the real world, please have a look at http://filmlives.net/content/articles/lenses/telephoto/Nikon70300VR/

--
Lito
D80 + Mac :)

 
hi

when I saw your image it reminded me of one I took a while back with the first incarnation of the 70-300mm genre, the 75-300mm (non VR)

here it is;



thoughts?

zero pp at all.

Here's that thread in case interested.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&message=22772526&changemode=1

rgds
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin
so many flowers, so little time sigh
the 'Art' of Aperture: a mini tutorial
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=23460691
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/thumbnails.php?album=68
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/index.php?cat=10032
http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/theronfamily/
 
you seem to have some good experience with checking/testing, how about these for the 70-300mm range?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&message=22772526&changemode=1
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin
so many flowers, so little time sigh
the 'Art' of Aperture: a mini tutorial
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=23460691
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/thumbnails.php?album=68
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/index.php?cat=10032
http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/theronfamily/
 
I did not read through all the posts but I ran accross an item that may apply to you. If AF-ON button is ON, then VR will not work. I think this comes from the instructions for my 18-200VR lens. It may not apply to your lens.

--

FINE PRINT: I reserve the right to be wrong. Should you prove me wrong, I reserve the right to change my mind.
 
i ike it
TheronFamily said:
hi
when I saw your image it reminded me of one I took a while back with
the first incarnation of the 70-300mm genre, the 75-300mm (non VR)

here it is;



thoughts?

zero pp at all.

Here's that thread in case interested.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&message=22772526&changemode=1

rgds
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin
so many flowers, so little time sigh
the 'Art' of Aperture: a mini tutorial
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=23460691
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/thumbnails.php?album=68
http://www.rootminus1.com/freepics/index.php?cat=10032
http://s33.photobucket.com/albums/d58/theronfamily/
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tloon1/ D40 18-55 70-300vr
 
And it was great - very sharp from 70-200 wide open and very sharp at F8 at 300mm, still pretty good wide open at 300.

I have a 5D and 70-200L which is a class above now, but the 70-300 VR I had was a versatile, impressive lens for the money.
--

http://www.creativeinclined.com/index.gallery.php?gid=3
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top