300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
ARClark
ARClark Veteran Member • Posts: 3,695
300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?

My biggest frustration with this lens is the weak VR. I'm not referring to the concerns of VR in the 1/60 to 1/125 range, but just the inability of the lens to really stabilize an image in general.  Comparing the VR in the 200-500 with the 300 PF is night and day.

So my question is whether users of the Z6 or Z7 see a noticeable difference in VR/image stabilization effectiveness with IBIS?

Thanks, Alan

 ARClark's gear list:ARClark's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D ED-IF II Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +11 more
Nikon Z6 Nikon Z7
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
arniebook Senior Member • Posts: 1,108
Re: 300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?

ARClark wrote:

My biggest frustration with this lens is the weak VR. I'm not referring to the concerns of VR in the 1/60 to 1/125 range, but just the inability of the lens to really stabilize an image in general. Comparing the VR in the 200-500 with the 300 PF is night and day.

So my question is whether users of the Z6 or Z7 see a noticeable difference in VR/image stabilization effectiveness with IBIS?

Thanks, Alan

Mmmm ... I've never heard that. Is that documented elsewhere, or just your personal experience?  I don't have a 300 PF, but I've seen plenty of threads praising it, and don't recall reading anything about poor VR.

Arnie

-- hide signature --

What we spend on this stuff is equal to the depth of our pockets squared ($²) times what we (j)ustify in our minds as to what we expect to do with our pictures plus (+) the (e)njoyment we experience from using our stuff and sharing the result ... $xxxx=$²(j+e )

 arniebook's gear list:arniebook's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR Nikon D300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +2 more
Nikon33 Senior Member • Posts: 1,449
Re: 300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?
1

arniebook wrote:

ARClark wrote:

My biggest frustration with this lens is the weak VR. I'm not referring to the concerns of VR in the 1/60 to 1/125 range, but just the inability of the lens to really stabilize an image in general. Comparing the VR in the 200-500 with the 300 PF is night and day.

So my question is whether users of the Z6 or Z7 see a noticeable difference in VR/image stabilization effectiveness with IBIS?

Thanks, Alan

Mmmm ... I've never heard that. Is that documented elsewhere, or just your personal experience? I don't have a 300 PF, but I've seen plenty of threads praising it, and don't recall reading anything about poor VR.

Arnie

Many people have issues with the lens between about 1/60 and 1/100 with the VR. Yes, I indeed do find that the 300mm f/4E PF works better on the Z6 than the D850, D3500, and D5500.

 Nikon33's gear list:Nikon33's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ3 Nikon D60 Nikon D700 Nikon D800E Nikon D500 +15 more
ARClark
OP ARClark Veteran Member • Posts: 3,695
Re: 300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?

arniebook wrote:

ARClark wrote:

My biggest frustration with this lens is the weak VR. I'm not referring to the concerns of VR in the 1/60 to 1/125 range, but just the inability of the lens to really stabilize an image in general. Comparing the VR in the 200-500 with the 300 PF is night and day.

So my question is whether users of the Z6 or Z7 see a noticeable difference in VR/image stabilization effectiveness with IBIS?

Thanks, Alan

Mmmm ... I've never heard that. Is that documented elsewhere, or just your personal experience? I don't have a 300 PF, but I've seen plenty of threads praising it, and don't recall reading anything about poor VR.

Arnie

I should clarify that the VR works, but in my experience it’s noticeably less effective than that of the 200-500.

 ARClark's gear list:ARClark's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D ED-IF II Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +11 more
ARClark
OP ARClark Veteran Member • Posts: 3,695
Re: 300mm PF Stabilization better with Z body IBIS?

Nikon33 wrote:

arniebook wrote:

ARClark wrote:

My biggest frustration with this lens is the weak VR. I'm not referring to the concerns of VR in the 1/60 to 1/125 range, but just the inability of the lens to really stabilize an image in general. Comparing the VR in the 200-500 with the 300 PF is night and day.

So my question is whether users of the Z6 or Z7 see a noticeable difference in VR/image stabilization effectiveness with IBIS?

Thanks, Alan

Mmmm ... I've never heard that. Is that documented elsewhere, or just your personal experience? I don't have a 300 PF, but I've seen plenty of threads praising it, and don't recall reading anything about poor VR.

Arnie

Many people have issues with the lens between about 1/60 and 1/100 with the VR. Yes, I indeed do find that the 300mm f/4E PF works better on the Z6 than the D850, D3500, and D5500.

Thanks very much.

 ARClark's gear list:ARClark's gear list
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D ED-IF II Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +11 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads