IS/VR - is it needed?

Discuss equipment and methods or ask for advice
Post Reply
User avatar
CameronSys
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri 19 Jul 2013, 12:33 pm

IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by CameronSys »

Hello all,

I am going to get a Nikon D3200 in the summer next year, and am trying to work out what lenses I could get...

I have been filtering out anything without IS/VR which only leaves me with the NIKKOR 55-300mm in my price range.

I am wondering if I need Stabilization or if I would be fine getting extra lenses without it for aviation photography?

Probably needed for things like RIAT so I would use the 55-300mm VR for then, but seeing as I am normally shooting GA or Airliners, could I get a non-VR for then as that would open up a whole lot of other options.

Many thanks and a merry Christmas to all!

Cameron

User avatar
Brevet Cable
Posts: 13190
Joined: Tue 05 Mar 2013, 12:13 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by Brevet Cable »

Needed ?? Nope......it can be useful to have ( especially for slow shutter speeds , hand-held ) but unless you have a medical complaint which makes it difficult to hold a camera steady , it's something that wouldn't really be missed. If you're shooting at anywhere around the focal length or faster ( so 1/300sec or faster for a 300mm lens ) you'd frequently turn it off anyway.
Besides , photographers managed perfectly well without it until it became popular in recent years.
Tôi chỉ đặt cái này ở đây để giữ cho người điều hành bận rộn
아직도 숨어있다

User avatar
CameronSys
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri 19 Jul 2013, 12:33 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by CameronSys »

Alright thanks. Just worried that Nikon's adverts for VR being absolutely 100% needed might not be exaggerated lol!

I might have to get a Tamron 18-200mm for close up photography as I get airside at Coventry quite regularly.

Many Thanks for clearing that up!

FastJetsBest
Posts: 1219
Joined: Sat 23 Jun 2012, 4:11 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by FastJetsBest »

Agree its not needed. Like the post above it can be useful at times. I use a Sigma 800mm which has nothing and I do pretty well with it down to around 1/300th any lower then I pretty much struggle, can be done but takes a lot of shots to get one hit. If I use my 6D on it I can go a little lower then 1/300th.

John_E
Posts: 407
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:41 am

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by John_E »

I have VR switched off when I'm using higher shutter speeds but as BC says, it can be handy if doing low shutter speed handheld stuff. This was handheld at 1/20 and 500mm, pretty sure it would look pretty different without VR.

Image3 Lancs 07.09.14 by JDE_Photography, on Flickr

User avatar
bigfatron
Posts: 918
Joined: Mon 06 Jul 2009, 11:40 am

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by bigfatron »

John_E wrote:I have VR switched off when I'm using higher shutter speeds but as BC says, it can be handy if doing low shutter speed handheld stuff. This was handheld at 1/20 and 500mm, pretty sure it would look pretty different without VR.


As you say, its borderline invaluable if you shoot prop aircraft a lot and either don't have the steadiest hands or a monopod. As a trade-off though I'd take image quality of the lens over IS, although its increasingly rare these days anyway to see long telephoto lenses without it.

That Lanc picture is some effort by the way. I'm pleased with shooting 1/20s at 300mm, let alone 500mm.

User avatar
CameronSys
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri 19 Jul 2013, 12:33 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by CameronSys »

Thanks guys for your replies and well done for getting that Lanc shot! Superb!

Managed to get a Nikon D3200 body for £160 and will get a 55-200mm VR lens soon to get me started and will then upgrade to the 55-300mm VR with an 18-200mm non-VR I think.

Thanks all..

Cameron

Maisie
Posts: 4129
Joined: Wed 28 Oct 2009, 5:02 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by Maisie »

It has it's uses, but you don't need it. Just practise...

Here are some with Mode 2 IS (best for panning) with a Canon 70-300 IS USM.

1/80th
ImageEI-EVE Ryanair B737 by Totallyrad.co.uk, on Flickr

1/60th
ImageUntitled by Totallyrad.co.uk, on Flickr

1/50th shot through glass at Luqa, Malta.
ImageG-EZWZ A320 departing Malta by Totallyrad.co.uk, on Flickr

and here is one at 1/30th @500mm, using a 1D Mk2 + 50-500 non-OS.. not pin sharp, but not bad (I think so anyway).

ImageG-SVIV by Totallyrad.co.uk, on Flickr
6D | 7D | 60D
11-16 f/2.8 | 24-105 IS L | 70-300 IS USM | 50 f/1.4 | 100 f/2.8 | 400 f/5.6

User avatar
CameronSys
Posts: 552
Joined: Fri 19 Jul 2013, 12:33 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by CameronSys »

Nice photos! I agree about the final photo, very good. I'd be pleased to get that one even with VR tbh!

User avatar
Petedcollins
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 8:45 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by Petedcollins »

I used to believe in VR then I turned it off and although it does have a different feel of it, it is by no means required

All of these with no VR on a 400mm lens

ImageOld Warden End of the Season Show 2014 by Pmanuk, on Flickr

ImageOld Warden End of the Year Show 2014 by Pmanuk, on Flickr

ImageCosmic Wind by Pmanuk, on Flickr

User avatar
AlexC
Posts: 6040
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:40 pm
Location: New Forest

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by AlexC »

I haven't got it on any of my lenses. But perhaps it's one of those things that once you've got it you say that you don't know how you even managed without it?!
Pte. Aubrey Gerald Harmer, R. Suss. R. (att. to the Sherwood Foresters) KIA 26/9/1917 Polygon Wood, aged 19, NKG. RIP

The Doctor
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed 26 Jun 2013, 12:26 pm

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by The Doctor »

Not having VR won't stop you from taking good photos, but it might help to raise your hit rate slightly, especially if you are relatively new to photography. I've borrowed a friends Nikkor 300mm F4 before which doesn't have VR and not had any problems with getting good pictures (for me). I would say that regarding the upgrade to lenses, I think the 70-300 might be worth looking at, it's a very good value lens indeed. I have recently parted with my D3200 and really learned a lot from it. Hope you have fun with it too.

warferry
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed 23 Feb 2011, 11:05 am

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by warferry »

I suspect young and fit guys would not have much use for IS .But even so I find using large lenses in windy conditions not good and many of my pals agree.
Changed over a few years back and results much better.

User avatar
Wes_Howes
Posts: 3801
Joined: Wed 03 Sep 2008, 7:39 am
Contact:

Re: IS/VR - is it needed?

Post by Wes_Howes »

I've noticed my 100-400 is a lot quicker at focusing when IS is turned off

Post Reply