I am considering re-entering the world of nature photography after a few years break. I previously used Canon (EOS1N, etc.), but Nikon's cropped FOV has obvious advatages for bird photography. But once I started to compare Canon vs. Nikon more carefully, I realised that Nikon does not provide VR versions of lenses such as the 500/4. Does anyone know the reasoning behind this?
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Peter - my understanding is that Nikon are currently rebuilding their entire line of ultra telephotos with integrated VR. They have kicked off with the 300 f2.8 and the 400 f2.8 is due some time in 2006 with the 500 and 600 to follow. I'm not sure if they are going to be completely new designs (lighter weight smaller diameter for DX) or if they are going to use the basis of the AF-S Mark II casing and integrate the VR into that. There's not many ways to compact large focal lengths (don't mention mirror lenses - please!) so I imagine that the prices will be similar to established Nikon list, but that is purely speculation on my part. The reason that they haven't built more VR lenses in the ultra range is simply down to economics - they don't sell enough of these type of telephotos to pay back R&D costs. With teleconverters and the 1.5X crop, most Nikon photographers are already getting an effective field of view of 400mm and above without paying for the expensive glass of yesteryear.
To be honest, when you start using prime 500mm lenses on digitals you enter a new world of potential gremlins to ruin your pictures: increased camera shake, atmosphere and not even finding the subject again if you lose track! I've had very mixed results using a 500 on the D2X - no fault of the equipment as such - it is just very difficult to successfully handhold fast moving subjects using decent ISO settings.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
[ QUOTE ]
... With teleconverters and the 1.5X crop, most Nikon photographers are already getting an effective field of view of 400mm and above without paying for the expensive glass of yesteryear.
To be honest, when you start using prime 500mm lenses on digitals you enter a new world of potential gremlins to ruin your pictures: increased camera shake, atmosphere and not even finding the subject again if you lose track! I've had very mixed results using a 500 on the D2X - no fault of the equipment as such - it is just very difficult to successfully handhold fast moving subjects using decent ISO settings.
[/ QUOTE ]
When shooting small birds, 750mm equivalent doesn't get you all that much distance. I used to use a 400/2.8 with a 2x converter a lot. I agree that finding the little beggars through the viewfinder is a problem (especially when they are flitting around), but that goes with the territory.
Camera shake is why I want the VR - even on a tripod or beanbag I found Canon's IS to be helpful in mitigating tremor induced by my hands. I wouldn't think of trying to handhold at that kind of magnification. Atmospheric effects are somewhat mitigated by the short working distances typical of bird photography, but always a problem. Compared to film - the nice thing about digital is being able to shoot at ISO 400 without paying the price in grain.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
As an off topic FYI- I've found that setting my d2x to auto ISO, and selecting an exposure in manual works well.
For example, when using my 300-800mm Sigma, I set it for 1/800th @ f7.1 or 8. I've had very good results with noise not being a real issue because the camera gets the exposure nailed each time. While I don't use a tripod, I use a monopod and get acceptable results. Heck, I've gotten decent shots with this combo at 1/500th too... but I use 1/800th to be safe.
One of the reasons Nikon may be slow in producing long VR AFS lenses, which are very expensive, is that most of the professionals, who would typically be a primary customer for such lenses, have abandoned Nikon in favor of Canon. Hence, the potential target market for such lenses is substantially smaller now than it would have been in years past.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Personally, I think nikon have still some way to go in perfecting thier VR technology. Untill they have perfected it, then we can see the technology incorporated into all their lenses. Of course, commerce do play apart so put the vr tech on lenses that most people will buy and comment.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
That second in which the VR settles has cost me numerous perfectly clear shots....until I smartened up...sold the 200-400 and bought a 500.
As you should be shooting this on a sturdy tripod with a proper head and most likely a full Wimberly or a sidekick, the VR isn't going to buy you squat unless you're shooting handheld. With the 200-400, that was the only time I found the VR to be of any advantage.
This year, I've got in excess of 9000 flight shots under my belt and the yield is definitely higher with VR off or a non VR lens.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Linear Mode
