NIKON VR Lense (1 Viewer)

Has anyone on the forum any experience with the Nikon 80-400 VR lense? If not the Nikon lense any lense with a stabilizing factor such as Canon.

While researching the D100 and 10D, the 80/100-400 range was the lens I knew I'd buy first.

I ended up buying the 10D and the 100-400L, but I can say some thing from what my research. The 80-400 is a quite slow focusing. It's intentional in its design. Not only is it not AF-S, it one of the slowest AF lenses Nikon makes. I've also heard mixed things about the quality control on the lens (same applies to the Canon.) Check out these reviews:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80400vr.htm

This review doesn't think the AF is that slow:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/VR80_400_review.html

Most of the people I talked to (and what I read on dpreview.com) considered it quite slow.

You can also look here:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/lenses/mylenses.html
and:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/lenses/ronreznick.html
(at the bottom.)

The VR is the first generation VR, and isn’t as good as the 2 newer VR lenses. It works well, I’m told. But not on a tripod and under some situations not as well.

I own the 10D and the 100-400L F4.5-F5.6 IS USM. This is a wonderful lens. It's the lens I use 95% of the time. I find it to be very crisp and very fast & quiet when focusing. No CA and other distortions/defects (that my untrained eye can find.) Due to quality control issues, I wouldn’t mail order this lens. Some of them are duds and some are amazing. I would buy it from a place I knew I could return it… maybe many times.

IS is amazing. I can take shots at 400mm 1/150 (even 1/125) and still get the shot. Sure, the f5.6 sucks and I have to shoot at 800ISO often to even get that shutter speed, but neat image removes the noise and the shots still look good. I wish it was faster... but then it would cost even more and weigh a lot more too

Other than weight and cost, I only have one complaint. And I think it’s more the camera than the lens. It really bugs me how every now and then it just suddenly huts all the way out to infinity (or min focus, I don't know) and then seeks to the right focus. Some times, that precious second or two costs you the shot.

If you want examples of this lens, check out my gallery (both pictures use the lens) or these links. The first three pictures were shot at 400mm (not include 1.6x crop) and 1/300 of a second or less. The next 3 were shot a less mm, but still low shutter speed. I was about 8 feet away from the Heron. The last was 400mm, but I don’t remember the shutter.

http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/woodpecker1.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/heron_house1.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/heron_house2.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/heron_at_grate1.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/heron_at_grate2.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/heron_at_grate3.jpg
http://www.marx7.org/~dsmith/eric/blandings1.jpg

That last is an endangered species, the Blandings Turtle. Protect by the UN and by state law. It’s a once-in-a-lifetime find, I feel very lucky.

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask here or by PM. I don't always check this forum but I'll try to watch out.

Eric

I have used the lens for 2 years and cannot think of anything else that meets my need as well. It may be all the things that critics say it is, but I shoot successfully at 1/60th of a second hand-held and I have focused on Palm Swifts which are 10cms and the fastest moving things possible. Almost all the images in my Gallery
http://www.birdforum.net/pp_gallery/showgallery.php?ppuser=1853
are shot with this lens. You can judge the sharpness from the images.
This is the best f5.6 400mm lens you can get from Nikon if you want mobility and hand-held photography opportunities. I have trudged miles with only this lens as a companion.
And the VR works upto 3 stops equivalent, a great plus for me in my low light work areas. I don't know if anything else matches that.
If the work that you intend to put the lens to requires at least 400mm at the long end and if you want flexibility and mobility then I think this is a very useful tool for your bag. I never leave home without it....

Cheers
Sumit

That is how I feel about the Canon version. IS is amazing (as I'm sure VR is.) I have *never* put my camera on a tripod. I was thinking of getting one, but right now I wonder... why? I get great pictures without one almost all the time. Sure it would help on rare occasions, but why carry a tripod for "rare occasions"?

If all you need is 400mm & IS/VR and weight and quality matter, the Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM is even better. Really sharp, good color rendition, 4.3lb (almost 2/3s less than the f2.8) and a stop faster than the 100-400. The downside? It costs $5,300. For $200 more, you can get the 500mm.

You won't see me getting this any time soon, the 100-400 fits me well and I'd rather get the 500mm or 600mm. Heck, it really isn't fair to compare the DO and 500mm lenses, they are build for completely different purproses.

Sumit
How do you rate the AF speed. This is kind a personal thing, I know. I've heard some people say "its ok" and some say "its too slow, but VR makes it worth it!" If all those in your gallery us it, clearly you use it well. Some very nice work there.

Eric

Hi Eric,
The AF speed is acceptable but not like a prime or AFS lens. Clear day, contrasty subject and good light, I don't think the difference would amount to much. Difficult conditions, specially grey and non-contrasty subjects cause "focus hunt". If you pre-focus or limit focus, you will get satisfying performance. I suppose the more you get familiar with the lens the easier it becomes to get acceptable performance. I have rarely missed a bird because of the focus speed...however, I have missed some due to hunting.
Appreciate your feedback on my images. Almost all are with this lens (the soft ones are digiscoped).
Sumit