New Nikon 400mm f2.8 VR

Thanks Nigel

I never use VR on my 300mm f2.8 when it's on a tripod, (which is most of the time) ………. but when using a "cheaper" gimbal maybe there could be some "camera" movement ………………. I'll have to experiment
 
BillN_33 said:
apparently Nikon have announced a new 400mm f2.8 and a 600mm
General question: why do they put VR on a lens that spends most of its time on a tripod - presumably a non VR lens would be cheaper?
Click to expand...

Because there are idiots like me who still handhold these lenses (the Canon Versions) to take images like these

Canon 500mm f4
IMG_8412copy1_zps403aa708.jpg


Canon 300mm f2.8 + TC
IMG_8765copy1.jpg


Canon 300mm f2.8 + TC
IMG_8951copy1.jpg


But I will how be using the 500 to take similar images
 
Last edited:
The question did relate to the 400 but was also aimed at the 500 and 600

Great shots by the way!
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
General question: why do they put VR on a lens that spends most of its time on a tripod - presumably a non VR lens would be cheaper?
Click to expand...

How much cheaper would it be? £100, £200? Pretty much nothing compared to the cost of the lens.

And it would be very unfortunate to have a long lens of this class without VR.

Some Canon claim they are able to handhold 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM without any problems. The new Nikon version will be similar in weight (lighter than the original) so perhaps it will be possible to handhold it as well.
 
Last edited:
I think there are a fair few instances where a Gimbal (wonderful though they are) just do not give enough freedom of movement, in such circumstances IS or VR is invaluable. In addition to this there are venues i.e airshows where it's perhaps impractical to take a tripod add to this the freedom of movement allowed by handholding and you can see why some would forego the tripod.

As such I think if Canon or Nikon discontinued image stabilization on those lines there would be quite an outcry.

Alternatively in my cynical mode, perhaps they include IS/VR to push the price up so we pay more.
 
MarkEvan said:
I think there are a fair few instances where a Gimbal (wonderful though they are) just do not give enough freedom of movement, in such circumstances IS or VR is invaluable. In addition to this there are venues i.e airshows where it's perhaps impractical to take a tripod add to this the freedom of movement allowed by handholding and you can see why some would forego the tripod.

As such I think if Canon or Nikon discontinued image stabilization on those lines there would be quite an outcry.

Alternatively in my cynical mode, perhaps they include IS/VR to push the price up so we pay more.
Click to expand...

Thanks sounds good
 
BillN_33 said:
pretty obvious really as that were I put it

(do you mean why should this appear in the Bird Section?)
Click to expand...

In all fairness Bill and it is nobody getting funny with anyone, Brash has a point. Yeh you can look at your question from both sides of the fence but anything relating to equipment needs and such like, should in theory go into the relevant section. You will still get plenty of replies from experienced bird photographers in there.
 
More pleased at the announcement of the 1.4x III I have been holding off upgrading my MKI for some time and nearly pushed the button several times over the last 2 weeks. For me that will make more difference.

Whilst I can see the improvements they have put into the new 400mm lens there isn't enough to force an upgrade from my current model.

As for VR on the lens I'd say that the average 400mm probably spends it's time on a monopod more than a tripod as it is the key field sports lens for pros. Guidance from NPS is VR on at speeds up to 1/2000 even on a monopod, and above that switch it off as the VR introduces more vibration at those speeds than not.
 
Last edited:
Yv said:
It wasn't me that moved it btw, though yes, it should be in equipment, not Bird photosharing, but I have cleaned the thread up chaps, so lets leave at that and gerronwiv discussing the various lenses. Thankyou :)
Click to expand...

the "non relevant" comments, (most of which you seems to have deleted), attitudes and delivery on this thread are symptomatic of the problems that you, (we), have
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
apparently Nikon have announced a new 400mm f2.8

http://nikonrumors.com/2014/05/12/confirmed-nikon-to-launch-a-new-400mm-f2-8-lens.aspx/

and a 600mm

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/12/15/n...4-and-400mm-f2-8-super-telephoto-lenses.aspx/

General question: why do they put VR on a lens that spends most of its time on a tripod - presumably a non VR lens would be cheaper?
Click to expand...

Because the VR lets one handhold the lens (Shot with what is now the "old" Nikkor 400mm f2.8 VR....) Heavy b****r, though.

DSC_2865 by winkyintheuk, on Flickr
 
Winkyphoto said:
Because the VR lets one handhold the lens (Shot with what is now the "old" Nikkor 400mm f2.8 VR....) Heavy b****r, though.

DSC_2865 by winkyintheuk, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Thanks - do you reckon that the 400mm f2.8 is well ahead of the 300mm f2.8 - used on their own or with the TC-20Elll - I'm looking at my next upgrade from the 300mm f2.8 - to the 400mm or 500mm
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
Thanks - do you reckon that the 400mm f2.8 is well ahead of the 300mm f2.8 - used on their own or with the TC-20Elll - I'm looking at my next upgrade from the 300mm f2.8 - to the 400mm or 500mm
Click to expand...

No clue as I've never used the 300mm. Get right with 400 and it is razor sharp and fast. The 300mm would perhaps be more versatile in a lot of ways, though (and lighter).
 
meonshore said:
As for VR on the lens I'd say that the average 400mm probably spends it's time on a monopod more than a tripod as it is the key field sports lens for pros. Guidance from NPS is VR on at speeds up to 1/2000 even on a monopod, and above that switch it off as the VR introduces more vibration at those speeds than not.
Click to expand...

Yes, the monopod is a good middle ground. Nearly the flexibility of handheld, without the workout. You can always pick it up if you need to.
 
BillN_33 said:
Thanks - do you reckon that the 400mm f2.8 is well ahead of the 300mm f2.8 - used on their own or with the TC-20Elll - I'm looking at my next upgrade from the 300mm f2.8 - to the 400mm or 500mm
Click to expand...

I've read the 400 (and the 200 f2) are supposed to have the best acuity of all the superteles. Really at that supertele level you're talking brilliant IQ no matter what focal length. The 300 is so much easier to carry and handhold than a 400. For wildlife a 500 is what I'd go for.
 
I run an "old" 400mm 2.8 VRII and it's a heavy beast but do still hand hold it, and do still use VR, especially for paddock shots.

I can't see any reason to upgrade my 400mm for a new one, to save 800g, for an additional $3,000. I can't imagine many other pros will be offloading their gear either unless they really need the weight saving.

Most if the time, mine is attached to a monopod and slung over my shoulder walking around the track or through a forest.
 
But I also do agree I'm keen to pick up a new 1.4x TCIII. I have owned a 2x III and found it a little too much for my use but think the 1.4x could be perfect - held off buying the MKII since hearing a romour about the MkIII a couple of months ago.
 
BillN_33 said:
the "non relevant" comments, (most of which you seems to have deleted), attitudes and delivery on this thread are symptomatic of the problems that you, (we), have
Click to expand...
Sorry Bill, but I disagree with you.

The bird section is for photo sharing, the equipment section is for discussing things like this.This thread is now in the right place.Just my opinion I hasten to add.

Anyway, not worth getting flustered about it really. The mods have enough to do at the moment without giving then any more work.
 
Impspeed said:
I run an "old" 400mm 2.8 VRII and it's a heavy beast but do still hand hold it, and do still use VR, especially for paddock shots.

I can't see any reason to upgrade my 400mm for a new one, to save 800g, for an additional $3,000. I can't imagine many other pros will be offloading their gear either unless they really need the weight saving.

Most if the time, mine is attached to a monopod and slung over my shoulder walking around the track or through a forest.
Click to expand...

What monopod are you using for the 400?
 
fracster said:
Sorry Bill, but I disagree with you.

The bird section is for photo sharing, the equipment section is for discussing things like this.This thread is now in the right place.Just my opinion I hasten to add.

Anyway, not worth getting flustered about it really. The mods have enough to do at the moment without giving then any more work.
Click to expand...

Ade, I am a reasonable person, I do not mind being disagreed with if it is done in a sensible fashion, if fact I quite like to debate subjects in a reasonable way. The reaction was expected' indeed anticipated, after the experiences of the previous weeks; as you say not worth being bothered or bothering about, pity really, but that's life.
 
Last edited:
no worries Bill.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top