VR Lens shots Hand Held: How slow can you go?

[rocketman]

Since there was a discussion recently about VR (Vibration Reduction) lens I thought I would try to take some photos using my 70-300 Nikor VR lens in low light early AM hand held and then some with full light to illustrate the capabilities of the VR system. The first four were taken just as the sun was coming up and the shutter speeds were 1/10, 1/30, 1/40 and 1/50. Lens wide open at either 5.0 and 5.6 depending on zoom level, all at ASO of 125. While there is some loss of sharpness compared to the three shot later in full light following the first four not bad for hand held. I’ll try for some next week with my 70-300 without VR but otherwise similar lens in the same conditions and then maybe rearrange the sequence to show a one on one comparison.

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-1-web.jpg

Note in the following one the effect that the slow shutter speed has on the water cascading down around the fountain...

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-2-web.jpg

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-3-web.jpg

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-4-web.jpg

These were taken at mid-day speed set at 320 f4.5 ASO 125 and EV at 0

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-5-400-web.jpg

A crop of the above

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-5-400-crop-web.jpg

And another close up

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-6-400-crop-web.jpg

And a couple of moon shots the same morning and time as the first four just for fun, again hand held,

speed 320, f4.5 ASO125 EV -1.00 zoom 85 for the first

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/moon-1-web.jpg

And 320, f5.6 ASO 125, -.67 EV zoom at 230

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/moon-2-web.jpg

I used the –EV to help get some detail in the moon, shoot to bright and you lose that nice detail, also when its lower in the sky you get a better shot, even though you lose something due to haze, which also can help improve the contrast by softening the brightness of a full moon, so its both good and bad. A better way would be to use a filter with the moon higher up which I still need to try. The trick with shooting the moon (yeah yeah I know!) is to remember that it is a sun-lit object.

So, any one else up for trying a series illustrating some aspect of different types of lens, settings, DOF, same shot with different lenses or cameras ( say a P&S and DSLR) etc?

Tell us what and why, good points and bad, as you share your shots.

RM

[torags]

While VR is good for slow moving subjects, it isn't when shooting fast subjects on continuous fps.

I shut it off to catch horse muscle definition to free my burst

http://torags.smugmug.com/photos/199212697-M.jpg

http://torags.smugmug.com/photos/221893512-M.jpg

The faster the shutter speed the less you need VR

[SNC1923]

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/234502839-L.jpg

1/15 @ 135mm equivalent, 3 stops below recommended minimum shutter speed.

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/234590382-L.jpg

1/13 @ 38mm equivalent, at a very noisy 3200 ISO.

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/234591531-L.jpg

1/8 @ 28mm equivalent.

Compare these, however, to this 13 second exposure on a tripod:

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/244587935-L.jpg

[rinty]

That's interesting, Tom; I never thought it was possible to hand hold below about 1 / 25th or so. But I've never tried it with digital and the new lenses.

Great shots, too!

Rinty

[torags]

Great long exposure Bakersfield shot Tom. Do you leave the VR on, on the tripod? Some versions recommend not to.

Rags

[bmdubyou]

I find that with my 18-200VR if the subject is moving you still get a blurred image. I almost think I like my old 2.8 lenses better sometimes. I just like the range of this little lens.

[SNC1923]

That's interesting, Tom; I never thought it was possible to hand hold below about 1 / 25th or so. But I've never tried it with digital and the new lenses.

Great shots, too!

Rinty

Great long exposure Bakersfield shot Tom. Do you leave the VR on, on the tripod? Some versions recommend not to.

Rags

Thanks!

VR and IS make it possible to handhold exposure that were impossible before; however, it isn't perfect or foolproof. Here's a good rule of thumb:

You can handhold a shot at no lower a shutter speed than the inverse of the focal length of the lens. For example, with a


100mm lens, you should handhold no lower than 1/125 sec
A 50mm, no lower than 1/30 sec
70-200 at 200mm, no lower than 1/250.


The latest generation of VR (vibration reduction) and IS (image stabilization) provides for about 3 stops of reduced speed. So, using the examples above:


100mm lens WITH IS or VR, you should handhold no lower than 1/15 sec
A 50mm, WITH IS or VR, no lower than 1/4 sec
70-200 at 200mm, WITH IS or VR, no lower than 1/30.


The lenses are still subject to how much you move. You've got to hold them steady. They'll help you, but they won't perform magic (although it seems like magic to me!).

In answer to the tripod question, if you're on a tripod, you should definitely turn the IS or VR off. You don't need it and it's eating battery power. The long exposure above was taken with my 10-22, a non-IS lens. My 70-200 is actually intuitive: it senses when it's on a tripod and actually shuts itself off.

I find that with my 18-200VR if the subject is moving you still get a blurred image. I almost think I like my old 2.8 lenses better sometimes. I just like the range of this little lens.

This is a common misunderstanding. VR and IS have nothing to do with freezing a moving subject. That's ALL shutter speed. The VR and IS functions prevent the LENS from moving, therefore reducing motion blur, the blurring of the entire image which results from camera/lens movement at lower shutter speeds. If I am shooting a scene, say a motorcycle racing past, at a low shutter speed, the VR or IS will freeze major camera/lens movement, resulting in a sharp background. The subject, the moving motorcyclist, would still be blurred, due to the low shutter speed.

This isn't a perfect example, but it should give you the idea:

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/181649798-L.jpg

The background is sharp and clear because the camera/lens didn't move in my hands; however, the roller coaster is blurred because the shutter was only set to 1/100. Get it?

[torags]

Good example Tom

:thumb

[rocketman]

Thanks!

VR and IS make it possible to handhold exposure that were impossible before; however, it isn't perfect or foolproof. Here's a good rule of thumb:

You can handhold a shot at no lower a shutter speed than the inverse of the focal length of the lens. For example, with a


100mm lens, you should handhold no lower than 1/125 sec
A 50mm, no lower than 1/30 sec
70-200 at 200mm, no lower than 1/250.


The latest generation of VR (vibration reduction) and IS (image stabilization) provides for about 3 stops of reduced speed. So, using the examples above:


100mm lens WITH IS or VR, you should handhold no lower than 1/15 sec
A 50mm, WITH IS or VR, no lower than 1/4 sec
70-200 at 200mm, WITH IS or VR, no lower than 1/30.


The lenses are still subject to how much you move. You've got to hold them steady. They'll help you, but they won't perform magic (although it seems like magic to me!).

In answer to the tripod question, if you're on a tripod, you should definitely turn the IS or VR off. You don't need it and it's eating battery power. The long exposure above was taken with my 10-22, a non-IS lens. My 70-200 is actually intuitive: it senses when it's on a tripod and actually shuts itself off.



This is a common misunderstanding. VR and IS have nothing to do with freezing a moving subject. That's ALL shutter speed. The VR and IS functions prevent the LENS from moving, therefore reducing motion blur, the blurring of the entire image which results from camera/lens movement at lower shutter speeds. If I am shooting a scene, say a motorcycle racing past, at a low shutter speed, the VR or IS will freeze major camera/lens movement, resulting in a sharp background. The subject, the moving motorcyclist, would still be blurred, due to the low shutter speed.

This isn't a perfect example, but it should give you the idea:

http://SNC1923.smugmug.com/photos/181649798-L.jpg

The background is sharp and clear because the camera/lens didn't move in my hands; however, the roller coaster is blurred because the shutter was only set to 1/100. Get it?

Nicely put indeed, Tom.

here again is another example on the question of subject motion as apposed to lens motion, from my original series.

Note in the following one the effect that the slow shutter speed has on the water cascading down around the fountain...but the water is fairly sharp.

http://roadrunes.com/images3/geese-work-pond/geese-2-web.jpg

RM

[bmdubyou]

ahh, yes...I see what you mean! Good pic example! thanks

[SNC1923]

ahh, yes...I see what you mean! Good pic example! thanks

Any time--my pleasure.

[empeg9000]

I shot all of these hand held this past summer during F1 weekend. They are all unaltered.
ISO: 220
Exposure: 1/5 sec
Aperture: f/3.5
Focal Length: 18mm
Flash Used: No
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/stephen.pivonka/MontrealGrandPrix20070610/photo?authkey=Pa_VtwWqk24#5076220049473129122"><img src="http://lh3.google.com/stephen.pivonka/RnJbPXKPyqI/AAAAAAAAA9c/4G4Zb6sKtn8/s800/DSC_0845.JPG" /></a>

ISO: 1600
Exposure: 1/13 sec
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 150mm
Flash Used: No
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/stephen.pivonka/MontrealGrandPrix20070610/photo?authkey=Pa_VtwWqk24#5076220006523456114"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/stephen.pivonka/RnJbM3KPynI/AAAAAAAAA9E/tBFd-gVPaS4/s800/DSC_0842.JPG" /></a>

This one is a smidge blurry
ISO: 360
Exposure: 1/6 sec
Aperture: f/4.5
Focal Length: 38mm
Flash Used: No
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/stephen.pivonka/MontrealGrandPrix20070610/photo?authkey=Pa_VtwWqk24#5074969019989084354"><img src="http://lh4.google.com/stephen.pivonka/Rm3pb3KPyMI/AAAAAAAAA-I/Ok_xfIQXRYw/s800/DSC_0851.JPG" /></a>

ISO: 360
Exposure: 1/10 sec
Aperture: f/3.5
Focal Length: 18mm
Flash Used: No
<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/stephen.pivonka/MontrealGrandPrix20070610/photo?authkey=Pa_VtwWqk24#5076223047360304882"><img src="http://lh5.google.com/stephen.pivonka/RnJd93KP1vI/AAAAAAAABWQ/uvhftYoJeew/s800/DSC_1108.jpg" /></a>

[bmdubyou]

wow....neat buildings! The architectural detail you captured is awesome! where were you again??

[empeg9000]

wow....neat buildings! The architectural detail you captured is awesome! where were you again??
It was in Montreal this past June during the F1 weekend.

[bmdubyou]

It was in Montreal this past June during the F1 weekend.

Very cool! you sure get around! By the way...great website!