Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    1,148
    CR beat me to the crop-factor mention.

    VR really will help, even at faster shutter speeds when your subject is not moving. If you need a particular shot, and want to make sure it is as sharp as the lens is capable, you cannot lose to put it on a tripod - VR or Not. But VR will help you if you can't / won't carry a tripod. Actually the nice little ML-L3 will also help if you have the camera on a tripod.
    Nikon D70s
    Nikkor 50mm 1.8D (If you don't have it you need it)
    Nikkor 18-200mm VR II
    SB-600
    Bogen/Manfrotto Tripods/Heads
    NAS (D300, Nikkor 80-200mm (or 70-200mm)f/2.8, Tamron 90mm Macro)

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    73
    actually, in my camera i use shutter speeds about 1\125 a sec. so as i read from the other posts, i think i wont need VR..

    but the image quality is very different?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    Quote Originally Posted by X-SOFT View Post
    actually, in my camera i use shutter speeds about 1\125 a sec. so as i read from the other posts, i think i wont need VR..

    but the image quality is very different?
    Of course you will need VR if you are going to shoot 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm.
    You would need at least 1/400 sec, 1/125 is a lot longer...
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    73
    strange what you saying because i have Canon poweshot A710 IS, and i didnt have camera shake from 1\40. [i've done internal tests with and without ths IS option]

    so how come this will affect it?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by X-SOFT View Post
    strange what you saying because i have Canon poweshot A710 IS, and i didnt have camera shake from 1\40. [i've done internal tests with and without ths IS option]

    so how come this will affect it?
    If you did your tests at the wide end of the zoom, 35 mm, I guess, than 1/40th secon should be handholdable. The long end of the zoom of your camera will probably be around 100mm, so 1/40th second would be tough to handhold. If you are able to do that, you have pretty steady hands.

    Like Coldrain said, you can usually handhold the camera at a shutterspeed of 1 divided by the apparant focal length (the focal lenght when taking the crop factor into account). So, with a ultrawide 10mm lens you can handhold from speeds of 1/15th and faster and with a 300 lens 1/450th second. Of course these values differ from person to person. I shoot regularly at 1/300th second with my 70-300 without camera shake.
    Last edited by Prospero; 03-16-2007 at 02:29 PM.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    73
    i did it in full tele (X6~210mm) at iso 80, and it didnt blured.
    so, at d80 which it is a DSLR, i can shoot even at iso 800 and i will have the image like in canon a710 [iso perfomance is great in D80], so i suppose it will be ok- isnt it?

    my main concern, as i stated before, is the image quality..
    Last edited by X-SOFT; 03-16-2007 at 02:59 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by X-SOFT View Post
    i did it in full tele (X6~210mm) at iso 80, and it didnt blured.
    so, at d80 which it is a DSLR, i can shoot even at iso 800 and i will have the image like in canon a710 [iso perfomance is great in D80], so i suppose it will be ok- isnt it?

    my main concern, as i stated before, is the image quality..
    So you shot at 210mm without image stabilisation and did not get blur until 1/40th second. Do you have a pulse??

    Seriously, though, having VR can really come in handy. It will give you some flexibility in less than ideal light, which may allow lower ISO (ISO 800 may be great, but ISO 200 is much better still) or allows you to stop down the lens to get more depth of field if required.

    Thus, with the 70-300VR you will get better image quality than with the Sigma. The Nikkor lens is also sharper than the Sigma.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    73
    yeah, but more than 3 times higher cost (in my country).
    it is very costly for me..

    so i think i'll buy the sigma 70-300..

    but i keep wondering if the 28-300 or the 18-200 [and the new 18-250 that is coming soon] are better than two lenses in termes of quality, speed and ect:
    18-70 and 70-300?

    any advice?

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Delfgauw, The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by X-SOFT View Post
    yeah, but more than 3 times higher cost (in my country).
    it is very costly for me..

    so i think i'll buy the sigma 70-300..

    but i keep wondering if the 28-300 or the 18-200 [and the new 18-250 that is coming soon] are better than two lenses in termes of quality, speed and ect:
    18-70 and 70-300?

    any advice?
    If you cannot afford it, I would go for the Sigma. I own the lens myself and am happy with it. It is reasonably sharp, if I use the unsharp mask I can always get the results as sharp as I want them to be. The apperture is not great for low light, but in cloudy days still good enough (so I can use it without going to high ISO). The focussing is slow, but accurate. Here the Nikkor would be much better due to af-s focussing. Finally, the macro mode is great.

    All in all, a great lens for the money.

    It outperforms any of the 18-200s in the tele range. The 18-200 are nice walk around lenses, but they are compromised due to the extreme range. Also, the 18-200 of both Sigma and Tamron only go to 150 or 160mm if they are not focussed on infinity.
    Nikon D-50
    // Nikkor 70-300 f/4-5.6 VR // Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8
    // Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5 ...// Nikon SB-600
    // Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6......// Nikon Series E 135 mm f/2.8
    // Kiron 105 f/2.8 Macro....// Manfrotto 190XPROB + 488RC4
    // Nikkor 35 f/1.8..........// Sigma 500 mm f/8

    My website: http://www.dennisdolkens.nl

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Prospero View Post
    So you shot at 210mm without image stabilisation and did not get blur until 1/40th second. Do you have a pulse?? .
    pisses you off don;t it ? lol
    my other nikon buddy can shoot at 200mm,(with VR), at 1 second with no noticeable blur without leaning on anything. i mean thats just outstanding...not outstanding enuf for me to give up alcohol and coffee though.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •