VR or not to VR, that is the question

[Hawkeshead]

Looking at the content of other threads on the forum, such as the difference normal v active VR mode has on certain lenses and body combos has generated this thought. Modern lenses have adopted VR as a general feature. The question is, for wildlife photography, particularly with moving or small creatures tending to benefit from a faster shutter speed, how necessary is VR and when is it best used? How many people habitually use VR on as a default mode. I confess, I do but am wondering if I should be more selective.

Thom Hogen takes an interesting view in the following article but I would be interested in members thoughts.

All About Nikon VR | DSLRBodies | Thom Hogan

All About Nikon VR (vibration reduction) systems

www.dslrbodies.com

 

[Thern]

Some will say I use VR all the time, Some will follow Thom, switching VR off with shutterspeeds of 1/500 and faster.
Personally I switch VR off with shutterspeeds slower than 1/focal length in use. (Above that one shouldn’t need VR anyway but for a steady view in the viewfinder)

Some will say they never witnessed blur caused by VR.
Some will say yup! I’ve seen it happen!
Personally I don’t know for sure, blur is caused by ‘user error’ so it may be me (very probably) or it may be VR.

 

[realspeed]

Of course it depends on how good the VR is on a lens. I have recently bought a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 with VC G2 lens . I also have the Nikon 24-70 G f2.8 lens. comparing them side by side the Tamron image stablisation is far better than the Nikon. .

 

[Warren D]

Of course it depends on how good the VR is on a lens. I have recently bought a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 with VC G2 lens . I also have the Nikon 24-70 G f2.8 lens. comparing them side by side the Tamron image stablisation is far better than the Nikon. .

Just curious what you are basing your opinion on? Is it what you are seeing in the viewfinder or have you done tests where you can see that the Tammy will allow you to shoot at a slower shutter speed for the same level of sharpness?
I ask because I've known several lenses (Sigma in particular) that didn't show a particularly obvious reduction in shake as observed in the VF but when looking at the images there was no doubt VR was working at a higher level than what was observed.
In addition, how is it that your Nikon 24-70G has VR? I have both 24-70 G and E and only the E has VR.

 

[realspeed]

My opinion is based on using both The tamrom locked on subject rock solid hand held, the Nikon didn't. The Tamron was actually sharper as well

 

[gbodave]

I'm in the "use VR all the time" camp as I've never observed any deterioration in image quality using the Sigma 150-600mm and Nikkor 200-500mm on a D750 and now a 200-600mm on a Sony. I'm sure this has been discussed in great detail here before so it might be worth the OP looking for that to take in more points of view.

 

[Hawkeshead]

Hi gbodave, I too leave VR on but coming across Thom Hogans article mage me think.The selling point of VR by Nikon is “Vibration Reduction (VR) is an image stabilization technology that minimizes blur caused by camera shake. Using a VR NIKKOR lens can result in sharp images in low light, under windy conditions or when using a physically large NIKKOR lens, at up to four stops slower with a VR lens than a non-VR lens” This implies that the use is conditional and not necessarily universal. Looking at suggested shutter speeds for wildlife, such those with many of Steve’s presentations etc, and also mentioned on other forum posts, low shutter speeds as a major contributing factor in blurred images. Balancing technology, shooting conditions and technique I am curious as to what members think regarding the potential reliance on VR, as it is becoming increasingly prevalent in our equipment. I suspect the type of photography we like, ie wildlife, raises different challenges to that such as portraiture, architectural, etc. Indeed Landscape and Astro are two examples where images benefit from VR being off.

 

[Demodave]

Personal observation is it depends on the lens. My 500PF has vr sport mode on all the time. I have noticed no deterioration with it on at any shutter speed beyond 1/60. Same with my copy of the 300PF or 70-200E. However with my 600G, on static subjects, it is sharper with vr off above the 1/2000 or so. However introduce any panning and VR normal produces sharper images on a loose gimball head. So again, it depends. The only way to know is to test it under field conditions. Locked on a tripod with a cable release the tripod mode produces sharp images with the 600, but that's not how I use it.

The newer Nikon lenses with VR Sport seem to be more flexible, at least for my shooting style

 

[Charles Loy]

Your question will get pro's and con's all day long. My comment is I use VR 100% of the time on my lenses that have it, don't consider it a concern.
And I don't buy lenses that are not Nikon, no way.

 

[gbodave]

Hi gbodave, I too leave VR on but coming across Thom Hogans article mage me think.The selling point of VR by Nikon is “Vibration Reduction (VR) is an image stabilization technology that minimizes blur caused by camera shake. Using a VR NIKKOR lens can result in sharp images in low light, under windy conditions or when using a physically large NIKKOR lens, at up to four stops slower with a VR lens than a non-VR lens” This implies that the use is conditional and not necessarily universal. Looking at suggested shutter speeds for wildlife, such those with many of Steve’s presentations etc, and also mentioned on other forum posts, low shutter speeds as a major contributing factor in blurred images. Balancing technology, shooting conditions and technique I am curious as to what members think regarding the potential reliance on VR, as it is becoming increasingly prevalent in our equipment. I suspect the type of photography we like, ie wildlife, raises different challenges to that such as portraiture, architectural, etc. Indeed Landscape and Astro are two examples where images benefit from VR being off.

I've no problem with what Nikon says or any "expert". Whether my experience agrees or differs is the issue. My position is that my results are what matter to me. If, after seeing other opinions, I think I'm right in what I'm doing, I carry on regardless.

This issue has been raised in a number of places and usually there's mention of testing but I've never been convinced that any testing, especially of birds in flight, have been controlled enough to be meaningful.

As far as the Thom's article is concerned I find it to be bewildering and I certainly won't be giving it any thought when I next lift the camera to my eye to capture that bird I never saw previously, flying across the line of the camera at speed. Neither will I be fumbling about with the VR control.

With all articles of this nature they usually contain wording like :-

the lens seems to have more acuity with VR off above 1/500 on the older VR lenses - subjective.

My contention is - an opinion not a fact.

I’m led to believe - a balance of probabilities.

And as far as ..."If you regularly shoot out of helicopters," is concerned...well.

I see no mention of meaningful testing either so for me this remains a subjective issue where experience in the field counts for far more than anything else.

 

[Ralph]

I use the VR sport all the time. I find it most useful for handholding my Nikon 500 PF. It eliminates any viewfinder shake while photographing stationary objects so I can remain on target. I don't require it for birds in flight birds but because of the added advantage for me when hand holding for stationary objects I always put it on by default.

 

[Hawkeshead]

Interesting comments from all. This topic, like many others in photography is subjective. What matters is what works for the individual and will be dependent on the camera, lens and shooting conditions. As other articles on the forum have mentioned, some lenses work well with VR and others less so at, particularly at or above certain shutter speeds. Likewise there has been previous discussion on how members use VR with tripods and monopods. Main takeaway for me is learning from others experiences, so the comments are appreciated as is the time taken for the submissions

 

[Steve]

VR is incredibly hard to pin down, test, or really verify. Nearly everything is anecdotal when it comes to shutter speeds. The problem is, VR reacts differently depending on how stable you are, if the camera is on a tripod, monopod, or handheld, and the mass of the camera with or without a grip can also affect it. Plus, everyone has a different option on what's sharp enough - I often see photos that the shooter thinks are tack sharp and mentally disagree - but they are perfectly happy and that's what matters.

Additionally, I have yet to see any lens instruction manual from Nikon that says to turn it off for best results at higher shutter speeds. Still, I have noticed better overall acuity with some lenses when it's disabled at higher shutter speeds, but with other lenses it doesn't seem to matter.

In the end, I think testing the rig yourself under various conditions is the best way to go. Try it on and off. Failing that, my recommendation is simple to shut it off once you reach a shutter speed where you don't need it anymore.

 

[Hawkeshead]

Cheers Steve, getting advice from those that produce great images and learning is the determining factor for me hence my appreciation for comments from those with far greater knowledge and experience than I. As you suggest, getting to know what works through trail and error will shape my options. Now about that non VR lens I just bought

 

[Warren D]

VR is incredibly hard to pin down, test, or really verify. Nearly everything is anecdotal when it comes to shutter speeds. The problem is, VR reacts differently depending on how stable you are, if the camera is on a tripod, monopod, or handheld, and the mass of the camera with or without a grip can also affect it. Plus, everyone has a different option on what's sharp enough - I often see photos that the shooter thinks are tack sharp and mentally disagree - but they are perfectly happy and that's what matters.

Additionally, I have yet to see any lens instruction manual from Nikon that says to turn it off for best results at higher shutter speeds. Still, I have noticed better overall acuity with some lenses when it's disabled at higher shutter speeds, but with other lenses it doesn't seem to matter.

In the end, I think testing the rig yourself under various conditions is the best way to go. Try it on and off. Failing that, my recommendation is simple to shut it off once you reach a shutter speed where you don't need it anymore.

I basically agree and will add that I have noticed that VR acts "differently" when the lens is aimed at the horizon vs when the lens is aimed upwards at 45 degrees or more from the horizon. My results of overhead shots with VR on generally aren't as good as those closer to horizontal at the same shutter speed.

 

[EricBowles]

VR is incredibly hard to pin down, test, or really verify. Nearly everything is anecdotal when it comes to shutter speeds. The problem is, VR reacts differently depending on how stable you are, if the camera is on a tripod, monopod, or handheld, and the mass of the camera with or without a grip can also affect it. Plus, everyone has a different option on what's sharp enough - I often see photos that the shooter thinks are tack sharp and mentally disagree - but they are perfectly happy and that's what matters.

Additionally, I have yet to see any lens instruction manual from Nikon that says to turn it off for best results at higher shutter speeds. Still, I have noticed better overall acuity with some lenses when it's disabled at higher shutter speeds, but with other lenses it doesn't seem to matter.

In the end, I think testing the rig yourself under various conditions is the best way to go. Try it on and off. Failing that, my recommendation is simple to shut it off once you reach a shutter speed where you don't need it anymore.

Steve's the only one I've seen to really spend enough time to try to figure out the conditions where it works for specific camera and lens combinations. He tested several lenses and suggested you need to test your specific gear. It was not a "single rule of thumb" because there was lots of variation. For some lenses, VR was fine at 1/500 second but not at faster speeds. In general, the more expensive and newer lenses seem to work better using VR all the time, because the lens will control VR better on a tripod or at fast speeds.

Thom Hogan has repeatedly referred to unexplained softness when using VR at higher shutter speeds or on a tripod. It seems to be an intermittent problem affecting 10-20% of images. Of course, it's always the image you can't repeat that is soft.

I've taken the approach of turning off VR at 1/500 sec. and higher. I'm not willing to accept a minimal benefit at fast shutter speeds against an intermittent problem.

 

[Woodpecker]

For my friend - the one I got my 500 f4 G from - told me that it is better to turn it of if shooting from a tripod and he actually showed me results that showed he was right. But as @Steve said, it depends on so many parameters including the photographers behaviour, preferences and practice that I think you can't really tell or define a genera rule for that. I know that there are differences between the generations of VR and obviously my 500 f4 G has one of the older versions. But I keep it on most of the time, already because I rarely have the chance to sit somewhere for a long time with a perfectly tuned setup allowing me to shoot without. And if you have to move and shoot either hand-holding, with a monopod or just hanging your lens on a branch or a fence I would expect it to be better to have it on all the time, because even with some sort of support you still move -and I have to admit that I am not the most steady person in the world. In situations where I want to be able ho keep the AF point on the spot I follow @Steve 's recommendation and go to ACTIVE or SPORT, not because of image quality but because it reduce the delay between the viewfinder and the movement of the camera.

Up to now I did not encounter these intermittent problems, that @EricBowles mentioned but I think that is at least partly dependent on the lens model and firmware. I remember some lots of the 300PF being produced had this kind of problems that were cured by a firmware update.

On the other hand there used to be days without this discussion because there were no lenses with VR and still people shooting truly amazing images. Maybe not in a one-of moment, but perhaps we should all give a bit more room to shooting without VR engaged. The friend I mentioned is one of the blessed persons owning one of these 800 f5.6 monsters, but still some of his most amazing shots are made with an even older 500 f4 than mine - and it does not have any VR .

 

[Yellowboard]

My only problem with using VR is that I continually forget to turn it off before I turn the camera off...

 

[DRwyoming]

My only problem with using VR is that I continually forget to turn it off before I turn the camera off...

You don't need to turn it off before turning the camera off, you just have to wait until the metering circuit times out which shuts off the VR and then you can remove the lens without VR docking issues. Yeah, it requires waiting a few seconds after the last time you took a photo or enabled the AF circuitry but you don't need to literally turn off the VR before turning off the camera.

 

[Yellowboard]

You don't need to turn it off before turning the camera off, you just have to wait until the metering circuit times out which shuts off the VR and then you can remove the lens without VR docking issues. Yeah, it requires waiting a few seconds after the last time you took a photo or enabled the AF circuitry but you don't need to literally turn off the VR before turning off the camera.

Good to know, thanks!

 

[Woodpecker]

You don't need to turn it off before turning the camera off, you just have to wait until the metering circuit times out which shuts off the VR and then you can remove the lens without VR docking issues. Yeah, it requires waiting a few seconds after the last time you took a photo or enabled the AF circuitry but you don't need to literally turn off the VR before turning off the camera.

Wow, never thought about this one before. But maybe it just happened to take place in the right sequence because of the way I use the gear....

 

[DRwyoming]

Wow, never thought about this one before. But maybe it just happened to take place in the right sequence because of the way I use the gear....

I didn't think about it for the longest time until one day when I picked up my 70-200mm E-FL out of the camera bag and heard something rattling around internally. My heart sank and I wondered what I could have possibly done to the lens in its case which certainly wasn't dropped. Then I remember reading about the VR 'docking' issue where the lens group controlled by VR can free float if you turn off the camera or remove the lens before the VR circuitry has timed out. Sure enough, nothing wrong with the lens but I now wait a few seconds until my metering times out before turning off the camera and removing my VR lenses.

The flip side of course is that it's unlikely you'd damage anything by forgetting to do this but it is disconcerting to hear your lens rattle when you pick it up

 

[Woodpecker]

I didn't think about it for the longest time until one day when I picked up my 70-200mm E-FL out of the camera bag and heard something rattling around internally. My heart sank and I wondered what I could have possibly done to the lens in its case which certainly wasn't dropped. Then I remember reading about the VR 'docking' issue where the lens group controlled by VR can free float if you turn off the camera or remove the lens before the VR circuitry has timed out. Sure enough, nothing wrong with the lens but I now wait a few seconds until my metering times out before turning off the camera and removing my VR lenses.

The flip side of course is that it's unlikely you'd damage anything by forgetting to do this but it is disconcerting to hear your lens rattle when you pick it up

Oh dear ! Now I know what (might have) happened ...
I had occasions where I wondered whether something is wrong with my 500PF. I realized a kind of noise combined with a feeling in my hand when caryying it along at teh tripod foot. I had the impresssion that something has come loose inside and I can hear it move when tilting it slightly. However, there was no effecton IQ, AF etc. what so ever.

Thanks for this one . I will observe it and see whether I can get rid of this phenomenon by changing the procedure of shutting my camera down.

 

[txstone]

I always have VR turned on for my telephoto lenses with D500/D850 bodies - because VR stabilizes the viewfinder. If I turned VR off for shutter speeds >= 1/500, I wouldn’t be using VR for BIF. That doesn’t seem practical to me.

I continued to use VR with telephoto lenses the same way with my Z6.

Since I first heard the ‘turn VR off at shutter speeds >= 1/500’ rule years ago, I’ve always wondered which system we were talking about. Nikon’s VR has been built into their lenses for years. Now with mirrorless, VR is both in the lenses (that have VR) and in the Z models that have IBIS - in body sensor based stabilization. Now in the Z bodies, stabilization correction commands move the sensor. Nikon lens based VR and in camera IBIS can work together. Is shutter speed >= to 1/500 still the magic no.? I think Steve’s advice works here - test your rig in the conditions you shoot under and see what works.

I think the first place I read the 1/500 rule was in Thom Hogan’s ‘All about Nikon VR’ piece. I think this number is based on an earlier Nikon lens based VR system that had two angular velocity sensors. These sensors detected camera motion every 1/1000 of a second - but … diagonal movement was detected by combining the results of both sensors. I’m sure someone will tell us what this means in terms of why higher shutter speeds are ineffective.

I see even Thom has loosened up a bit to allow,

“In thousands of cases I've examined now the results are the same: the lens seems to have more acuity with VR off above 1/500 on the older VR lenses (with some of the most recent Nikkors I might shift that to 1/1000 as Nikon changed something).”

 

[Deleted member 115]

Of course it depends on how good the VR is on a lens. I have recently bought a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 with VC G2 lens . I also have the Nikon 24-70 G f2.8 lens. comparing them side by side the Tamron image stablisation is far better than the Nikon. .

I bought the Tamron this January and concur that it has great stabilization. I never owned the Nikon version but extremely pleased with the Tamron G2.

To the OP in regards to birds in flight. I have used my Nikon 70-300mm NO VR kit lens that was bundled with my old 3400 on Swallows in flight and found them to be every bit as sharp as other lenses with VR 1/2500 seconds