ilkka_nissila
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #6 · 600 III stabilization/blurry images | |
On the Nikon side, if the user turns VR OFF, the problem of double image or pronounced blur on the 300 PF disappears, according to most reports. It seems that the shutter front curtain initiates the vibration and if VR is OFF, the VR group is held in fixed position by the mechanism (so it cannot move), so while there may be blur it is the kind that you would expect at these speeds without VR. But if VR is ON, somehow the VR group seems to resonate with the shutter vibration and lead to an unusual amount of blur, and for some users, a double image (basically a completely ruined shot).
I generally try to use fast shutter speeds with the 300 PF (1/500s to 1/1250s) and don't see much of a problem at those speeds. But occasionally I need to shoot at a slower speed such as 1/160s to 1/320s and I would see surprising amount of blur, not related to subject movement, and if I notice it in time, I can take some more shots (subject permitting) with VR OFF, and they typically come out sharper. So I am aware of the problem and it does show to some extend on my gear, although my lens and camera bodies have not shown the double image or severe blur that some users report. At really slow speeds (1/50s), VR is surprisingly effective, and there is no problem there, it's the intermediate speeds that seem to be susceptible to shutter shock when VR is ON. Today instead of turning VR OFF, I turn my D850 to Qc (quiet continuous, which allows EFCS to work in viewfinder photography) and the problem disappears.
I subsequently purchased the 500 PF, which is another really lightweight long lens, and I do notice markedly improved sharpness when using Qc with EFCS, especially at shutter speeds that are a bit on the slow side for 500mm (e.g., 1/200s). The Qc mode is suited to static or slowly moving subjects, as there is a slight delay between the mirror rising and the exposure beginning (the camera moves the mirror up more slowly and waits for a split second before starting the electronic front curtain, these are to minimize blur and sound noise), so the timing of action may be slightly "off" compared to using the regular mechanical shutter based modes where the mirror moves at high speed. So for action I may switch to CH (continous high) and use a fast shutter speed, and when the subject is static or moving slowly, I go to Qc and use a slower shutter speed to be able to use a lower ISO and get higher quality images of those situations. This has worked well for me, although it would be nicer if the problem didn't exist.
Nikon issued several firmware updates (one on the lens, one for D750, maybe others) but none of them seemed to solve the problem for every user. Dpreview have covered this issue in several articles. Nikon's mirrorless camera bodies (Z7 and Z6) also allow EFCS in viewfinder photography and I have not seen reports of PF lens vibration problems using those cameras.
I would try to communicate to Canon that Nikon 300 PF and some 500 PF users have reported similar problems of unusual amount of blur with VR ON at certain shutter speeds (1/80s to 1/320s) and that one solution that has been found to work well is to use the D850's EFCS in Quiet or Quiet continous modes in viewfinder photography. Canon might be able to implement something similar.
In the meanwhile, I guess following the suggestion of using a tripod and turning IS OFF should allow shots to be made at slow speeds with good results, but of course this results in a different shooting workflow. I know that a lot of people now are used to using their supertelephoto lenses hand held, and for some subjects this may be a practical requirement to get the shots, e.g. bird flying past directly above the photographer. Also moving the tripod around can spook the animals. I tend to use the 500 PF hand held when photographing deer but for birds I typically use a tripod (because of the long wait for something to happen). I can get shots hand held but get tired holding the lens pointed at the bird for a long time, so the tripod really makes the process easier for some subjects (e.g. red-throated divers). Of course, I need to accommodate for the reduced freedoms of movement that the tripod imposes, but I've been satisfied with the results (currently using a Gitzo fluid head which is intended for birdwatching). For other subjects, the ability to move about and find the right subject and angle for a nice background hand held is invaluable (e.g., small birds in trees).
I have read that Canon are rumored to be working on (perhaps close to launching?) a full frame mirrorless camera body with very high resolution to compete with the Sony 61MP model which has been announced. This might present a possible solution. I know it is very annoying after spending money on very expensive lenses to have to spend more money to solve problems, but I guess it is the price to pay for moving to lighter weight gear.
I have seen amazing results from both the 400/2.8 III and 600/4 III so I would definitely not abandon the lenses. The solution is probably in the form of a camera body that allows the vibration to be avoided.
|
