Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 VR 1 vs Nikkor 70-200mm f4 for D7100

[jaomul]

It's annoying enough when you start your own ridiculous thread just so you can argue and amuse yourself but to hijack someone else's thread where they were looking for genuine advice is just rude.

Is there an ignore function on this forum? If so please someone send me the instructions.

Just click on the avatar, a box will open, ignore is inside

 

[wezza13]

but look how many more pixels are on that deer at 400mm.

it's clearly the better image, you have more pixels on the deer. The cant debate that.


seriously, if you're following advice from @Auslese youre doing yourself a huge disservice.

Here is an excellent action shot with my 80-200, 2.8 D that I never would have, or would not be as sharp with VR, because VR is not recommended for action, why, because once the VR locks on target, it has to reacquire and relock to take an in focus photo, and if the subject is in fast motion, you get nothing. All In Flight

I wouldn't call it "excellent".

It's soft and out of focus. Haven't seen a decent picture provided by you yet.

I think/thought this guy was someone like Derrel (involved in some mischief with the mods!) on an elaborate early April fool's joke or something!

 

[dannylightning]

VR really does work extremely well, i hand hold my 600mm lens with VR and i get great results. VR is a good thing, not a bad thing. if i turn the VR off and hand hold my lens i am much more likely to get a blurry image.

it does not slow me down, it does not cause me to miss shots, it does not cause out of focus shots, the images i get are always in focus and they are nice and sharp, you just have to know how to use a camera correctly.

 

[Auslese]

but look how many more pixels are on that deer at 400mm.

it's clearly the better image, you have more pixels on the deer. The cant debate that.


seriously, if you're following advice from @Auslese youre doing yourself a huge disservice.

Here is an excellent action shot with my 80-200, 2.8 D that I never would have, or would not be as sharp with VR, because VR is not recommended for action, why, because once the VR locks on target, it has to reacquire and relock to take an in focus photo, and if the subject is in fast motion, you get nothing. All In Flight

I wouldn't call it "excellent".

It's soft and out of focus. Haven't seen a decent picture provided by you yet.

I think/thought this guy was someone like Derrel (involved in some mischief with the mods!) on an elaborate early April fool's joke or something!

Here are a few of my non sports photos..... The Digital German Pointer I like the one I took today, where the dragonfly has landed on the heron's back, if you blow it up to full detail, the detail is quite nice. Dragonfly on heron

 

[Braineack]

detail is quite nice, but when you view the full size image of your dog here, it all falls apart: DSC_2490b

did you heavily crop it in or something? the IQ between those two shots is night and day.

I'm assuming you did considering the image-size of the full-sized shot. Your pixel density theory is failing you here.


honestly, when I look through that album, it makes me think your lens sucks. seriously, the IQ is awful.

f/4.5
1/1250
iso 400

this shot should be clean and crisp, but it's soft and noisy:
DSC_0749b


now when you put on a different lenes: DSC_9917b

this looks WORLDS better. It was shot at a higher ISO, yet it less noisy. it was shot at a slower shutter, yet its capturing much better fine detail.


seriously, throw your 200mm in the trash.

 

[Auslese]

detail is quite nice, but when you view the full size image of your dog here, it all falls apart: DSC_2490b

did you heavily crop it in or something? the IQ between those two shots is night and day.

I'm assuming you did considering the image-size of the full-sized shot. Your pixel density theory is failing you here.


honestly, when I look through that album, it makes me think your lens sucks. seriously, the IQ is awful.

f/4.5
1/1250
iso 400

this shot should be clean and crisp, but it's soft and noisy:
DSC_0749b


now when you put on a different lenes: DSC_9917b

this looks WORLDS better. It was shot at a higher ISO, yet it less noisy. it was shot at a slower shutter, yet its capturing much better fine detail.


seriously, throw your 200mm in the trash.

You make some nice points, as this album is in part about what the dog can do, not so much about the picture quality. This is a versatile hunting dog who needs to be able to do everything, so the picture quality is not as important as the action and the story told. For example the dog put this pheasant in a tree yesterday, and I only had a second to snap this photo which was underexposed, but the photo shows when explained that the dog does her job of flushing, tracking and retrieving perfectly. Pheasant flushed to tree

This photo that looks like a desert shot is actually at the bottom of a half empty reservoir and what looks like sky is water reflecting sky. Reservoir Dog

Got some Eagles in NJ there as well, I was on the wrong side of the Sun however. You have any pictures? It seems like the most critical people here are words without photos.

 

[Braineack]

the last shot is great except your lens renders like mush and the dog wasn't even in focus...

you seem to have an awesome subject to shoot, and an amazing environment for him to roam for you to capture -- but your technique and equipment are both holding you back.

 

[Auslese]

the last shot is great except your lens renders like mush and the dog wasn't even in focus...

you seem to have an awesome subject to shoot, and an amazing environment for him to roam for you to capture -- but your technique and equipment are both holding you back.

You noticed the dog with the dead whitetail. The photo says that I am a hunter, and shot that buck. However that is far from the truth, as the dog took off in the woods as usual, but did not return promptly when called, when she did pop up on the trail she just looked at me and took off again. So I followed, seeing her chasing turkey vultures away from the ten point buck that she just found. I cut off the head and now have the rack of my dogs first ten point buck. DSC_9744b It's on the wall now............ DSC_9917b

 

[wezza13]

the last shot is great except your lens renders like mush and the dog wasn't even in focus...

you seem to have an awesome subject to shoot, and an amazing environment for him to roam for you to capture -- but your technique and equipment are both holding you back.

You noticed the dog with the dead whitetail. The photo says that I am a hunter, and shot that buck. However that is far from the truth, as the dog took off in the woods as usual, but did not return promptly when called, when she did pop up on the trail she just looked at me and took off again. So I followed, seeing her chasing turkey vultures away from the ten point buck that she just found. I cut off the head and now have the rack of my dogs first ten point buck. DSC_9744b It's on the wall now............ DSC_9917b

The problem is, is that you're telling us the story, when the picture should be conveying the story.

Like the Pheasant in the tree shot, you explained to us what happened, when all we would see is a badly exposed, badly composed picture of a bird in a tree.

The dog is a great subject to practise on, I love German Pointers. Try taking the camera off of the scene modes and trying out Shutter priority mode.

Also, practise trying to lock focus on your subject and keeping it there.

It'll be a start for you.