Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 15, 2007, 2:38 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26
Default

Hey Guys, bought the new VR lens(55-200 mm VR ED-IF DX)and it makes like a high pitch noise when VR Enabled,wanted to know if this was normal. Also i was testing it in my room where the lighting was not the greatest and it seemed like it wasn't doing that great of a job..



Just wanted to make sure the VR is not broken when it makes this noise.
GigaS27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 15, 2007, 4:16 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

The noise is completely normal. Vr is not necessarily a complete solution in lowlight. Yes it allows you to use slower shutter speeds while handholding, but it is not effective at preventing blur from moving subjects. Faster lenses (f2.8 or better) or flash is the best solution for freezing subject motion in low light.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2007, 4:16 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 195
Default

I have two VR lenses and neither of them makes any high pitched noises when VR is enabled or engaged. The lenses are 55-200mm and 70-300mm... However, when VR kicks in they both make a small clunk like sound after they have autofocussed and locked the image,and if you don't take the shot and let the shutter release button go again, it clunks out of VR. You have to strain your ears to hear it but you can do if you try... I bought the 55-200mm first and didn't notice it but then I bought the 70-300 and oneevening, in the slilent room I was in and messing about with the camera, I did notice it. I scratched my head and as I wondered, I moved the camera around a bit trying to locate the source of the noise inside the lens, and noticed there seemed to be another sound eminating from within the lens. Gently rattling the lens revealed another dull knocking sound. I thought the 70-300mm was a dud and was about ready to put in back into its container ready to return it to the shop,, then I thought "Why not try the 55-200mm, afterall, it too is a VR and maybe this is a unique VR sound???"...

Sure enough the 55-200 has the exact same sounds. Then brother tells me all VR's make those sounds...

They both perform flawlessly and I love the results...

Oh,, some of my other lenses (non VR)have their own internal sounds, now that I have rattled them a little too...
fewpics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2007, 7:33 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26
Default

Thanks for the clarification.



Also with the low lighting and bad results, i read the manual and didn't notice that you need to hold the shutter and wait for the image to stop shaking before hitting the shutter completely...my question is, how does this compare to fast action shooting? VR not worth it?
GigaS27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2007, 11:47 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Default

The VR is just to assist you on long distance shots without a tripod. Fast shots you do not use VR as your shutter speeds are high and camera shake doesnt come into play. VR is when your speeds are slow as well.



To confirm, yes your lens will "cluck" "click" or whatever you call it ticking etc... when stops push your shutter down fully.


nexusworks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2007, 6:55 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 195
Default

I have to agree with nexusworks, that VR will assist you but wont completely help you overcome taking a bad shot...

I was convinced by my brother who told me of VR and its magic properties and I really at that stage, thought it was going to cure my average to poor picture taking at the time but the price always put me off from buying one. Only after seeing the very cheap 55-200mm VR lens did I give it a go. At first I was totally confused about the mixed bag of results I was getting for the first couple of outings. Certain shots lookedno different from any other lens I was using. They were still blurry and at the time I though "What the $##@..??", so much for VR... Then I tried to refine my shots and take note of just how VR actually worked andwow, what a difference. I was so impressed with the results, I bought another VRlens just a week later, the 70-300mm, and now these two are getting a real good workout.

It seems to me, the stiller you want to hold your camera, the better VR works. When you try to take (as nexusworks quotes) fast or action shots which involves following something or moving the lens at a brisk to high rate, it tends to act more like any other lens, relying more on your settings than "its" magic... I know it sounds crazy to say "the stiller you want to hold your camera, the better VR works" but its obvious that VR, just like any other form of lens image stabilization, is based on image accuracy rather than speed shots.

Imagine taking two shots of the same target, say a mountain and surrounding landscape. The first shot taken by just holding the camera in your hands and the second shot from a good tripod. I am sure you can appreciate the average difference, especially if you zoom in. Now imagine having the ability to produce another level above the tripod shot by using VR. For me, zoomed shots are more stable but normal shots appear more alive, because you can see more detail with the less movement.
Whatever they did with VR, it works for me... BUT, you can't abuse it and hope to get away with it...

A couple of days before I bought the 55-200, I looked through a pair of Canon binniculars with image stabilization. That to was one of the clinching moments. I couldn't believe what I was seeing... I was SOLD..!!!

fewpics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 17, 2007, 1:03 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
Default

Nicely put.

And If you have a Tripod use it! Too many times, you see people "Lazy" because they think VR is everything. I have been lazy myself, but true good shots are used with tripod. Saves power on your batteries too.

I notice the power drain especially using 105mm VR compared to my 70-300mm VR. In which I advise to always carry two batteries if not 3 for one outing.
nexusworks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2007, 1:49 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 26
Default

Good point on battery drainage.



Once again thanks for all the input guys.
GigaS27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 21, 2007, 5:23 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 195
Default

nexusworks wrote:
Quote:
I notice the power drain especially using 105mm VR compared to my 70-300mm VR. In which I advise to always carry two batteries if not 3 for one outing.
Funny you mention power drain, because I have been beating my head trying to work out why my batteries appear to be dying a lot quicker than "usual" in the past handful of weeks. I read about guys/gals getting zillions of shots per charge on their D80 (which I too have) EN-EL3E cells, and although I never counted, I know a few months ago I was getting a lot more life out of them... So, what have I done to make them drain so quickly..???

Answer... According to my brother (Nikon D200 which also uses EN-EL3E's), VR lensesdraw the big ones out of the batteries... I bought my first VR lens (55-200mm)about a month ago, then bought a 70-300mm about 3 weeks ago... I've been giving these lenses quite a workout and have noticed the difference in battery life...
fewpics is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:36 AM.