Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 18-200mm 1:3.5-5.6 G ED VR

[ControlD]

I still get the same amount of blur as i got with other lenses. i don't have definitive proof or side by side examples (not sure how you would even begin to replicate that) but I seem to see the same amount of blurry photos as I did before.

If you really want to test the VR, try taking some held held lower light shots of stationary objects with and without the VR turned on. Those "extra stops" that you get with VR are only going to correct small movements caused by shaky hands or the inability to use a tripod. They will do nothing to freeze the motion of a moving subject. You still need a fast shutter speed and light (a good flash) to freeze your subjects.

This is why people spend insane money on fast lenses. A lens like the 18-200 is a good compromise lens but it isn't super fast so you need plenty of light to get in-motion subjects. A good flash would be your best friend in this case (assuming you aren't always shooting at 200mm).

 

[pontifex]

I meant blur on stationary objects, probably because of movement of the camera.

 

[CuriousMike]

That fact you're not noticing the VR snap while you half-press ( focus ) is alarming.

To be clear: When you half-press the shutter, you're not taking the photo. You're simply telling the camera to focus. Just hold it at the half-shutter. During the entire duration of this, keep your eye thru the eyepiece, be racked out to 200mm, and wait about 1-4 seconds. Your small-but-erratic handheld movements should "snap" into a very slow (or possibly none) weave as the VR bites.

 

[CuriousMike]

If would also be instructive if you post an example photo where you get blur (that doesn't have the EXIF details stripped out.)

 

[blastingcap]

That fact you're not noticing the VR snap while you half-press ( focus ) is alarming.

To be clear: When you half-press the shutter, you're not taking the photo. You're simply telling the camera to focus. Just hold it at the half-shutter. During the entire duration of this, keep your eye thru the eyepiece, be racked out to 200mm, and wait about 1-4 seconds. Your small-but-erratic handheld movements should "snap" into a very slow (or possibly none) weave as the VR bites.

I can't remember for sure but I think Nikon VR doesn't always work that way. For instance I had the 70-300 VR and VC (Tamron). The Nikon would NOT stabilize until you actually took a photo, whereas the Tamron VC would engage when you focused (half-press) and make the view through optical viewfinder much more steady.

 

[CuriousMike]

For my 18-140, 55-200 and 70-200 f4 they all have a "snap."
But those are all VR2.

So, you may be right - i think the 18-200 is VR1.

 

[pontifex]

That fact you're not noticing the VR snap while you half-press ( focus ) is alarming.

To be clear: When you half-press the shutter, you're not taking the photo. You're simply telling the camera to focus. Just hold it at the half-shutter. During the entire duration of this, keep your eye thru the eyepiece, be racked out to 200mm, and wait about 1-4 seconds. Your small-but-erratic handheld movements should "snap" into a very slow (or possibly none) weave as the VR bites.

right, not taking photo, just focusing. so i tried again with the 70-200 vr and i notice the vr kick in. went back to the 18-200 and now i notice the vr kick in.


I can hear a small "tick" or some kind of sound from each lens when I see the vr kick in.

mine is the 18-200 VR1. There is a 18-200 VR2 though.

 

[pontifex]

If would also be instructive if you post an example photo where you get blur (that doesn't have the EXIF details stripped out.)

let me see if i still have any. most blurry photos i just delete.


here are some (only modification was to lower resolution to make them smaller.)

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/225.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/009.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/032.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/036.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/080.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/134.jpg

I guess some could be exposure and/or lighting.

 

[CuriousMike]

#1 = 1/15 sec
#2 = looks over exposed, but sharpish
#3 = 1/80 sec, which may be ok, but you have the focus on the plant.
#4 = 1/125 sec, which is ok, you're at f5.6 at 105mm so your focal plane (the area which will be in focus ) gives you 1/2 foot of focus assuming you were 10 feet away. ( http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html )
#5 was was 200mm (fully zoomed), 1/500 which should have been fast enough. However, I'm not convinced the focal point was on the dog - it may have been on the barrel to the right.
#6 is focus issue. If you look above the dogs head, the range of about 3 feet beyond was in focus.

I'd say most of your issue is you're using automatic focus.
If I'm wrong, then stop reading.

If I'm right, you should consider using "manual focus area selection" - this is NOT manual focus, rather you choose where your focus point is.
You look thru the viewfinder, put the focus point you choose on your subjects eyeball, and take the picture.
You take the guesswork out of what will be in focus - if left to it's own devices, the camera does a best guess for what to focus on. That's no good.
You KNOW what you want in focus, so do it.

 

[pontifex]

#1 = 1/15 sec
#2 = looks over exposed, but sharpish
#3 = 1/80 sec, which may be ok, but you have the focus on the plant.
#4 = 1/125 sec, which is ok, you're at f5.6 at 105mm so your focal plane (the area which will be in focus ) gives you 1/2 foot of focus assuming you were 10 feet away. ( http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html )
#5 was was 200mm (fully zoomed), 1/500 which should have been fast enough. However, I'm not convinced the focal point was on the dog - it may have been on the barrel to the right.
#6 is focus issue. If you look above the dogs head, the range of about 3 feet beyond was in focus.

I'd say most of your issue is you're using automatic focus.
If I'm wrong, then stop reading.

If I'm right, you should consider using "manual focus area selection" - this is NOT manual focus, rather you choose where your focus point is.
You look thru the viewfinder, put the focus point you choose on your subjects eyeball, and take the picture.
You take the guesswork out of what will be in focus - if left to it's own devices, the camera does a best guess for what to focus on. That's no good.
You KNOW what you want in focus, so do it.

It would be autofocus for those. I'll try manual focus area selection and see how that works.

 

[CuriousMike]

It would be autofocus for those. I'll try manual focus area selection and see how that works.

Try manual focus area, "Single Area" - that will ensure the camera will only use the spot you pick.

"Dynamic Area" could have the camera adjust the focus point if it thinks your subject moved.
While that is useful in some situations, to simplify the test, just use "Single Area".

Also, if you are taking photos of moving objects ( your dogs running ), find out how to enable Continuous Auto Focus --- as long as you keep the focus point on the dog, the AF system will continue to keep that object in focus, even if it moves away or towards you.

 

[pontifex]

ok, so tried to take some photos of my dog running around and stuff using the shutter priority mode, set it to 500. got some nice non-blurry pics but its all dark. editing afterwards didn't really help a whole lot.

fstop was probably around 5.6 (auto) because i was zoomed in.
Even using manual I couldn't change it, so I guess that is a limitation of that lens?

some examples
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/061.jpg

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/atotpontifex/079.jpg