VR lenses

[unclejeffie]

does anyone ever tried lenses with vr on film cameras? Always wonderd if its worth picking one up.

 

[AgX]

What are "lenses with VR" ?

 

[Dali]

What are "lenses with VR" ?

Vibration Reduction.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Since "VR" is the Nikon name for this technology, I'll assume you are referring to Nikon lenses and cameras.

I have used VR lenses extensively on film, and the feature works as well as it does for digital. It gives the same amount of benefit, and in fact for practical purposes it's probably better on film than on digital since most folks since you're not likely to do the film equivalent of 100% magnification to look for evidence of motion blur. With a stationary subject, it will let me hand-hold a focal length of 50mm at 1/15.

My experience on film is with three different Nikon VR lenses-the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5, 24-120mm f/4, and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR(first generation). I've also used the Tamrom 35mm f/1.8 VC, which is their equivalent of VR. I have a few other VR lenses, but for various reasons they are not suitable for film use(crop sensor lenses, AF-P lenses that can't focus on film cameras).

I will add the caveat that VR only works with fairly late film cameras. I've personally used it successfully on the F5, F6, F100, and N80. It does not work on the F4. There are a few other in-between cameras(the N70 I think comes to mind as a maybe, I know the Pronea 6i for sure) that will make VR "hum" but not actually activate it-instead they just drain the battery. Some late lower end cameras(N75, N65) MIGHT work with it, but I'm not terribly inclined to use film testing them.

It's worth noting that Canon introduced IS(their counterpart to VR) firmly in the film era, I think in 1999. Nikon started putting in super-teles in the early 2000s, a time when film was still a pretty significant market force. Canon brand IS lenses work on all EOS bodies, all the way back to the EOS 620(I've heard of issues with Tamron and other makes not working with some very early bodies). The 70-200mm f/2.8, one of Nikon's first relatively affordable and practical VR lenses, came out in early 2003, a time when NIkon's least expensive DSLR was $2K(for an N80 body with a 6mp CCD) and the first of the D2 series cameras hadn't even started shipping yet. Its optical performance(super sharp in the center, poor corner sharpness) seems to indicate to me that APS-C DSLRs were the target market for it, but none the less there were still a LOT of 35mm SLRs in use professionally still at the time.

 

[AgX]

Well, there are so many propriatory names that I forgot... But once I actually considered such from a technical perspective. The lens would not even need to have the right mount, I could adapt it. However, when I looked into the prices of such lenses the fun went off.

 

[unclejeffie]

Ben, thanks for the elaboratuin.
I’m shooting f801 do you think the VR should work on that? Atm i have a 50mm1.8, 24mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 80-200 2.8 amd a sigma 28-70 2.8. But all without VR and im thinking about getting a new 50mm with.

 

[miha]

You may find this of use: https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/nikon-slr-camera-and-lens-compatibility

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Ben, thanks for the elaboratuin.
I’m shooting f801 do you think the VR should work on that? Atm i have a 50mm1.8, 24mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, 80-200 2.8 amd a sigma 28-70 2.8. But all without VR and im thinking about getting a new 50mm with.

I had to pause for a second and look up the F-801-it's what we call the N8008 in the US

In that case, no, you're out of luck on VR lenses for several reasons. Not only will VR not work at all, but all the ones I know of are AF-S and G. AF-S lenses won't auto focus on this camera, and on G lenses you are limited to S and P modes since the camera needs you to set the aperture from the lens for A and M.

Also, what lens were you looking at? I don't know of a 50mm prime from ANYONE that has VR or its equivalent. Tamron makes a 45mm f/1.8 VC lens, but assuming it's the same as the Tamrom 35mm f/1.8 it's basically useless on the N8008. It won't focus, and the camera will only let you set it to "A" mode although you have no way to control the aperture. The end result of this is that the camera will meter as if the lens will be wide open, but it will close all the way down on exposure.

The 3rd party makers generally do a good job or reverse engineering the communication protocols, but bear in mind that Nikon has never actually RELEASED these and these days the 3rd party makers(for good reason) put much higher priority on having their lenses be fully compatible with DSLRs made in the last ~10 years than on film cameras made 30 years ago.

 

[jimjm]

I'm using a 70-300 VR Nikkor on an F100 body and it's been great. I prefer to use film for sports and airshow photography and having VR has been a big plus.

 

[film_man]

You'll have to figure out which VR lenses work with your Nikon body. I've got a 35/2 IS on Canon along with a 70-300 IS tele and a while ago had a Tarmon 90 VC. They are fantastic and I think stabilisation is even more useful with film given that we have to live with lower available ISO options vs digital. That 35 and the Tamron 90 where just silly sharp even at slow shutter speeds, I just find stabilisation invaluable when shooting indoors with short lenses and also with long lenses in anything but good light.

Given that VR lenses probably won't work with your camera I'd say if you have the cash it is worth getting a F100 or something like that to use VR lenses.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

It's worth noting that Canon introduced IS(their counterpart to VR) firmly in the film era, I think in 1999.

Canon had introduced image stabilisation in 1995 (it had experimented with two prototypes as early as 1992), with the first-generation 75-300 f5.6 lens, which was not a particularly good performer optically, to say more still of the horrendous noise of the gyrosensor in the lens and the swift killing of a 2CR5 battery (though to Canon's credit they did advise using the power drive booster E1 for the pro-level cameras and "using IS judiciously" in cameras fitted only with 2CR5 batteries).

 

[unclejeffie]

well thx all for the input,
guess i'll have to be on the lookout for a new body aswell then if I want to upgrade to VR lenses

 

[Alan Gales]

Well, there are so many propriatory names that I forgot... But once I actually considered such from a technical perspective. The lens would not even need to have the right mount, I could adapt it. However, when I looked into the prices of such lenses the fun went off.

I prefer ultimate vibration reduction. In other words, a tripod.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Canon had introduced image stabilisation in 1995 (it had experimented with two prototypes as early as 1992), with the first-generation 75-300 f5.6 lens, which was not a particularly good performer optically, to say more still of the horrendous noise of the gyrosensor in the lens and the swift killing of a 2CR5 battery (though to Canon's credit they did advise using the power drive booster E1 for the pro-level cameras and "using IS judiciously" in cameras fitted only with 2CR5 batteries).

Thanks-I'm not too up on my Canon EOS history-I just new that it was in the film era. That's a few years earlier than I thought, though.

One of the things I've noticed is that as VR technology has improved(the only Canon IS lens I've had was the 18-55 kit lens on a Digital Rebel I once had), it has also gotten a lot quieter. My oldest VR lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 that I mentioned above, and it makes quite a racket when the gyroscopes and everything else get spun up and working.

My newest, technology wise, VR lens is the little 10-20mm DX AF-P VR. I actually use this lens on full frame digital, as it weighs nothing and covers the full frame at 14mm and longer(I have the 14-24mm f/2.8, but it's big and heavy), but this lens won't work at all on film. As an AF-P lens, it's "focus by wire", something which no film Nikons support and even only relatively recent DSLRs(I had to upgrade the firmware on my D600 and D800 to be able to focus it-even manually as turning the focusing ring just sends a signal to the camera body to activate the AF stepper motor). In any case, I can only hear just a faint, nearly inaudible hum from that lens when VR is working.

BTW, I would like to see Nikon update the firmware of the F6 to support AF-P and "E" aperture lenses, especially as the camera is still in production and only has limited compatibility with a fair few of Nikon's recently released high end lenses. I'm not the only one who has voiced this, and apparently Nikon can update the firmware in their facilities. Still, though, they have something of a "halo" product in making the only current production high end 35mm SLR, and arguably one of the most technologically advanced ones ever put on the market. It would be great if their only production SLR supported fully supported all current production, high end lenses.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I prefer ultimate vibration reduction. In other words, a tripod.

Try that at the racetrack. Horses for courses.

 

[neilt3]

does anyone ever tried lenses with vr on film cameras? Always wonderd if its worth picking one up.

Scroll down half way down the page to find a compatibility chart on film bodies for what lens functions on what bodies .
Then pick a body that meets your needs and budget .
https://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/compatibility-lens.htm

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

One of the things I've noticed is that as VR technology has improved(the only Canon IS lens I've had was the 18-55 kit lens on a Digital Rebel I once had), it has also gotten a lot quieter. My oldest VR lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 that I mentioned above, and it makes quite a racket when the gyroscopes and everything else get spun up and working.

Canon's IS is virtually silent now, and that point of refinement was reached around 2006. You pay a pretty penny for the top-shelf L-series lenses with image stabilisation, and there is little there to remind you of its presence, other than some fancy gold graphics and switches to play with.

I'm thinking that Nikon was last on the scene with VR technology, having witnessed the progress Canon had made. I have not used any Nikon lenses (or bodies) for about 30 years now.

 

[Alan Gales]

Try that at the racetrack. Horses for courses.

Yeah, I'm joking of course. I used to shoot sports with a D300 and VR lens. The VR does help when shooting hand held.

 

[GLS]

Canon's IS is virtually silent now, and that point of refinement was reached around 2006. You pay a pretty penny for the top-shelf L-series lenses with image stabilisation, and there is little there to remind you of its presence, other than some fancy gold graphics and switches to play with.

I'm thinking that Nikon was last on the scene with VR technology, having witnessed the progress Canon had made. I have not used any Nikon lenses (or bodies) for about 30 years now.

The current Nikon VR tech is the same. I have the 70-200mm f2.8G ED VRII and it is barely audible in use, even in a quiet room.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

The current Nikon VR tech is the same. I have the 70-200mm f2.8G ED VRII and it is barely audible in use, even in a quiet room.

Yes, of all my VR lenses the only ones that make any appreciable amount of noise are the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRI and the cheap, crummy 55-200mm VR lens that's sometimes sold as a kit(or a cheap add-on to) with low end DSLRs. My sister has the second generation version of the latter, and hers is a lot quieter too.

All of my other VR lenses, both film/FX and DX, can only be heard if I press my ear to the lens barrel.