Nikon 70-200 mm AF-S, VR Review

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Suitability for documentary photography

Documentary style photography often benefits from working close to the subject. Getting up close and using a wide focal length to place the viewer in the midst of the action is one of my favourite ways of working but sometimes the range of a telephoto lens is invaluable - being able to frame tight and remove background clutter, compress perspective or simply fill the frame from a distance can be a great advantage for documentary subjects. A medium telephoto like the 70-200 mm offers so many photographic possibilities that I consider it an essential part of my kit.

Used from a distance or up close the medium telephoto allows you to pick out specific elements in a scene or to isolate minute details close to the camera. Getting back from the subject and zooming in allows control over perspective, compressing distance where creatively desired. Having done so, if you need to preserve detail in the background you can simply stop down the aperture to increase DOF and use the VR to prevent camera shake at the resulting slower shutter speed (see section 6 for more on VR).

Working at a distance from the subject can be a bad idea - it's no way to build a rapport, but switching to a longer focal length once a rapport has been established can be very useful in building variety in the way a subject is portrayed.

The telephoto range also allows a lot of ground to be covered when there's a great deal of action going on all around - there's scope to get in close, zooming to make up the distance, in contrast to a wider lens.

Point of caution - because of the potentially large distance created between you and the subject sensitivity must be applied. The sheer size of this lens has the potential to be very intimidating and isn't easily concealed. In response people may withdraw or become aggressive - openness and clear communication are the best policy (communication in this sense being both orally or through body language).

An example where only a telephoto would do - unable to get closer due to my constricted position in the crowd, using the 70-200 allowed me to get the precise framing I wanted over a wide area of this wrestling arena

Using a telephoto lens in this instance allowed me to fill the frame with the full height of the flag bearer and create a neutral background by removing distracting elements on the far hillside by foreshortening the perspective of the distant hills

This zoom range allows for a great deal of flexibility for framing and is suitable for portraying a subject in diverse ways. In the image of the horse and trap below-left, by stepping back with the lens at 90 mm, it captures a wide view with the subject in context with the surroundings while still compressing the depth of the scene and emphasising the queuing traffic. Conversely closer to the subject, shooting at 110 mm to hold some detail of the rider, a close up environmental portrait can be achieved.

Being able to selectively frame precise portions of a subject to communicate a particular detail is an invaluable aspect of this zoom range and provided you're willing and able to move your feet as well as the zoom a huge variation in composition can be achieved.

Stepping back with the zoom set to 90 mm gave plenty of scope for showing this subject in context to the surroundings

Stepping closer and zooming to 110 mm dramatically changes perspective and sets up a close environmental portrait

Speed of focus with the 80-200 AF ED was frustratingly slow so I used it in manual focus for most of the time. To go from closest focus to infinity took around 4 seconds with the 80-200 using AF. I therefore found that manual focus always gave me quicker control with moving subjects.

The control of zoom and focus through one ring with the 80-200 lens was extremely intuitive and I really liked that manual focus meant not being restricted to the camera's AF focus selector positions. But I began to need faster auto-focus.

The out of focus image of the trail hound (below-right) is typical of the problem I was having trying to manually focus on fast moving subjects with the 80-200. Four months after I made this out of focus image I got the chance to photograph more hound trailing (this time as part of the Langholm Common Riding) and armed with my newly purchased 70-200 was able to make similar images, this time perfectly sharp (as the lower, enlarged image shows).

In the sharp image below, I got into position well in advance of the hounds. I'd previously spoken to the race organizers who'd laid the scent trail of aniseed for the hounds to follow so I knew the line they'd take across the moorland. I positioned myself on the finish line so I was guaranteed to see the dogs as they ran in.

I pre-focussed on the area the hounds were going to run into. I shot with the lens wide open giving a shutter speed that would freeze the motion. In doing so the depth of field was reduced to a minimum. I fired a four shot burst and was fortunate to get this pleasing composition with the main hound at the top of it's stride.

The speed of the AF meant that I had the flexibility to then recompose and refocus as the hounds neared the finish line, something my manual focus skills would never have allowed with the 80-200 AF ED lens.

The sharp image of the trail hounds, at 200 mm, has allowed the distance between them to be compressed communicating the drama of the pursuit; one of the most useful optical aspects of this focal length.

An image made with my 80-200 AF zoom showing a typical missed opportunity - where my manual focus skill couldn't keep up with the pace of the action

Trail hounds coming into the finish line - this time taken with the 70-200 AFS VR and no difficulty obtaining sharp focus

What a difference 10 mm makes

The two images below demonstrate the difference between the 70 and 80 mm focal lengths...10 mm might not sound like a lot but in reality, on a DX sensor the difference is considerable.

Both these images were tripod mounted, taken from precisely the same camera position and emphasize the difference in the focal length at the widest setting of each lens. Note that these images were taken with a D200 and a DX sized sensor so the effective focal length in comparison to a 35 mm image is 105 mm versus 120 mm. The consequences for depth of field are also significant. Both photographs below were taken with each lens at f/4, focussed on the same point in the image - the depth of field of the 80-200 is considerably shallower (this may be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on the situation).

70-200 mm VR at 70 mm

80-200 mm AF ED at 80 mm