VR for macro lens. Useful or a waste?

[gtewks]

I'm getting a lot of conflicting information outside this site concerning the usefulness of vibration reduction when using a macro on a tripod.

Hoping a macro-centric site like this will have more useful answers. Not just yes/no opinions but actual reasons to back it up.

thanks,

[enricosavazzi]

[...] usefulness of vibration reduction when using a macro on a tripod [...]

One can make considerations based on general principles. Almost invariably, VR should not be used when the camera is on a tripod. VR may have trouble compensating for the fast vibration of a tripod-mounted camera, as opposed to the slower movements of a hand-held camera. Electronic flash is a more reliable solution for vibration of tripod-mounted cameras.

A completely different question is whether VR can help in hand-held macrophotography. It depends on the situation. In macrophotography, it may help against unintentional rotation of the camera about the entrance pupil of the lens. In this case, VR can be fully effective even in macrophotography. With any other type of camera movement, perspective and/or focus plane are changed, and VR cannot completely compensate for these changes. In general, it helps to have VR on because it makes it easier to frame and focus, even if it does not necessarily improve image quality.

If we are talking about hand-held close-up photography (i.e. at a lower magnification and higher distance to the subject than in true macrophotography), then VR is more effective and may significantly improve image quality, although also in this case it cannot compensate for certain types of large camera movements.

However, as always, the proof of the pudding is in the results. Just try to shoot with and without VR, and this should tell you what works in a specific situation.

[austrokiwi1]

I would have thought it also depends on the VR system being used. I assume Vr is the same as image stabilisation. OLympus and now Sony have five axis in body image stabilisation covering X, Y, pitch, roll and yaw. I suspect( but someone with more experience might know differently) that the much more common three axis stabilisation( usually built into lenses) would not be particularly useful for macro, while the five axis systems might be very effective.

[enricosavazzi]

One of the reasons why VR (or IS, which is just the same thing called with different names by different camera brands) is less effective in macrophotography than with distant subjects is the short distance between camera and subject. Any involuntary movement of the camera changes the relative position of the subject and sensor, and this results in a change in perspective rendering of the subject and/or position of the focus plane. Neither can be fully compensated for by the amounts of sensor or optics movement allowed by VR, regardless of how many degrees of freedom (i.e. "axes" in the parlance of camera makers) it uses.

With a distant subject, the change in perspective caused by small camera movements is negligible, and DoF is higher. This makes it possible for VR to do its job in a satisfactory way.

Another situation that makes it impossible for VR to do its job is the use of non-rectilinear optics, like fisheye lenses. The amount of sensor or optics shift caused by VR may be able to correct for unintentional camera movements in the center of the frame, but not in peripheral regions of the field of view, which would require a different amounts of correction. This is not relevant in macrophotography, but it is just another example of limitations of VR.

The most obvious limitation of VR is of course movement of the subject during exposure. VR can do nothing about people walking in different directions in the field of view, for instance. For the same reason, manually panning to follow the subject, coupled with VR, can give you a sharp enough image of a passing car, but not of its spinning wheels.

In conclusion, VR can be useful, but not in all circumstances, and one should be aware of its limitations.

[austrokiwi1]

Thanks for the clarification