[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1295459348' post='5659']

I don't see an indication from those samples indicating that the IS lens is "better" here.

The VR shot with the poles will look nervous on most lenses except the Sony STF maybe - this is too much of a stress for a conventional lens.



The shown Canon samples are far simpler scenes - closer main objects thus more blur. No surprises that they appear to be "better" but they're just different.

[/quote]

Well, if you don't see any indication of that, I don't know what to say.



The poles one can be rendered a lot better with many lenses, including of course the Sony 135mm STF. But even a zoom lens of mine does a smoother job (although it of course can't reach the same level of blur).



It is not about the "simpler scenes", and it can't get more simple than the seagull shot. In every shot of the VR one, you will start to see double shapes/edges/lines and highlights that start their own "object" (shape). In contrast to the IS lens, which just shows smoother transitions.



Other example of the two lenses (even though it should just be about the 200VR's "creaminess"):

200VR:



200IS:





I would like to have either lens, no doubt. But creamy is not what comes to mind with the bokeh of the Nikon.