NR Blog NR Forum ebay Finds Nikon Deals Nikon Buying Guide Leica Rumors Pentax Rumors Photo Rumors Contact NR
›

VR for 24-70 lens

1246

Comments

  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 5,751Member
    TTJ, be sure to check out the Popular Photography review of the 24-120 F4. Just got the mag on Saturday.
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    edited March 2014
    Need to go to my mail box today then!

    I would love to see anyone who owns the 24-70 try the Tamron VC. It is a nice lens and everyone that I have seen that has tested it loves it. I was real close to getting that one over the 24-120 F4 but for me, I have primes if I want/need the mega bokeh and I wanted the extra reach. After 4 months with it, I'm very glad for my decision and wouldn't change it. VR is really a valuable and indispensable tool for anyone who has shakey-er hands like me.
    Post edited by TaoTeJared on
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    edited March 2014
    For those that are still questioning the amazing performance of the current 24-70 2.8...have a look at the end of this video...about 5:20sec and see how many shots Scott Woodward took with the 24-70 and their results. Personally, the need for VR on the 24-70 2.8 is not needed. The current Nikon DSLR's allow the end user to use higher ISO's, thus allowing for faster shutter speeds, which yields itself amazing, sharp images. For those times when you really want to keep the ISO low and are shooting in very challenging light...get yourself a nice sturdy tripod.

    Post edited by Golf007sd on
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,494Member
    Since I've owned the 24-70 for the last three years I would never question the performance. That does not mean that I wouldn't like to see improvements! I like to see a reduction of barrel distortion at the short end. Reduced weight. Oh, and I'd rather see an internally zooming design than the inclusion of VR, that is unless they added both. :D
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    I'm always in favor of lighter gear. With respect to lenses, so long as the durability is not hindered and performance is improved....I say: sign me up.
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited March 2014
    Our decision making is a very interesting process. I for one, have made decisions I thought were good, but have the 16-35mm f/4 VR and the 24-120mm f/4 VR, when all my friends have the Holy Trinity stuff….LOL.

    So, if Nikon does come out with a new 24-70/2.8…VR or not, I might be in.

    A note, VR on f/2.8 Nikkors….70-200mm, 105mm, and up….nothing shorter….
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    Since I've owned the 24-70 for the last three years I would never question the performance. That does not mean that I wouldn't like to see improvements! I like to see a reduction of barrel distortion at the short end. Reduced weight. Oh, and I'd rather see an internally zooming design than the inclusion of VR, that is unless they added both. :D
    Capture NX2 perfectly corrects it's barrel distortion, One reason I put up with it's workflow.


    .... H

    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,494Member
    @haroldp distortion correction throws away resolution, thus I'd rather have Nikon improve the actual performance than fix it later.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    I have not noticed this, my normal NX2 workflow macro corrects distortion, ACA, and LCA and I have been happy with the results, and I am fussy.

    Based on your comment, I will perform a semi structured test.

    Regards ... H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    TTJ, be sure to check out the Popular Photography review of the 24-120 F4. Just got the mag on Saturday.
    My Mag came yesterday, No 24-120vr F4 review though. It that the magazine or lens you meant?
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 5,751Member
    TTJ, that is what I call a senior moment. Next time I will get the mag before posting. Page 82, Nikon 18-140mm F/3.5-5.6G DX ED VR AF-S. Not even in the ball park. Sorry about that.

    I saw it under the Lab section and thought it was the 24-120VR. Not even close. And of course, I have not read the review. I am sorry for the bad info. :((
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    whew! I thought I was having a pre-dawn senior moment.
    No problem!
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    edited March 2014
    Happy to know there are others on NRF who are chronologically more mature……. I get the impression when I speak of the 1960's folks are wondering if we had to silver our own plates……

    Now, what is this thread about…..? :))
    Post edited by Msmoto on
    Msmoto, mod
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    Happy to know there are others on NRF who are chronologically more mature……. I get the impression when I speak of the 1960's folks are wondering if we had to silver our own plates……

    Now, what is this thread about…..? :))
    May be we need a new thread "As old as dirt"

    No I have not silvered plates but I have silvered aluminum, for prints

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 5,751Member
    +1 to Msmoto and sevencrossing. I got a big smile from your comments.
    As far as "As old as dirt"...lets not go there . :-))
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    Happy to know there are others on NRF who are chronologically more mature……. I get the impression when I speak of the 1960's folks are wondering if we had to silver our own plates……

    Now, what is this thread about…..? :))
    Those who were not around for the '60's really missed out.
    Always learning.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member

    Those who were not around for the '60's really missed out.
    As they saying goes" If remember the 60s you weren't there"

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • yakawaryakawar Posts: 6Member
    No other news, i guess, about this hypothetical lens ?
    I want to stop myself before purchasing the tamron one.
    Nikon D7000 + 16-35mm f4G EDVR + 50mm f1.4G + 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VRIFED +Nikon SB-700; ViewNX+CaptureNX2+Photomatix user.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    edited September 2014
    If you know how to use the current Nikon 24-70 2.8, then you will fully understand that, at this focal length, VR is not needed, if not pointless. Moreover, even Canon when they introduced their new version in 2012, left VR out.
    Post edited by Golf007sd on
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,192Member
    edited August 2014
    Any one have a guess if there will be a alternative to the Tamron 24-70 VC this photokina? maybe from tokina or sigma ?
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    edited September 2014
    If you know how to use the current Nikon 24-70 2.8, then you will fully understand that, at this focal length, VR is not needed, if not pointless. Moreover, even Canon when they introduced their new version in 2012, left VR out.
    The 16-35 has VR so Nikon can't update the 24-70 fast enough for me. No doubt it will then have the VR 'luxury tax' on it, but we'll see.
    Post edited by Golf007sd on
    Always learning.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    I think I would like to see a new 24-70mm f/2.8 VR from Nikon. It makes the lens more versatile, yet this focal length is, for me, used in photographing people, and for some reason the VR does not stop their motion… :-?
    Msmoto, mod
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    @spraynpray: The 16-35 is far more of a wide angle lens than the 24-70. From me perspective, each have their own specific uses. Moreover, it is an f4...not a 2.8. The additional amount of light coming through a 2.8 lens, of this focal length, is much better serviced if Nikon upgrades the optical elements vs. adding VR.
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2014
    Bought this lens 5 years ago, did a first test on the D300, windy, sunny day, blue sky, 1/400 + at f/8 and shooting seagulls, nothing could go wrong, they just stand still in the air and just hoover. From the 320 photo's I deleted 5 !!, due to camera movement, the rest was tag sharp. This lens is so quick and good .... I saw in LR that I shot 25% of my photo's with it.

    Now on my D600 with ISO 3200 (5 stops) on 70mm, I manage 1/15th of a second, with this lens. The battery grip is on the D600 for much better grip then. From 1/60th you don't need VR.

    I don't think I want to spend $600 to $800 more just for VR on this lens, simply for the reason that I don't make photo's (handheld) in darker environments.
    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
    Those who say it can't be done, should not interrupt those doing it!
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SquamishPhotoSquamishPhoto Posts: 608Member
    edited September 2014
    If you know how to use the current Nikon 24-70 2.8, then you will fully understand that, at this focal length, VR is not needed, if not pointless. Moreover, even Canon when they introduced their new version in 2012, left VR out.
    Thats total nonsense. The Tamron lens was designed for video use where VR is pretty much a necessity. Also, the only reason to shy away from VR in a zoom lens of this focal length is cost. Personally, the ability to use VR to keep your ISO in a desired range is one of the single biggest advantages while shooting stills. To suggest that its pointless is just being hyperbolic - as others have pointed out, there are many much wider lenses that have VR, so it really makes no sense to argue against its inclusion into lens design.
    Post edited by SquamishPhoto on
    Mike
    D3 • D750 • 14-24mm f2.8 • 35mm f1.4A • PC-E 45mm f2.8 • 50mm f1.8G • AF-D 85mm f1.4 • ZF.2 100mm f2 • 200mm f2 VR2
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.