VR for 24-70 lens

Golf007sd

If you are shooting video, to a good extent; then, I would agree that VR will yield itself helpful.

haroldp

I f Nikon would implement Sony's sensor based VR as an option, these discussions would be moot.

.... H

PB_PM

If you are shooting video, to a good extent; then, I would agree that VR will yield itself helpful.

You do not need to shoot video to need VR at any given focal length. While I think VR is less necessary at wider focal lengths, it would still be handy for times when using a tripod is not an option. The question is, would people pay an extra $1000 for it over the current version? Personally, no. Others, if the lens brings in the $$$ who am I to question their needs?

spraynpray

My 70-200 f4 at 70mm is one stop slower than a 24-70 f2.8 at 70mm but I can easily hand hold it with 4 stops slower shutter speed than my 60 2.8 macro.

Golf007sd

Just to clarify, I find VR, moreover, or any for of image stabilization, be a very useful feature for the end user.

I have come to the conclusion that, given my extensive usage of the current 24-70 2.8, I've become very comfortable with it weight, size and functionality. It has become an extension of my eye, thus I know full well what it will capture once I hit the shutter button.

If and when Nikon decides to add or improve upon the current 24-70 2.8 by adding VR, then I welcome all those that will purchase the lens.

spraynpray

If/when you start shaking, you will gain a different perspective Ali. The VR3 on my 70-200 makes it like an f1.2 in so far as being able to hold it still goes.

Golf007sd

Given the sallow depth of field of any lens @ f/1.2....it would be hard for a great majority of shooters in getting proper focus on a specific subject...specially if one has shaky hands, at a given distance.

VR has it's limitations; thus, the end user better have a full understanding of what is the best avenue, given the amount of light, in order to produce a result that is acceptable to he or she.

And one does not need to be old to experience shaky hands. Try shooting some light house's between 11:45-1:30AM like we did in Freeport and you would have seen plenty of us shaking in our boots...literarily. None of those shots you saw posted from our trips would have been accomplished without tripods and other proper gear. Hence, VR was pointless.

spraynpray

Ali - see that bit where it says "in so far as being able to hold it still goes."? Obviously the DoF is still f4.

Shaky shots are only good for the bin. I couldn't care less about f2.8 for DoF BTW.

You can turn VR off if you like, but if you haven't got it, you can't turn it on!

Golf007sd

I have never felt "screwed" when using the 24-70 2.8.

Be that as it many, I understand your meaning, and I know you know what I mean as well Andrew.

Cheers

spraynpray

I changed it from 'you're screwed' to 'you can't turn it on' Ali. :-)

heartyfisher

There are quite a lot of nice old dark places when you go on trips where flash and tripods are not allowed. .. yup spent 10000 to visit the place and walked through all those wonderful old historical buildings and not one picture is sharp.. well maybe 1 or 2 was sharp :-)

haroldp

You can turn VR off,but you can't remove the additional lens group from the optical path, just stop it from moving.

You also can't remove it's additional size and weight.

I net out in favor of VR and accept the trade offs, but that does not mean that there are none.

.... H

haroldp

The 24-70 /2.8 is one of the best lenses of any type that I have ever owned, and I have owned most of the 'legendary' lenses.

Mine is sharp (rivaling my primes) at every length and f stop.

I would like VR in this lens if I could get it, but it would be turned off most of the time.

It is my go to lens for event work where I am usually either in good light, or using flash.

Candid subjects move too fast for low speed VR to be useful most of the time.

.... H

spraynpray

That all sounds very plausible and interesting point @haroldp - but out of interest, can you name ANY lenses which have become less good when VR was added? I can't....

heartyfisher

That all sounds very plausible and interesting point @haroldp - but out of interest, can you name ANY lenses which have become less good when VR was added? I can't....

The tamron 17-50 ..

sevencrossing

, but it would be turned off most of the time.


.... H

unless you are working on a tripod, is there any advantage in turning VR off ?

haroldp

@spraynpray

The Nikon 24-120mm F3.5 - 5.6 was a very sharp lens pre VR and used by many pros at the time (including me). The VT version is crap. The 24-120 F4 is very good but a different optical formula.

@sevencrossing

The VR sensor has a cyclic frequency of 1 Khz. Theoretically, any shutter speed above 1/500 is as likely to be made worse, as better, but steady pattern correction in VR can improve those odds..

Shooting wildlife, I am often at 1/2000 or faster to stop subject motion. I am usually handheld but rested, and My hit ratio is better with VR off.

Flash is almost always faster than that, and often how I use the 24-70 / 2.8.

VR can also slow down auto focus.

Thom Hogan has a very articulate write up on these phenomena.

Regards ... Harold

heartyfisher

ok :-)

yakawar

Any update about this piece of glass ? I try to resist to purchasing the Tamron one ^^.

kanuck

I still don't think a 2.8 24-70mm lens with VR would be released by Nikon in terms of it being profitable. The design and research would be very costly and this would certainly be reflected in the price. Ultimately, if conceived, this would be a fantastic lens for sure, but the price tag would be astronomical. Sadly, I don't think we will ever see this kind of lens released. A 24-70 F4 with VR will certainly come out first (and soon), then a refresh of the current fantastic 24-70 Nano coated version with that new fluorine coating

Msmoto

I believe Nikon will redesign the 24-70/2.8 with flourite lens elements and do so without any VR.

kanuck

For sure the pros who rely on this focal range as their bread and butter are already asking for this and with the higher resolution bodies it is definitely necessary. The amazing thing is how good the current 24-70 lens still is on these impressive new bodies. I believe we will see the 24-70mm F4 with VR in the 1st quarter of next year or early 2nd in order to keep up with Canon.

nek4life

http://nikonrumors.com/2015/02/03/some-interesting-nikon-patents-including-a-nikkor-24-70mm-f2-8-pf-vr-lens.aspx/

Just a patent, which doesn't mean it will actually be produced, but this could be interesting. I wonder how the PF design might affect the image quality.

spraynpray

I thought the PF lens was only for prime fl lenses - seems it works on a zoom too.

Looks like the next 24-70 may have VR then.

Ironheart

Canon already has a 70-300 DO/PF lens. Very 'spensive though... Double the price, half the size.