Your opinion - from what focal length is VR/OS/VC beneficial?

E

Englischdude

Senior Member
Hi all,

i am currently pondering over a mid range fast zoom (2.8). The nikon 24 70 may be a fantastic lens, but I just cant justify the price of 1600 euro here new!!
There are couple of other options, from sigma, tamron and co., tamron also have a new 24-70 with VC for 800 euro new, however there are also a couple of cheaper options albeit without image stabilization. to be honest, i really don’t see the need for image stabilization at the rather modest maximum FL of 70mm. What do you think? Is it worth spending the extra cash on stabilization within this FL?

Thanks for your feedback
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
With the D7000 having a quiet mode which can prevent quite a bit of mirror vibrations, I'd say you probably could go without the stabilization. What I like about the non-stabilized lenses is that they are a little cheaper and there is less that could go wrong with them if and when a repair becomes necessary.

But for a cropped sensor, have you also considered the 17-50 2.8 alternatives? For me, I'd miss the 17-24 portion more then the 50-70, but that's me.

Tamron also has produced a 28-75 2.8 that had a very good reputation for sharpness.
 
E

Englischdude

Senior Member
Marcel said:
With the D7000 having a quiet mode which can prevent quite a bit of mirror vibrations, I'd say you probably could go without the stabilization. What I like about the non-stabilized lenses is that they are a little cheaper and there is less that could go wrong with them if and when a repair becomes necessary.

But for a cropped sensor, have you also considered the 17-50 2.8 alternatives? For me, I'd miss the 17-24 portion more then the 50-70, but that's me.

Tamron also has produced a 28-75 2.8 that had a very good reputation for sharpness.
Click to expand...

thanks for your feedback marcel. i am also looking at the siggy 10-20 to cover the wide end eventually. i too have also heard good things about the 28-75, but have not yet had the opportunity to shoot with one.
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
I have the Tamron 17-50 and find it very nice whenever I use my D7000. I used to have the Nikon 17-55 and I sold it after comparing some shots I did with both.
 
Eduard

Eduard

Super Mod
Staff member
Super Mod
If you plan on staying with DX, I'd go for a used Nikon 17-55. Best photography investment I ever made. I've seen them going for ~US$700-750 on Nikonians or Fred Miranda. Even KEH has them for ~ US$825. At that focal range, I never missed VR.

Now that I'm shooting FX, I have the Tamron 24-70. With a D800 having so many megapixels, it is very unforgiving regarding sharpness. The VR (or VC in Tamron speak) is very useful especially at the long end.
 
E

Englischdude

Senior Member
Eduard said:
If you plan on staying with DX, I'd go for a used Nikon 17-55. Best photography investment I ever made. I've seen them going for ~US$700-750 on Nikonians or Fred Miranda. Even KEH has them for ~ US$825. At that focal range, I never missed VR.

Now that I'm shooting FX, I have the Tamron 24-70. With a D800 having so many megapixels, it is very unforgiving regarding sharpness. The VR (or VC in Tamron speak) is very useful especially at the long end.
Click to expand...

to be honest, who knows what the future will hold. i dont want to rule out an upgrade to fx eventually so a wise decision now may save a few notes later. for the purpose of this discussion lets assume it should also be fx compatible
 
Eduard

Eduard

Super Mod
Staff member
Super Mod
I'm with Marcel - I would miss the 17-24mm range on DX. But I like to shoot wide. Depends on your style and subjects.
 
E

Englischdude

Senior Member
Marcel said:
With the D7000 having a quiet mode which can prevent quite a bit of mirror vibrations, I'd say you probably could go without the stabilization. What I like about the non-stabilized lenses is that they are a little cheaper and there is less that could go wrong with them if and when a repair becomes necessary.

But for a cropped sensor, have you also considered the 17-50 2.8 alternatives? For me, I'd miss the 17-24 portion more then the 50-70, but that's me.

Tamron also has produced a 28-75 2.8 that had a very good reputation for sharpness.
Click to expand...

another option is of course the sigma 17-70 2.8-4. it covers the 17-24 range, but I lose a bit on light sensitivity, not sure if that would be much of an issue on the D7K which performs well in low light anyway..... and it has OS!
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
My opinion would be that my/your hand might be steadier than your/my hand. Why not do a test with the 18-105mm with the VR turned off and see if/when you need the VR turned on.
 
R

RON_RIP

Senior Member
I would not be without my 16-85 vr. I think the vr helps me and you always have the option of turning it off. This lens is surprisingly sharp and versatile on my D7000. I will keep this lens as long as I shoot dx and would probably opt for the 24-120vr if I ever go fx.
 
L

LensWork

Senior Member
The general rule-of-thumb for minimum hand-holdable shutter speed is 1/effective focal length. Example: a 20mm lens on a DX body has an effective focal length of 30mm (20mm X 1.5 DX crop factor = 30mm), therefore the minimum shutter speed would be 1/30 second.
 
Top