Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
70-200 VRII or not
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Joseph Bautsch" data-source="post: 17392" data-attributes="member: 654"><p>Both lenses have the same quality glass. I doubt you will see any difference between the two because of the glass. To buy the VRII or non-VRII is a matter of your shooting style and what you shoot. If you never use a long lens except on a tripod or monopod then you probably don't need the VRII. I have owned both and I would buy the VRII without hesitation. I've done a lot of nature shooting over the years, hand held, from moving cars, boats, planes, and on the run. I've had to take quick shots with no time to stabilize the camera much less put it on a tripod or use a monopod. Also I don't have steady hands like I use to. When I got two new lenses with the VRII, the 18-105mm and a 70-300mm, I wasn't real sure about the extra money I spent for the VRII. I did some testing and, hand holding, found I could get up to 3 stops additional stability and sometimes 4 stops if I had an extra moment to stabilize the camera before taking the shot. (Your results may be different but that is what works for me). The VRII has meant a lot more shots that are sharp and clear of camera shake at much lower light levels than without the VRII. However, even with VRII I still do my best to follow the rule of a shutter speed no less than equal to the focal length of the lens, 300mm then it's 1/300 sec. or higher.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Joseph Bautsch, post: 17392, member: 654"] Both lenses have the same quality glass. I doubt you will see any difference between the two because of the glass. To buy the VRII or non-VRII is a matter of your shooting style and what you shoot. If you never use a long lens except on a tripod or monopod then you probably don't need the VRII. I have owned both and I would buy the VRII without hesitation. I've done a lot of nature shooting over the years, hand held, from moving cars, boats, planes, and on the run. I've had to take quick shots with no time to stabilize the camera much less put it on a tripod or use a monopod. Also I don't have steady hands like I use to. When I got two new lenses with the VRII, the 18-105mm and a 70-300mm, I wasn't real sure about the extra money I spent for the VRII. I did some testing and, hand holding, found I could get up to 3 stops additional stability and sometimes 4 stops if I had an extra moment to stabilize the camera before taking the shot. (Your results may be different but that is what works for me). The VRII has meant a lot more shots that are sharp and clear of camera shake at much lower light levels than without the VRII. However, even with VRII I still do my best to follow the rule of a shutter speed no less than equal to the focal length of the lens, 300mm then it's 1/300 sec. or higher. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
70-200 VRII or not
Top
