Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="stmv" data-source="post: 90256" data-attributes="member: 10038">Any time you make the camera truly immobile via tripod or a stable object like a chair,, you have to turn off VR, or it may actually be less sharp. The VR is designed for unsteady humans, and is expecting that slight movement to compensate. when rock steady, the VR can actually induce shake! which is why, I just don't bother, and on my lens with VR, mostly keep off. The exception is my 55-300 Zoom, because I often do hand carry this lens, and in that case the VR is a welcome addition. I actually dread the day that for marketing purposes, Nikon starts putting VR into all their Primes,,&nbsp; yuck,, adds bulk, and size to the lens. I am actually in favor of putting the VR into the Camera, and eliminate all the VR trend in thelens, would reduce weight/complexity/size, and well cost since the investment is more in the lens then the camera.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="stmv, post: 90256, member: 10038"] Any time you make the camera truly immobile via tripod or a stable object like a chair,, you have to turn off VR, or it may actually be less sharp. The VR is designed for unsteady humans, and is expecting that slight movement to compensate. when rock steady, the VR can actually induce shake! which is why, I just don't bother, and on my lens with VR, mostly keep off. The exception is my 55-300 Zoom, because I often do hand carry this lens, and in that case the VR is a welcome addition. I actually dread the day that for marketing purposes, Nikon starts putting VR into all their Primes,, yuck,, adds bulk, and size to the lens. I am actually in favor of putting the VR into the Camera, and eliminate all the VR trend in the lens, would reduce weight/complexity/size, and well cost since the investment is more in the lens then the camera. [/QUOTE]

Verification