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
Learning
Photography Q&A
Why no VR on 50mm ?
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="Fred Kingston" data-source="post: 688555" data-attributes="member: 10742"><p>There's probably at least 4 or 5 reasons why Nikon doesn't put VR on their smaller primes... The cost benefit just isn't there... VR helps in low-light, but most of the smaller focal length primes are already either f1.8 or f1.4... hand held motion is also less pronounced at the under 100mm range than at the 200mm Plus range... adding VR adds lens design complexity which seems to translate to "less sharp"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fred Kingston, post: 688555, member: 10742"] There's probably at least 4 or 5 reasons why Nikon doesn't put VR on their smaller primes... The cost benefit just isn't there... VR helps in low-light, but most of the smaller focal length primes are already either f1.8 or f1.4... hand held motion is also less pronounced at the under 100mm range than at the 200mm Plus range... adding VR adds lens design complexity which seems to translate to "less sharp" [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Photography Q&A
Why no VR on 50mm ?
Top