+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Senior Member

    Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Was looking at 50mm f1.4 and notice there’s no VR offered by Nikon. Why is that so ?


    › See More: Why no VR on 50mm ?



  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Horoscope Fish's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Quote Originally Posted by D7100-79 View Post
    Was looking at 50mm f1.4 and notice there’s no VR offered by Nikon. Why is that so ?
    Obviously only Nikon knows for certain, but very few Nikon primes anywhere near that focal length come with VR. There's an 85mm and the 105mm, but that's it.

    I have always assumed VR must add to the overall cost, weight and complexity of a lens which may be enough to preclude it's inclusion.

    Depending on how important VR is to you, there's always the "slightly" heavier, "slightly" more expensive Sigma Art series 50mm to consider.


    .....
    Last edited by Horoscope Fish; 12-25-2018 at 07:06 PM.
    Thanks/Like D7100-79 Thanks/liked this post
     
    ~ Paul
    ....
    ....
    Primary Kit :: D850, Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2, Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2, Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art, Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art,
    Godox Flashes & Triggers, Manfrotto X055PROB, 3-Legged Thing Airhed II... All Stuffed into a Manfrotto Pro Backpack 50
    ....
    ....
    ● ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ๑۩۩๑ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ●

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    480sparky's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Just a guess: The target market for that particular lens doesn't need VR.
    Don't mind me... I'm out roaming around somewhere between Zone III and VII.


    Go forth and actuate!


    My Website.

  4. #4
    Senior Member

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    When one does not know the answer to a question the answer i always money. It would increase the cost and size and is probably not necessary for a lens that is easy to hold steady.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Dawg Pics's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Interesting, I don't think I would even have had that as a consideration for a 50mm lens. I guess it would be handy if hand-holding in very low light. Anyway, it is cost for sure.
    "Remember to gaze up at the night sky because there is a little bit of the cosmos in each of us."


    Um yeahhhh, I shoot a lot of pics of my dogs.
    D500 (DOB 05/26/17), D300, D80, SB-800. RIP-D100

  6. #6
    Happy to be Canadian
    Super Mod
    Marcel's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Probably because of the size increase that VR would need to function properly. Prime lenses are Fast, Small and Light and, for some, not expensive. I think VR in a nifty 50 would not meet all these criterions.
    I'm beginning to see the LIGHT!
    Please visit my Gallery and my Flickr Gallery

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Texas's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    I've read about some or one new third party wide angle prime with stabilization. Sigma/Tamron/Tokina ? I forget.

    Canon has it https://cpn.canon-europe.com/content...m_f28is_usm.do
    D750, D90, D100, Nikon 1 J5
    (Once owned: EL, F2AS, D50, D200, D300s, and D7100)

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    FredKingston's Avatar

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    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"
    Thanks/Like Marcel Thanks/liked this post
     

  9. #9
    Senior Member

    Re: Why no VR on 50mm ?

    Thanks for the clarification ��





Quick Reply Quick Reply

If you are already a member, please login above before posting.

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •