is nikon VR lens worht buying?
its th ehype again-faster lens, bigger wallet, better image.....
so is the VR lens that great?
its th ehype again-faster lens, bigger wallet, better image.....
so is the VR lens that great?
Is Nikon VR lens worth buying?
- Thread starter nikonpicture
- Start date
- Status
s nikon VR lens worth buying?
its th e hype again-faster lens, better image, higher bokeh etc .....
so is the VR lens that great?
its th e hype again-faster lens, better image, higher bokeh etc .....
so is the VR lens that great?
which one are you talking? you lumped every tom dick and harry VR lens and expect us to give you answer?
24-120 VR ok lens
70-200 VR pricey but superb lens
80-400 VR a tad slow
200-400 VR superb tele
Do a search or try it out at the shops to find out some of the basics beforehand.
24-120 VR ok lens
70-200 VR pricey but superb lens
80-400 VR a tad slow
200-400 VR superb tele
Do a search or try it out at the shops to find out some of the basics beforehand.
As a hardened Nikon user for last 20 years, I have observed that Nikon hardly introduce stupid lenses. Of course the occassional unless ones do come by. On this case, the VR range is all it is hyped up to be. When Canon came up with image stabaliser lens, why didn't anyone cry wolf rather many Canon users embraced it. The VR technoloy is far more superior to that of Canon, that confidence is shown in Nikon's inclusion of this into its ED range of lenses (predominantly pro class lens).
I have tested the VRs and yes it does help the shooter to do a better job, so there.
I have tested the VRs and yes it does help the shooter to do a better job, so there.
personally i feel that the vrs are especially usefull for the tele ranges.....
coz the lenses are usually very heavy and thus u are more prone to handshake etc etc etc......
vr will help alot.....
coz the lenses are usually very heavy and thus u are more prone to handshake etc etc etc......
vr will help alot.....
I have a few Nikon lenses, none of them is VR, it depends on what u shoot and how u shoot, really.
Frankly, I find this kind of question useless and not geared towards a healthy decision.
What do you mean by worth buying? By just stating VR, it's stereotyped towards ALL the VR glasses.
Lastly, the equipment is as good/useful if you use it good. No point I tell you 300 f/2.8VR good, but you don't know how to use it, nor find it useful and it becomes useless/lousy.
What do you mean by worth buying? By just stating VR, it's stereotyped towards ALL the VR glasses.
Lastly, the equipment is as good/useful if you use it good. No point I tell you 300 f/2.8VR good, but you don't know how to use it, nor find it useful and it becomes useless/lousy.
Cheesecake
Senior Member
aiya, shoot indoors = get vr, outdoors = not so needed. like outdoors >1/300th i'll off vr coz no difference n waste batt. indoors i'll on vr to shoot 1/20th
but seriously, i think only the 24-120 and 70-200 make full use of vr. lenses like 200-400 r so big tt ppl wont handhold them much. i'd rather nikon put vr in more mid range zooms like canon did.
vr is a [luxury] feature, only u can decide its worth
but seriously, i think only the 24-120 and 70-200 make full use of vr. lenses like 200-400 r so big tt ppl wont handhold them much. i'd rather nikon put vr in more mid range zooms like canon did.
vr is a [luxury] feature, only u can decide its worth
Astin said:
I agree with bro astin. I too do not have any VR lens but I did tried it out on my friend's lens. Its love at first shot. I felt tt its so easy to use it and the kinda images it produced on the lens are awesome.
If one is using the vr lens in the outdoor, I don't think the vr function will be necessary.
- Status
Similar threads
