08-28-2008, 03:00 AM | #1 |
DANNY
46
Rep 608
Posts
Drives: E93 335i AW/CR
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Los Angeles
|
VR lens
do VR lenses have any disadvantages?
and what's better to get, a Nikon D40 kit with: 18-55 VR --&-- 55-200 ~ $900 18-55 --&-- 55-200 VR ~ $800 thanks Last edited by DSe93; 08-28-2008 at 03:20 AM.. |
08-28-2008, 07:59 AM | #2 | |
Private First Class
9
Rep 165
Posts |
Quote:
It all depends on what you are aiming at : Normally VR is more useful at the long range, since the luminosity is smaller, with the VR you will win one stop. But then having VR on the wide lens allows you to take more pictures without a flash indoors. What about the aperture of the lenses are they the same ? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-28-2008, 10:14 AM | #3 |
Major
76
Rep 1,324
Posts |
There's no disadvantage to VR other than a little bit of added weight. But (at least in the Canon camp) it can be disabled if you want to induce some blur or shake.
As for which one is better (if you can only have one) I think it depends on your usage... 18-55: Would be your indoor lens, and VR might help you use a longer shutter speed to avoid using your flash 55-200: At the longer focal lengths, lenses are more susceptible to small movement So which will you be using more?
__________________
Was: 2008 335xi sedan 6MT Black Sapphire Metallic
Is: 2014 Tesla P85D (Blue Metallic) Wife's: 2013 Infiniti G37 S sedan 6MT, Black |
Appreciate
0
|
08-28-2008, 10:29 AM | #4 |
Captain
56
Rep 815
Posts |
Generally speaking the only disadvantage of VR/IS is the added cost and, potentially, some additional tendency toward lens flare due to the additional lens elements. Most VR/IS lenses have this pretty well under control though.
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-28-2008, 10:32 AM | #5 |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 477
Posts |
There isn't any disadvantages to VR lenses. Only benefits
Oh, actually...there may be one disadvantage. My 55-200mm VR lens makes a very high pitch whine when the VR is on. Some people might not be able to hear it, but it is there. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-28-2008, 11:17 AM | #6 |
Major
58
Rep 1,224
Posts |
I've been using the Nikon 18-200 VR lens for a while now and it's great. It's practically a do-it-all lens which means you don't have to carry around multiple lenses, you're not constantly swap lenses, you don't have to worry about dust getting on the sensor during lens swaps, and you (almost) always have the right lens at the right time. For what you get it's not overly large or heavy, but it isn't a lightweight by any means. The VR mode is great for no flash low light shots.
The downside is it's price. If you consider it's price in perspective of two different lenses of the same quality, it's not such a bad deal. Something to consider. |
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 01:33 AM | #7 |
Ski bum
327
Rep 6,198
Posts |
skip the VR on wide angle lenses (18-55). The rule with good technique is you can hand-hold shutter speeds down to 1/focal length. So, if you are shooting at 18mm, you can hand-hold down to 1/18 sec on the shutter speed, and likely get a good result, if you have good technique. So, that's a pretty slow shutter speed, very little need for VR.
However, for a 200mm focal length, you need to be around 1/200 sec to avoid blur. You will have a hard time with that indoors, early morning / late day light. So, the VR is more useful in the longer ranges. Downsides? Battery drain, slower focus, heavy, more complex. Image-wise, there's no real downside. VR can be turned off on the Nikon lenses I have.
__________________
1999 e46 328i Ti Silver / Black[retired] 2007 e90 335xi Jet Black / Black[retired] 2011 e70 X5 35d Vermillion Red / Cinnamon 2011 e92 M3 LeMans / Fox Red extended |
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 01:34 AM | #8 |
Ski bum
327
Rep 6,198
Posts |
btw, I'd take a D60 over the D40x. I wouldn't buy a D40.
__________________
1999 e46 328i Ti Silver / Black[retired] 2007 e90 335xi Jet Black / Black[retired] 2011 e70 X5 35d Vermillion Red / Cinnamon 2011 e92 M3 LeMans / Fox Red extended |
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 02:50 AM | #9 | |
DANNY
46
Rep 608
Posts
Drives: E93 335i AW/CR
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Los Angeles
|
Quote:
why is that? I read this article and it was convincing... its about D40 vs D60 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d60.htm |
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 10:26 AM | #10 |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 477
Posts |
I just got the D40. No major difference between the D40 and the D60.
I got the D40 because I am just getting into photography and I don't know how long I will be interested. In a couple of years, if I still can find the time and enjoy it, I'll upgrade for something beyond the D60 (at least the D80). |
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 02:06 PM | #11 |
Captain
29
Rep 957
Posts
Drives: 2022 X3 M40i
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SheffVill, OH
|
I like my D40. I'm by no means a professional, so there's no sense in me buying a more expensive body. Besides, I'd rather save money for a good VR like the OP.
|
Appreciate
0
|
08-30-2008, 11:30 PM | #12 | |
Ski bum
327
Rep 6,198
Posts |
Quote:
I scanned the article from Ken Rockwell. I've never found him to be wrong. I was of the impression that the D60 had more of the technology from the D3/300 platform, but it seems it does not. So, go for the 40x, and happy shooting!
__________________
1999 e46 328i Ti Silver / Black[retired] 2007 e90 335xi Jet Black / Black[retired] 2011 e70 X5 35d Vermillion Red / Cinnamon 2011 e92 M3 LeMans / Fox Red extended |
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-04-2008, 11:01 PM | #13 |
Major
74
Rep 1,058
Posts
Drives: f30 328 xdrive, e90 335i gone
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Eastside
|
As to lenses, I highly recommend 16-85 VR for all around shooting. It's very sharp and has a nice contrast.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|