Nikon 24-70 VR

Livin The Dream

Livin The Dream

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,608
Name
Kris
Edit My Images
No
So who has some real life experience of the new version against the old. I don't really care for the VR and the old AF is pretty good, reviews seem to suggest that optically, it's not really any better? Is it worth the extra £300 when I don't need VR?
 
No experience of the new one but had the old one and can't see the value ... do you really need VR on a 24-70mm ?
 
I tried both last weekend... I didn't really notice much difference, but the boys in LCE said it was much MUCH better IQ. However, it was bigger and heavier - enough to put me off ;)
 
Yardbent said:
IMO - not needed

and has to be 'OFF' when on a tripod for landscapes anyway
Click to expand...
Never understood this comment yes it may not be needed for every shot but given the choice I would always prefer stabilisation over none it opens up loads of options like not using a tripod!
 
Last edited:
Just started to use the older version this weekend and although VR would be nice the non VR is big and heavy enough!

If I think I need VR I will see how the Tamron shapes up.
 
a1ex2001 said:
Never understood this comment yes it may not be needed for every shot but given the choice I would always prefer stabilisation over none it opens up loads of options like not using a tripod!
Click to expand...

It's handy if you're snapping something that doesn't move granted, but I'm more a people snapper so not needed for me.

minnnt said:
IIRC it actually scored worse than the original on DXO?
Click to expand...

That's the interesting thing, surely can't be? Interested in any real world examples, otherwise it seems to be a significant flop for probably their best selling lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top