|
Re: I wonder why the 24-70 f/2.8 has no VR
In reply to digital ed,
4 months ago
|
digital ed wrote:
Some people whose photographic opinion I trust feel VR decreases the sharpness of a lens. The added elements to move the image degrades the potential sharpness.
My evaluation, as an engineer, is that VR is a servo and there is always a basic noise level in a servo loop. The noise can dither the image in some conditions.
Even if that decrease could be demonstrated on a print, I would trade that bit of compromise for the increased % of shots that are in focus. Bumping up iso increases noise, so pick your poison. Tripods can be a pain and prohibited in many museums. Try taking a shot of the Declaration of Independence inside the National Archives. No flash, no pods. You're looking at iso 4000-6400, F2.8, 1/30s or less in there. I prefer to own a few zooms rather than a dozen primes, so don't have those 1.8 lenses.
In my less than perfect hands, VR allows a greater % of sharp shots.
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | 1 | ||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | 1 | ||
| 4 months ago | 2 | ||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago |