Nikkor 16-35 with VR versus Nikkor 18-35 without VR: How crucial is VR?

Started Apr 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
j_pyykonen Junior Member • Posts: 43
Re: Nikkor 16-35 VR vs Nikkor 18-35.

narddogg81 wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

It's not just VR. The 16-35 VR is otherwise a better lens. You get what you pay for.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

you realize that 18-35 photozone review is for the old D version of the 18-35, right? the one that was released last year is much, much better, and is optically equal to (or even a little better than) the 16-35. here is the link to the G version review my copy certainly is a beast. plus is half as much and very light, yet is still well built and weather-sealed (had it out in the rain just this past weekend). i think anyone that doesnt absolutle need 16mm vs 18 or VR woudl be crazy not to take a serious look at the new 18-35. you would still have money to spare get a samyang 14mm if you really need wider. here are some 18-35g shots

What a beautiful images! I have also 18-35G (and I agree with all the positives) and that weather sealing thing left me wondering. Is it really so that you can take it to the light rain and it would withstand it? If so, that would make it "perfect lens" for me.

 j_pyykonen's gear list:j_pyykonen's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Fujifilm X-T1 Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +10 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow