Low Light Value of VR in 16-35 vs. Non-VR 18-35 G

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
calson Forum Pro • Posts: 10,570
Re: Low Light Value of VR in 16-35 vs. Non-VR 18-35 G

I can hand hold a D5 with the 16-35mm at shutter speeds down to 1/10s and have sharp pictures if I am careful. Same goes for the 18-35mm f/3.5G lens and the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. If I am making longer exposures I am going to put the camera and lens on a tripod.

The images I got from the 16-35mm on a 12MP D3 were noticeably less sharp than those using either the 14-24mm or the 18-35mm f/3.5G lens on this camera. I liked the zoom range of the 16-35mm but after looking at the pictures I quickly returned it and kept the 14-24mm and added the 18-35mm f/3.5 G lens (be sure to get the G version as the earlier version was not all that good).

With my 70-200mm f/2.8 lens I would often shoot at 1/10s at 200mm when photographing wedding ceremonies in dimly lit churches and my keeper rate even with VR and careful bracing of the camera was still around 50% on average. Without the VR my keeper rate would have been close to zero. But 200mm is quite different that 35mm.

Recommend taking any lens and with careful holding of the camera and breath control see how slow a shutter speed you can get away with and not have image blurring from camera motion. I have also found that I need 1/80s minimum shutter speed to avoid subject motion blur in images when photographing people or critters.

-- hide signature --

"It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment." Ansel Adams

 calson's gear list:calson's gear list
Nikon D5 Nikon D850
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow