Is VR really needed for the 70-200mm/f2.8?

[seancrane]

<p>Ilkka, the clear intent of the "casual shooter" comments were amateu/beginner vs. pro/advanced, not a style of shooting, but so be it.</p>

 

[boinkphoto]

<p>It's funny because it seems a lot people seem to think VR <strong>doesn't</strong> work for them. My best friend actually thinks it's counter productive, at least on his Nikon 18-200.</p>

<p>I can't say, I don't own a VR lens, though I'd love to.</p>

<p>Personally, if you're really concerned about image quality (and can afford it - which I could not), I'd go for the Nikon even forgetting the VR. I'm not saying Sigma isn't capable of good glass, but my personal experience has been that there is a qualitative difference between Nikon glass and Sigma glass (or for that matter, most 3rd party glass, but particularly Sigma).</p>

<p>However, I own a number of 3rd party lenses, including a Sigma, because the money is significant and you sometimes have to compromise. What I usually do is buy the older Nikon lenses, which often are just as good and enormously cheaper (like, I have a Nikon 80-200mm push-pull).</p>

<p>Yes, you do need quality glass, but in the end it's what you do with the camera that matters most.</p>

[alex_lofquist]

<p>"Zooming with your feet" is not generally a good idea when on safari!</p>

[jakub_czerminski]

<p>Joe,</p>

<p>if you're doing a posed portrait hand-held in avaiable light and you don't want to use flash, you can make sharp photo in 1/15 at 200m. Now I'd say it's pretty hard to do this without VR / IS. It's a great feature.</p>

[alvinyap]

<p>Here's a sample pic I took over the weekend. This was taken under heavy shade inside a forest so my D200 @ iso 640 returned me an exposure of: F4 1/45 (I was caught off guard - should have opened up to F2.8)</p><div></div>

[alvinyap]

<p>And here's the 100% crop:</p><div></div>

[alvinyap]

<p>I forgot which eye I put my sensor on, anyways it's one or the other. The ability to handhold a 200mm with a cropped body camera @ 1/45 is really useful. That said, this shot was luck. Usually at 1/50 I would have to have a burst of at least 4-8 pictures, one *should* come back really good. Even with VR I still try my best to do the 1/FL rule. Also, I did not have a tripod plate for this lens and was not able to use my monopod. I'm certain with a monopod I would get more keepers @ 1/45 shutter.<br>

Alvin</p>

[bmm]

<p>I am a primarily an AF-D prime shooter, who also has the 18-200VR as a general purpose lens. I only mention this to state that I have no particular attachment to zooms or VR lenses.<br>

But does the VR on my zoom noticeably work? Absolutely. And proof in the pudding is that with this slowish lens, the VR enables me to use shutter speeds that are not so far off those which I use with my primes, in equivalent conditions and with a still subject.<br>

Bottom line is I would be unquestionably happy to have VR as an available feature on any lens I use.</p>

[keith_lubow]

<p>You mean it wasn't actually shot on 2x3 sheet film, Alvin?</p>