VR for Nikon lenses: I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of...

SCChop

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

Kissel vonKeister Loc: Georgia

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

My opinion just go for it. That's a great lens for the price and you'll enjoy it. Not many situations demand VR if you think about it.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

I own the DX version 35mm f1.8. Being such a small lightweight lens, I really wouldn't need VR. However, one particular Nikon AF-P DX lens, the 70-300mm, VR is not offered. A lens that should have it. VR is offered on that lens for an additional low cost of about $60. Who wouldn't want to pay that?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

About the only fast wide, stabilized primes on the market today are the 35mm and 45mm F1.8 VC lenses from Tamron. And they are amazing lenses. I have used them at 1/6sec hand held with perfect results in a museum where flash and tripods are forbidden.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

Most wide primes are small enough and light enough that VR isn't necessary.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

Buy it, use it , enjoy it; and stop borrowing trouble.

CO

MT Shooter wrote:

About the only fast wide, stabilized primes on the market today are the 35mm and 45mm F1.8 VC lenses from Tamron. And they are amazing lenses. I have used them at 1/6sec hand held with perfect results in a museum where flash and tripods are forbidden.

I have the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 SP VC lens for my Nikons. I use it sometimes for outdoor model photo shoots. The vibration compensation is great because it's not practical to use a tripod for those shoots. It's also great for street photography. Having a stabilized lens is useful even for short focal lengths.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

The wider you go, the less you need VR, and the reverse is true of tele.

AndyT Loc: Hampstead, New Hampshire

jerryc41 wrote:

The wider you go, the less you need VR, and the reverse is true of tele.

All of the comments make sense. Just think of it this way. If you have a prime lens on, in theory because it's smaller than a telephoto, it will stick out much less and should be much easier to hold it still. It's more like just having to hold the body still.

Picdude Loc: Ohio

SCChop wrote:

I want to purchase the Nikkor 35mm F1.8 FX lens for my D500 (so I can have an equivalent "nifty-fifty", well, 52.5mm but close enough)--however, I noticed most of Nikon's prime wide angles don't have VR. Will I miss VR; that is, is it as critical for lenses at the 50mm and wider to not have it? Of course, in the film days I shot 35mm without VR or IS and did just fine but I've gotten used to the fact that I have it and now I'm wondering is it as critical as I think it is?

Even though the F1.8 aperture should give you many happy returns in shutter speed at low light, you still may have to focus more on technique with that lens (deep breath, let half of it out, gently stroke the shutter button...). But ultimately, is that a bad thing?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Buy the lens you want and make sure when you use it that your shutter speed is at least 1/100sec.
You do not need VR for sharp shots with that lens.

jkoar Loc: The Gunks, NY

The wider the lens the less camera shake is a problem.

cthahn

It is a crutch for those who do not believe in tripods and refuse to use one for reasons they dream up.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

cthahn wrote:

It is a crutch for those who do not believe in tripods and refuse to use one for reasons they dream up.

Typical moronic response

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

Wide angles don't require VR it isn't until your field of view begins to narrow where it comes in handy the narrower the field of view lets say 105 or 135mm on up does shake become noticeable to very noticeable and harder to control the narrower it gets, try hand holding a 500 or 600mm prime with out VR and see what you can capture. If you find you're too shaky and not getting sharp images with your wide angle lenses pull out the tripod or monopod. Long story short VR on wide angle lenses, not critical at all.