I think I have made up my mind. I will not purchase the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 lens. It does not have VR and VR is a big deal for me. I remember doing test shots with a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 in one of Henry's stores before and frankly, when handheld, my Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR beats the 50mm in sharpness hands down, almost all the time. With the 17-55mm, would there be any difference? To put it to the test, I brought out my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and tried it with and without VC. When shot with VC, the Tamron delivers sharp images almost all the time. Without VC, very few images are sharp under normal room light conditions. So, it makes a big difference to have VC. Anyone that says otherwise must have a really stable hand or a really good camera so they can crank up the ISO to compensate for low lights.
On a tripod or in bright day light, the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 would be a superb lens. Otherwise, forget it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Invasion of What?
What are these bugs? I've never seen them before. I saw them at my parents' place the other day. Lots of them in soil or grassy areas.
-
What are these bugs? I've never seen them before. I saw them at my parents' place the other day. Lots of them in soil or grassy areas. -
This shot was taken with the D7200 from inside my car. I had to pull over quickly and I didn't have time to think about the settings. I ... -
A local Zellers store is having liquidation sales of everything in the store. I was browsing through some electronics the other day--not pl...
No comments:
Post a Comment