35/50mm Prime with Vibration Control

umarhant · Oct 14, 2011

I have a d5100 with the kit lens which I bought a ten days back. Now time has come to buy a new lens. I am looking for a 35/50mm f1.8 prime (Preferably 35 since my camera has 1.5 crop factor). I will use it for portraits and landscape photography. I also plan to use it for video recording. VR/IF/VC/OS will be a nice feature for videos. Why can't I find a 35/50mm prime with vr? Can someone guide me for a good lens for videos. Althogh I am new to dslr, I have been using prosumer level video cameras.

Markw · Oct 14, 2011

You won't find one with VR because it's simply not needed. The closest lens to that focal length you'll see is the 60mm F/2.8 Micro Nikkor.

We need to know what kind of videos you're going to shoot, and what your budget is to really offer a lens.

If you're doing landscape videos, Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8. Or even any of the 18-50, 17-50, etc, lenses would work. The 35/1.8 would be fine, though. It just wouldn't allow you to get quite as far out as the rest of them.

Mark

KmH · Oct 14, 2011

Yep, at those focal lengths image stabilization just isn't needed, and it would not only make the lenses bigger, it would also make them more expensive. ↑ ↑ ↑

Image stabilization isn't really needed until focal lengths approach 200 mm.

IS/VR (et al) was invented to help amateur shooters that use poor camera handeling/holding technique.

Nikon_Josh · Oct 14, 2011

KmH said:
Yep, at those focal lengths image stabilization just isn't needed, and it would not only make the lenses bigger, it would also make them more expensive. ↑ ↑ ↑

Image stabilization isn't really needed until focal lengths approach 200 mm.

IS/VR (et al) was invented to help amateur shooters that use poor camera handeling/holding technique.

Partly true but not completely, I have got sharp shots handholding from my 70-300VR set at 300 mm and shooting at only 1/80th of a second. Without VR this wouldn't be possible. So VR helps hugely in low light also for static subjects

But it is true, VR is not needed so much in a fast prime lens. Due to the fact its wide aperture allows more light in to get faster shutter speeds, also their is a weight penalty. People some prefer primes due to their small size and superior image quality, if you are carry five primes for example for diffferent situations and they are all the size of a 70-200 VR. Your back is going to know about it!

Destin · Oct 14, 2011

If you want usable video out of a DSLR, it CANNOT be hand held. You need some sort of stabilization device (tripod, monopod, steadycam, shoulder mount, etc.). If you're going to try handholding video with a DSLR, you'll be better off using an iphone 4s, simply because of it's much larger DOF and better autofocus.

KmH · Oct 14, 2011

Nikon_Josh said:
Partly true but not completely, I have got sharp shots handholding from my 70-300VR set at 300 mm and shooting at only 1/80th of a second. Without VR this wouldn't be possible. So VR helps hugely in low light also for static subjects

It's a wonder anyone was able to make photographs at all before things like AF, VR, multiple metering modes, etc. :lmao:

analog.universe · Oct 14, 2011

KmH said:
It's a wonder anyone was able to make photographs at all before things like AF, VR, multiple metering modes, etc. :lmao:

I don't think anyone is implying that these things are necessary to make photos. They are most certainly necessary to make certain photos under certain conditions. When choosing gear, it's worth considering how new technology will give you more tools to make better shots. Just because a feature wasn't necessary doesn't mean it's not useful and worth having.

Markw · Oct 14, 2011

Destin said:
If you want usable video out of a DSLR, it CANNOT be hand held. You need some sort of stabilization device (tripod, monopod, steadycam, shoulder mount, etc.). If you're going to try handholding video with a DSLR, you'll be better off using an iphone 4s, simply because of it's much larger DOF and better autofocus.

Or edited with After Effects' warp stabilizer.

Mark

kundalini · Oct 14, 2011

Nikon_Josh said:
Partly true but not completely, I have got sharp shots handholding from my 70-300VR set at 300 mm and shooting at only 1/80th of a second. Without VR this wouldn't be possible. So VR helps hugely in low light also for static subjects......

Comprehension is a wonderful thing. You should try it some time.

KmH said:
.....Image stabilization isn't really needed until focal lengths approach 200 mm.......

Derrel · Oct 14, 2011

As Nikon_Josh mentioned above, VR is a HUGE aid to photographing static subjects in low light levels. I had been photographing seriously for around twenty-five years before I got my first VR lens, a Nikkor 80-400 VR, and I used it on one of the first "decent" d-slr's, the FujiFilm FinePix S2 Pro body, a 6MP camera that had lovely color--much better, more-pleasing color than the Nikon D100. Having a VR lens opened up incredible new worlds for me...shots done at dusk with the zoom set to 400mm and the shutter notched as slow as 1/15 second...indoor photos at twilight of my sleeping infant son, done as slow as 1/3 second with the VR set to "Active", and me braced against a wall or door frame. With that lens, the "active VR" mode is for use from a moving platform, and the human body at 1/3 second is almost as wiggly and jiggle as a car is...as travel photos have learned, the VR lenses allow them to shoot static landscapes and interior photos with "modest" lens set-ups...

I really am tired of the facile question," I wonder if photos were possible before AF, VR, and multi-mode metering," because I have had over 10 years of shooting under my belt since 1983, when I was a 20-year-old photojournalism student, using Nikon manual focus equipment; that was BEFORE AUTOFOCUS existed on the open market. Sure, photos were made. But there were also a lot of photos that were NOT made then, that are dead-easy to get these days. Fast-focusing lenses, and I mean REALLY fast-focusing lenses like the Nikkor 400/3.5 and 300/4.5 ED-IF, were practically brand-new designs. Most lenses were straight helicoid designs, and focus was on a catch-shoot,refocus-catch-shoot type of staccato basis for experienced shooters. Today's AF systems are simply ***incredible*** by comparison.

As to 35 and 50mm primes with VR: not today. Nikons' 16-35mm f/4 AFS-G has VR though Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR Review
....same with the 18-105, and the 24-120,and so on...the 55-200 also has VR As does the 55-300 and 70-300. VR is very useful for slower-aperture lenses, or lenses that will be used in situations where VR really works well. VR makes panning better. Makes shooting in the wind better. Makes shooting stopped down for DOF on static shots possible where tripods are not allowed. Make shooting from moving platforms a higher percentage than without, without the need for 13 pounds and $8k worth of gyro gear.

The entire, "It's a wonder photos were even made before VR and AF," line of thought is disingenuous, because frankly, the photos were often NOT MADE successfully by anybody less capable than a full-time, very capable shooter, either pro or amateur--and even then, one with a lot of expensive equipment in many cases.

Nikon_Josh · Oct 14, 2011

kundalini said:
Nikon_Josh said:

Partly true but not completely, I have got sharp shots handholding from my 70-300VR set at 300 mm and shooting at only 1/80th of a second. Without VR this wouldn't be possible. So VR helps hugely in low light also for static subjects......

Click to expand...

Comprehension is a wonderful thing. You should try it some time.

KmH said:

.....Image stabilization isn't really needed until focal lengths approach 200 mm.......

Click to expand...

I beg your pardon?? Before you jump on me my friend, the statement was that VR was not for anything but people who couldn't hand hold a lens properly..I was stating that VR was for much more than just that.

Well explained Derrel! I think its only recently that I began to appreciate just how useful VR can be.

kundalini · Oct 14, 2011

Nikon_Josh said:
I beg your pardon??

There was a good 5 hours between your post (#4) and Keith's (#3). If I'm not mistaken, there was an agreement between the two of you. Yet, it seems that you did not read or comprehend KmH's reply.

Nikon_Josh said:
Before you jump on me my friend, the statement was that VR was not for anything but people who couldn't hand hold a lens properly..I was stating that VR was for much more than just that.

Actually, the question from the OP was concerning VR on much shorter focal lengths. The fact that you were capable of hand holding a shot at 1/80s at 300mm goes to the virtue of VR, but has little to do with the OPs original question. Thus, my comment about comprehension. KmH's statement that VR is negligible in focal lengths less than 200mm is valid and your regurgitation did not add value to the conversation when, in fact, you exasperated it by furthering the focal length, which only validates its efficacy at focal lengths greater than 200mm. But then again, I like to bow out my chest from time to time also.

Keith added a comment about amateur shooter's techniques with regard to using it (VR) as a crutch (my supposition). I've seen this all too often and concur. A solid foundation and proper technique can yeild much slower hand held shutter speeds than the norm of SS=FL. Chicken wings should be for the grille, not how you hold a camera.

Derrel · Oct 14, 2011

I do not agree that the benefits of VR are "negligible" below 200mm in focal length. No way...VR is useful at much shorter focal lengths than 200mm. Nikon now has VR is a professional-grade 16-35mm f/4 lens. VR is exceptionally useful on SLOW shutter speeds, hand-held. VR is exceptionally useful for panning,and is in my opinion, better than ANY tripod for panning, especially slow-speed panning in the 1/3 to 1/6 second range. VR is also exceptionally useful in gusty,or windy conditions, such as at windsurfing locations where 25,30,35 MPH wind gusts are the norm along with steady sustained winds below the gusts, such as in some of the windsurfing areas along the Pacific Coast. VR is also very useful when one is photographing and is out of breath, or has an accelerated heart rate due to hiking, exertion, or spotting big game at close range (i.e. buck fever, or the surge of adrenaline that results in accelerated heart rate and often muscle tremor when you come into close proximity to a bull elk or even a black bear,etc.). VR counteracts vibration in real time, DURING the actual exposure...it works much differently than a tripod does. VR used properly,in the right situations, can boosts keeper rates TREMENDOUSLY.

According to KmH''s statement above in post #3:"Image stabilization isn't really needed until focal lengths approach 200 mm.

IS/VR (et al) was invented to help amateur shooters that use poor camera handeling/holding technique."

I disagree with the first part of that statement, and I disagree strongly with the second statement. IS/VR is one of the single most-desired features incorporated into $7,000-$13,000 class super-telephoto lenses, to overcome mirror slap and image shake that occurs even when using one, or two, professional-grade tripods, or when shooting during less than ideal conditions. Attend a large windsurfing or sailboarding competition, and see the prevalence of IS and VR super-teles. Professional photojournalists often have to photograph WHILE walking, often backwards...or shoot one-handed...IS and VR is invaluable in the field that Nikon made its name in--photojournalism and action/adventure photography. IS and VR allow the still photographer a steady shooting platform without the need for a tripod. People who can not get that through their heads are really failing to think things through, or are just stirring the pot to piss people off.

The absolute value of an electronically-stabilized camera platform that is resistant to, and corrective of wind, heartbeat, hand tremor, heavy breathing, muscle twitching, walking, bike-riding, motorcycle riding, automobile riding, and aviation-based shooting...the absolute value of a camera that is resistant to and corrective of engine vibration, boat waves, wind chop, tidal swell...come ON....that is one of the single biggest advances in photographic equipment since flash powder was invented!!!!