how bad is the 24-70's camera shake?

[Tinderbox (UK)]

I just wish vr worked with subject movement

John.

 

[Derrel]

I've considered it. But the glass simply doesn't compare to the Nikon.

Yeah...The Tamron's got lower CA, and slightly higher sharpness than the Nikon zoom...and the Tamron has less light fall-off. Oh, and a bit less distortion.

Here's a screen capture I just made...

 

[ronlane]

I've considered it. But the glass simply doesn't compare to the Nikon.

Yeah...The Tamron's got lower CA, and slightly higher sharpness than the Nikon zoom...and the Tamron has less light fall-off. Oh, and a bit less distortion.

Here's a screen capture I just made...

View attachment 59876

Come on man! you know that ONLY for USA!!!

 

[Aloicious]

OP, from this and many of your other threads it appears as though you have difficulty grasping how the laws of physics apply to photography. Not that there is anything wrong with that, we all start learning somewhere.

What baffles me is why you continually argue with those trying to help you understand. And its not just in this thread.

With that I wish you luck and hope you find what your looking for.

Unsubscribed.

 

[hamlet]

Declarative statements are meaningless.

 

[hamlet]

I've considered it. But the glass simply doesn't compare to the Nikon.

Yeah...The Tamron's got lower CA, and slightly higher sharpness than the Nikon zoom...and the Tamron has less light fall-off. Oh, and a bit less distortion.

Here's a screen capture I just made...

View attachment 59876

Do they offer a read as to how they came up with those numbers? Perhaps raws compared back-to-back?

 

[astroNikon]

Do they offer a read as to how they came up with those numbers? Perhaps raws compared back-to-back?

try reading their website
DxOMark Score - DxOMark

 

[ratssass]

I am in awe.....

 

[robbins.photo]

Hamlet,

This isn't the first thread where you've opened asking a question to which you supposedly wanted the answer too, then after getting the answer tried to claim your question was more technical thus the answers previously given were wrong, only to get additional answers and to finally finish with you coming in and lecturing all the people who's time you just wasted on why their answers were wrong.

Normally I'd mark this thing down to simple miscommunication. I did, indeed do exactly that the first time it happened. But this isn't the first time it's happened. So, I stand by my last recommendation. You want any more answers, google them. Do your own research. I have better things to do than to try to answer questions in earnest that are actually being asked in bad faith.

 

[hamlet]

Hamlet,

This isn't the first thread where you've opened asking a question to which you supposedly wanted the answer too, then after getting the answer tried to claim your question was more technical thus the answers previously given were wrong, only to get additional answers and to finally finish with you coming in and lecturing all the people who's time you just wasted on why their answers were wrong.

Normally I'd mark this thing down to simple miscommunication. I did, indeed do exactly that the first time it happened. But this isn't the first time it's happened. So, I stand by my last recommendation. You want any more answers, google them. Do your own research. I have better things to do than to try to answer questions in earnest that are actually being asked in bad faith.

My original question was derailed some time ago, we are talking about a whole different horse now. This is the problem with declarative statements, you don't actually have to backup your claims. Because i am the first one who will freely admit that i am wrong about something, if i indeed am. Me challenging you to back up what you said isn't being dismissive, its not mean spirited, it doesn't come from bad faith.

 

[ratssass]

no,its not bad.yes it is manageable without VR.that being said,how much effort do you want to put into managing it?

 

[hamlet]

Do they offer a read as to how they came up with those numbers? Perhaps raws compared back-to-back?

try reading their website
DxOMark Score - DxOMark

Thank you. I'll look into how they made their review. Most of the reviews i've read so far put the Nikon ahead, but that information could be wrong, or there could be variables i'm not aware of.

 

[hamlet]

no,its not bad.yes it is manageable without VR.that being said,how much effort do you want to put into managing it?

A lot. I'm not as good as Lew or some of you guy's by any means, but i do put in a lot of hours into photography.

 

[robbins.photo]

Hamlet,

This isn't the first thread where you've opened asking a question to which you supposedly wanted the answer too, then after getting the answer tried to claim your question was more technical thus the answers previously given were wrong, only to get additional answers and to finally finish with you coming in and lecturing all the people who's time you just wasted on why their answers were wrong.

Normally I'd mark this thing down to simple miscommunication. I did, indeed do exactly that the first time it happened. But this isn't the first time it's happened. So, I stand by my last recommendation. You want any more answers, google them. Do your own research. I have better things to do than to try to answer questions in earnest that are actually being asked in bad faith.

My original question was derailed some time ago, we are talking about a whole different horse now. This is the problem with declarative statements, you don't actually have to backup your claims. Because i am the first one who will freely admit that i am wrong about something, if i indeed am. Me challenging you to back up what you said isn't being dismissive, its not mean spirited, it doesn't come from bad faith.

One, I haven't made any claims.

Two, all I have done is try to answer your questions in good faith. The original question posed appeared to be someone asking for help on how to deal with camera shake. I gave the information I thought was asked for, no declaritive statement whatsoever invovled. Then as is usual in one of your threads, you went off on another tangent, then another, and were finally at the point where you do your "reveal" and impress us all on how you knew the answer to your own question all along and were just a bunch of dunderheads.

Sorry, not interested. Fell for it once on a previous thread but not again. Find it laughably childish that you would waste peoples time like this, no idea who you think your impressing, but hey, if it floats your boat. Hopefully others will figure it out soon enough as well and stop feeding your obvious need for attention.

In the meantime, I'm done. Ciao.

 

[ratssass]

I really think that the bulk of responses to your OP was about technique.There are many tools at your disposal to overcome a blurred image due to a shaky hand..VR is just one of them.The right side of my body shakes....I don't use VR.In fact,if you use a tri-pod,it's recommended to disable VR..