Image Stabilized Primes Rant

AlexanderB · Nov 21, 2012

When will Nikon start producing image stabilized normal/wideangle primes? Starting getting envy that new Canon 35 f/2. Am I missing something something?

JSER · Nov 21, 2012

Yes, why the need for IS on a wide angle?

Just because Canon sells one for the must haves I have never used IS on WA

Trever1t · Nov 21, 2012

To shoot in lower light. I wish my 24-70 had VR....people balk but I get good use from VR on my longer lens.

tirediron · Nov 21, 2012

ALL Nikon lenses are available with stabilization.

KenC · Nov 21, 2012

The need for IS (VR) comes from subject magnification, so if you work close to the subject with a wide-angle you are just as likely to get softness from camera movement as you are with a normal or telephoto at a longer distance, but with the same magnification. In any case, a 35 produces greater magnification on a crop body, so you don't even need to be that close.

AlexanderB · Nov 21, 2012

JSER said:
Yes, why the need for IS on a wide angle?

Just because Canon sells one for the must haves I have never used IS on WA

Actually they have 24, 28 and 35 mm stabilized lenses. Somehow Canon customers need them but Nikon's not? Why I need them? I'd used such lens while backpack travelling to another city and night architecture shots. I travel light and don't like the idea I need carrying a tripod. I think stabilization will add some IQ without additional effort. More light = more IQ.

shadowlands · Nov 21, 2012

I don't find I need it. I needed it on my former F3.5-5.6 lenses, but on my former primes or current f2.8's... don't need it...

orb9220 · Nov 21, 2012

Well as mention VR or IS is less useful for shorter focal lengths. But still can be a boon giving you another stop or two of useable shutter speed for static type compositions. But won't help with any movement in the frame. And would welcome it for my static type shots but not at adding $100-$200 to the price of the lens will pass.
.

AlexanderB · Nov 21, 2012

orb9220 said:
Well as mention VR or IS is less useful for shorter focal lengths. But still can be a boon giving you another stop or two of useable shutter speed for static type compositions. But won't help with any movement in the frame. And would welcome it for my static type shots but not at adding $100-$200 to the price of the lens will pass.
.

I cannot afford to carry tripod not for $100, not any other amount of money saved. It will spoil any travel. But having the choice is always good IMO.

fjrabon · Nov 21, 2012

and here I am complaining that it's hard to find a good lens without the added and unnecessary cost, bulk and weight of VR these days.

what shutter speeds are you shooting with a wide angle that you need IS for?

I find I can shoot a 20mm as low as 1/10 sec if I'm being careful, stand properly, practice good breathing technique, squeeze the shutter release instead of pressing it and use MuP shutter activation. A grip helps a LOT too.

Anything slower than 1/10 and VR will often cause as many problems as it solves, at least in my experience.

orb9220 · Nov 21, 2012

As mentioned by fjrabon technique and practice will maximize handholding shots and up the keeper rate. And to AlexanderB I wasn't suggesting a tripod. Just pointing out the pitfalls of including VR in a wide or general range zoom or prime. Some will gladly deal with the extra cost,weight and bulk of a VR version. Others will fine tune their technique and/or use a tripod or flash.

Each their own and wasn't dinging one way or other way as right way. Just pointing out some of the plus'es and minus'es!
.

Derrel · Nov 21, 2012

AlexanderB said:
When will Nikon start producing image stabilized normal/wideangle primes? Starting getting envy that new Canon 35 f/2. Am I missing something something?

What you are missing is all the sub-par lenses Canon has been building these past three decades...

MLeeK · Nov 21, 2012

It's nearly useless at those widths. To avoid SHAKE issues you'd have to be above about 1/50 shutter speed. It's not going to cancel out MOTION and that's mostly what you are looking at when you're hoping for VR/IS at that range. Now for video? It might just happen.

tirediron · Nov 21, 2012

MLeeK said:
It's nearly useless at those widths. To avoid SHAKE issues you'd have to be above about 1/50 shutter speed. It's not going to cancel out MOTION and that's mostly what you are looking at when you're hoping for VR/IS at that range. Now for video? It might just happen.

Yep... I've got it on my 16-35, and still haven't figured out why it's there...

Overread · Nov 21, 2012

*clears his throat*
Video

Is (I greatly suspect) the reason that we are seeing more and more implementation of IS in shorter focal length lenses. Whilst handholding wide angle lenses for stills photography isn't all that hard, with video you greatly gain from the use of IS when handholding (esp if you've not invested in a bulky stabilization setup for mobile video shooting).

I also suspect it greatly helps people who shoot with the LCD screen although I would argue that whilst there are some (most who move up from the point and shoot market who are not used to viewfinders) who shoot like this, the majority of people fast use the viewfinder with a heavier DSLR.

Finally, and importantly, IS is an "upgrade feature" which is something that can be easily advertised and is easily visible as a new feature to buyers. Indeed after investing in advertising and developing IS it makes sense to put it into as much as you can - especially in todays market where companies like Sony are now invading into the DSLR segment and features such as in-body IS become major selling points. To retain that market segment requires you to have lenses with IS in all of them (or most of them at least).