I'm seriously considering purchasing the 70-200mm VR, based on reviews and everyone's apparent love affair with how well this VR thing works handheld. I went to a local camera store recently to check one out in person, but they had sold it just before I arrived. They showed me the 28-70 VR (is that right?), but at that range I honestly couldn't tell much was happening. When I pressed the shutter halfway while deliberately holding it not as steady as I could, I did see the image in the frame jump just a little, but it seemed fairly unremarkable. I'm wondering now if it usually takes a little longer for the VR to "warm up" and kick into a more noticeable benefit? Or maybe its really just not very spectacular at that wider range. I would really hope to notice much more VR action on the expensive 70-200 version.
Christian, The 28-70 isn't a VR lens. VR lenses include the 200 f/2, 300 f/2.8, 200-400, 24-120, 70-200 and 80-400. With a VR lens you'll hear a noticeable whirring and clicking. There is a tiny time lag for it to take effect. Glenn
Christian, First, welcome to the Cafe. The 28-70 is one of Nikon's better lenses, but does not have VR. As for how VR operates, it is almost instantaneous. There is no warm up or start up time involved. As soon as you press the shutter half way, it comes on. With regard to the 70-200VR, it was the first pro quality lens that I bought and is absolutely top class. I've used mine for a wide variety of subjects, from flying birds, to flowers, and even for macro photography with the addition of the 500D close-up adapter. You won't go wrong with either of these lenses. Hope this helps.
Im sure it was the 24-120mm VR. I wasn't sure of the range when I posted the original message (why i had asked if that was right). But regardless, I found it quite unspectacular. I also heard no whirring or other sounds at all, though I did see the effect of the image jumping a little when it initialized and there is no doubt it became more stabalized. My question was really about any potential warm up period because I heard some talk of that. And also if the effect is more pronounced at closer ranges such as 200mm (or greater with a TC). I can only assume its more noticeable and beneficial the closer youre zooming in, because I honestly wouldnt pay the extra for what I saw in the 120mm.
You really don't see a lot while VR is doing it's magic. The image may jump around a tiny bit then settle, but that's about it. It will give you about 2 stops on your shutter speed though. I personally don't think it's a huge deal in a relatively slow lens like the 24-120, but it's a boon on the 70-200.
