Nikon 24-70 2.8 vr vs non vr

seochris • Regular Member • Posts: 189

Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

Jul 9, 2018

Thinking about getting one of these lenses but not sure which one.  I do like the idea of VR but I have the 85mm 1.8 with no VR and I need to take more care getting sharp images so I think the VR version would be easier to use.

The non VR version is a little cheaper so that is a factor but what about the IQ?  I have the 70.200 VRII and love it.  Will the 24-70 be similar in terms of sharpness or what?

Any views?

Nikon D750 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR +3 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

2

The G version is extremely sharp in the very center, not as much on the edges.   The VR version is better farther from the center - and has VR.  I have both, though I've not used the G version since it developed zoom grind on a trip.  I notice that Thom Hogan just non-recommended it for the D850, mentioning that there were now better alternatives out there.

I never had any complaints about my G version, used on D300, D700, D800e and D810.   I do like my VR version as much, though I am less happy about the larger filter and lens cap size as they are no longer interchangeable with the other two lenses that typically get packed with it.

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D800E +45 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

2

I own and have used the 24-70 2.8 G a bunch but don't have experience shooting the newer VR version. The 24-70 2.8 G has always served me well (fast & accurate AF; extremely versatile) but to answer your question about how it compares in absolute terms with the 70-200 2.8 VR 2 (which I also own), it's no contest, I think the 70-200 2.8 VR 2 is a much better lens, period. I suppose a 24-70 class zoom is more difficult to design compared with a 70-200 2.8 class zoom though so that's to be expected.

Nikon D70s Nikon D800E Nikon D700 Nikon D300 Nikon D4 +44 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

3

sharp in the centre - G

quite sharp all over - VR

sharpest at 50mm only - Sigma Art

cheapest - Tamron VC

cheapish and tweakable - Tamron G2

best iq:dollar, usability issues - Tokina

mbecke • Senior Member • Posts: 1,202

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

3

Nikon kind of screwed the pooch with this alleged upgrade.   I have evaluated the two Nikon 24-70 lenses and find that the older one is generally sharper across the entire lens.   Yes, there are a couple of exceptions (i.e., focal length, f-stop) but the older lens is generally sharper -- and even into the corners!   Unless you need VR, get the older lens; cheaper too.   I don't know what happened with this lens revision.   It did not go well.  Also, see dxo's evaluation of the two lenses.   They, too, prefer the older version.   And I completely concur with the dxo evaluation.   It is accurate.

If you want to upgrade a zoom, look to the Nikon 70-200.   The new FL is a little sharper than the older VR II; at least from f2.8 to about f4.   At f4+, the VR II and the FL are just about the same.   But if you regularly shoot that zoom wide open, the FL is the way to go.   Also, I understand that the FL is not plagued by focus breathing.   As I usually shoot mine outdoors, and not at or near f2.8, my VR II is perfectly fine and I have no intentions whatsoever of upgrading.   Focus breathing is not a major issue to me.

(unknown member) • Senior Member • Posts: 3,206

Consider your usage

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

5

I'm of the opinion that a careful evaluation of uses is in order.  And keep in mind that I'm discussing only VR vs non VR here.

For instance, almost all of my photography tends to be in bright sunlight.  That translates most of the time into high shutter speeds at the apertures I use.  High Sutter speeds being a recommended time to turn of VR, I would personally not get much value for the extra money.

The ocasión for which I could best use VR, inside ancient cathedrals, castles, other old buildings and ruins, I'm generally either using a wide prime, a fast prime, or can find something against which I can grace the camera.  In any case, all our bodies have good higher ISO performance which for our personal situations tends to be good enough to make up for the difference.  YMMV

Your uses are likely different from my own so perhaps a similar evaluation would be useful.

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

2

Search the forum, there are quite a few similar discussions around.

To make is quick

• Non-VR is more optimized towards portraits, super sharp in the center, not so good midframe/corners
• VR is more optimized towards landscapes, a tad less sharp in the center but much more consistent sharpness across the whole frame

If you shoot more often portraits and no or very little landscapes and want to save some bucks, go with the older non-VR.

If you often shoot landscapes and once a while a portrait and you want almost prime quality at landscape appertures go with the VR version.
In my opinion the colors and the contrast is also better on the newer VR version. Additional the AF is faster, but I don't think you will notice easily.

Best take a look at some examples of the VR version and make your own conclusions.

For landscapes go here to my flicker stream. You could download the full-res versions and pixel peep as much as you want.

And some shots wide open:

70mm @2.8 very close

70mm @2.8 around 4-5 meters away

24mm @f2.8 1.5 meters away

I personally would always choose the VR version over the non-VR. I use this lens mostly for landscapes and city exploration and go with a 70-200 or primes for portrait work.

If you are still in doubt, just rent both and test them against each other in the scenarios you think you will use it most.

Nikon D5500 Nikon Z6 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +14 more

Lance B • Forum Pro • Posts: 34,102

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 9, 2018

1

I owned both the 24-70 f2.8G and the 24-70 f2.8E VR together for over 6 months and evaluated them back to back. I sold the 24-70 f2.8G. My reasons for keeping the VR: VR, overall IQ is simply gorgeous, better at the things that I required.

If you are using it as a general landscape and walkabout zoom, then I believe the VR version is the better lens, sharper across the frame and the IQ is simply beautiful - there is just something with the colors from this lens that really appeal. Nikon really pulled one of the bag with this lens and I guess why it is so expensive.

If you're needing the lens for close ups and portraits, then the older version may have a slight edge, but you don't always need super sharpness for portraits. However, the sharpness difference at portrait lengths is minimal at best anyway. Probably better to get a dedicated portrait lens for that purpose which is what I did.

At the end of the day, a zoom is a general purpose type lens, a lens that you want when you require something to fulfill a number of focal lengths hopefully with great IQ - with which the VR really does deliver. If you want ultimate IQ for a given focal length you may use a prime but more so when you want something faster for shallow DOF shots, ie faster than f2.8, but at f4 or slower, it'll give most primes a run for their money. For me, unless I am doing shallow DOF shots, I just don't bother with a prime. I look at a zoom of this type for use when travelling and as a general walk around lens which it fulfills superbly.

Nikon Z7 II Nikon Z9 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8E FL ED VR Nikon AF-S 105mm F1.4E ED +19 more

Toby43 • Contributing Member • Posts: 719

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

You can’t make a mistake. VR version if you can afford it and don’t mind the extra length and weight.

Ricoh GR II Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G +3 more

OP seochris • Regular Member • Posts: 189

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 10, 2018

Thanks for all the really helpful posts.....still thinking about it but now leaning towards the VR version.

As a supplementary questions what's the Tamron 24-70 G2 like compared with these lenses?

Nikon D750 Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm F4G ED VR +3 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 10, 2018

4

Photography Life has one of the better reviews of all three lenses, with some comparisons and lots of photos.  https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8e-vr/3  I had the older version of the 24-70. This particular review was what eventually convinced me not to buy the new version. Now, I have the Sigma 24-105mm ART (I sold the older Nikon 24-70); and like it much better. But, it's been out for a while; and, could use a Sigma upgrade.

-- hide signature --

truview

Sony RX100 Nikon D810 Sony a6300 Nikon 24mm F1.8G ED Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +15 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

1

Funny though this review from Nasim gave eventually the last push for me to buy the new version. Couldn't be happier with my decision.

Nikon D5500 Nikon Z6 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +14 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

I know what you're saying. I initially sort of felt that way, too. But, after reading it a couple of times, I ended up thinking he was really saying that "it's better than no upgrade". So, I decided I wasn't willing to drop that much chingqua down on a better than nothing lens. And, after years of using the original version as my primary walk-around lens, I really wanted the "upgrade" to be better than the original. I just didn't think it would be. On the other hand, I'm really finicky about sharpness; and was probably unrealistic in thinking a zoom lens could achieve more than the new version of the 24-70 does. For instance, right now, I'm thinking of replacing my Nikon 24mm 1.8 prime lens with the three times as expensive Zeiss 25mm Milvus prime; and, I'm virtually certain that I won't really notice the minute difference in sharpness. But, I know it's there; so, I believe I need to posses that last bit of sharpness (even if I can't really see it). I probably need mental health help. 

-- hide signature --

truview

Sony RX100 Nikon D810 Sony a6300 Nikon 24mm F1.8G ED Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +15 more

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 10, 2018

I don't know about the pixel-peeping technical differences between the lenses, but for me it doesn't matter. I also have the 85 1.8G and love it. BUT I have to be very careful with technique in a way I don't for my VR lenses. In fact, I get at least as many keepers hand-held with my 200-500. (I find that I am rarely taking pictures in great light.)

For me, especially for this range (snapshots, family pictures, etc.), the VR is more important than the extra bit of sharpness I might get from one lens or the other. It may  be less of an issue at 24mm but at 70mm I know I would get more keepers with VR. Camera shake has a much greater effect on quality than the differences between the maximum sharpness of the lenses, I bet.

Good luck!

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

Yes, in some areas the VR is better in other areas not so. It's different which is maybe the reason Nikon still produce and sell both versions. On the other side good to have the option.

Additionally it may make a difference if you upgrade or buy new. That is a very reasonable thought. The money you spent vs the improvements you get back.

When it comes to ultimate sharpness I think that most of the people looking at your pictures, may it be on a screen or printed, will never see those minute differences in sharpness nor did they care. Everybody is usually quite happy to see a picture with a pretty subject, nice light, and beautiful colors.

All these hunting for the best IQ is just to feed our little demon sitting inside our heads. Not that this is a bad thing, these nasty guys can be quite hungry. 

I also had the idea of the Zeiss Milvus 15mm in my mind for a while now. But since the lens does not take a 100mm filter holder (I really enjoy long exposures!), I didn't even try to rent one to see how awesome it is. It's good that such a technical requirement holds me back there.  

Nikon D5500 Nikon Z6 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR +14 more

rokoko • Senior Member • Posts: 2,433

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 13, 2018

On a 4K Sony TV, Nikon VR seemed sharp. On my laptop with D750, the VR is not impressive. For the last decade, my G was repaired twice for zoom mechanism. G2 is fine, especially its VC. Around f5.6 -f8 bit sharper than VR, but no at f2.8. G2 has focus shift on my current copy, but not so obvious on another one returned for minor coating defect. After tuning with Console I am happy so far. I would keep both for different purposes. May not consider the VR for now, VRii maybe.

Nikon Coolpix P1000 Nikon Z7 Sony a7 III Nikon Z fc Nikon D500

mbecke • Senior Member • Posts: 1,202

Re: Nikon 24-70 f2.8 VR or non VR? Which one should I get?

In reply to seochris • Jul 13, 2018

1

In making this decision, cost should probably be the overriding factor.  Especially, if you can get a good deal new or used on the prior version.   The old and new lenses are not that different from one another.   As I posted above, my observation is that the older lens is a little better anyways -- though no VR.   No way I would spend hundreds more for the latest version.   Some upgrades are worth it, some are not.

ARClark • Veteran Member • Posts: 4,740

Depends on your shooting needs/budget

In reply to seochris • Jul 13, 2018

1

seochris wrote:

Thinking about getting one of these lenses but not sure which one. I do like the idea of VR but I have the 85mm 1.8 with no VR and I need to take more care getting sharp images so I think the VR version would be easier to use.

The non VR version is a little cheaper so that is a factor but what about the IQ? I have the 70.200 VRII and love it. Will the 24-70 be similar in terms of sharpness or what?

Any views?

Like others have said, it depends on your needs (and your budget!). I had the G version and used it to shoot events, taking advantage of the center sharpness and f2.8 max aperture. But over time I gravitated to travel, nature and landscape photography and found the size, weight, lack of VR and edge softness to be liabilities. I replaced it with a Nikon 24-120 f/4 (the 24-70E VR version was not out yet) and have been pretty happy since. I’ve thought about the 24-70E because of the VR and reported better edge sharpness, but it’s even larger and heavier now, requires a larger filter and costs a fortune compared to other mid-range zoom options.

You just need to decide what is important for your shooting needs and keep in mind that there are no perfect mid-range zooms.  In addition to the two you’re considering, there are a number of lighter and less expensive Nikon and third party options with the lightest and least expensive being the  very serviceable Nikon 24-85 VR.

Alan

Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon Z9 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +14 more

Toby43 • Contributing Member • Posts: 719

Re: Depends on your shooting needs/budget

In reply to ARClark • Jul 16, 2018

The 24 70 G is an excellent portrait and street photography lens. I have used the VR version but didn’t think it worth the extra money for my needs.

Ricoh GR II Nikon D750 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G +3 more

mbecke • Senior Member • Posts: 1,202

Re: Depends on your shooting needs/budget

In reply to ARClark • Jul 16, 2018

1

The "reported" increased edge sharpness of the new 24-70 f2.8 VR is not accurate.  Except at 24mm, at f2.8, the older lens has a little better sharpness center to edge.   And for landscape use, one will likely not be shooting 24mm at f2.8 -- at least I don't.   Even at 24mm, by f4, the older lens is once again sharper center to edge.   Folks, sometimes an upgrade is not completely an upgrade (VR notwithstanding).   In this instance, the new lens received a major addition; VR.   However, its IQ decreased a little.   It is what it is; reporting otherwise does not change the facts and is misleading to prospective purchasers.   Purchase it for VR; don't purchase it if you are seeking increased IQ.

Keyboard shortcuts:

FForum MMy threads

Latest sample galleries

Latest in-depth reviews

Sure, the name is a mouthful but the latest camera from Blackmagic has some impressive features. Find out how Jordan thinks it compares to the latest mirrorless hybrid cameras.

The DJI Avata takes inspiration from the FPV and cinewhoop worlds, so we were excited to take it for a spin and see what it could do. What we discovered is a beginner-friendly, fun-to-fly, stunt-capable model that has the potential to shoot eye-catching video.

The Fujifilm X-H2S is the company's most ambitious APS-C camera, using a 26MP Stacked CMOS sensor to deliver the fastest shooting, best autofocus and most extensive video specs of any X-series camera yet. We tell you what you need to know in our full review.

You know all those beautiful manual focus M-Mount lenses? Wouldn't it be cool if they made autofocus versions? What if Techart released an updated version of its M to E-Mount AF adapter, and Chris Niccolls tested it? Anything is possible.

It's finally here! Chris and Jordan have been shooting with a production Fujifilm X-H2S for several weeks and their final review is here. Did Jordan just call this 'One of the best hybrid cameras ever made?' Watch to find out more.

Latest buying guides

What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

If you're looking for the perfect drone for yourself, or to gift someone special, we've gone through all of the options and selected our favorites.

Most modern cameras will shoot video to one degree or another, but these are the ones we’d look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We’ve chosen cameras that can take great photos and make it easy to get great looking video, rather than being the ones you’d choose as a committed videographer.

Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.

What is the difference between Nikon VR and non VR lenses?

Does Nikon 24 70 have VR?

What is the sweet spot for Nikon 24 70?

What is the Nikon 24 70 lens good for?