Nikon 18-55 Non VR vs. VR lens

jmcc99_98

Hi, Newbie here to the DSLR world.

I am just about to buy my first DSLR - Nikon 3200.

It is being offered with a non VR lens. Im just wondering will this make a massive difference to me as a beginner - ie am I better looking around for a deal with a VR lens.

I will be using it to begin with mostly for shots of the kids, maybe some landscape and also taking some shots at running events. It will be used both indoor and outdoor.

I dont want to get a lens which because of poor results will put me off photography.

Echoes675

The VR in the lens would certainly help you in situations where you may be hand holding the camera or where there is some kind of action (kids and running would qualify here). These days VR can give you 2 maybe 3 stop of a difference and in these situations shutter speed is what you are after.

On the other hand, With the landscapes VR, imo, isn't something that is as valuable as it is with the above scenario (I switch off VR on any of my lenses when on a tripod).

My guess is that the lens being offered with the 3200 is a kit, therefore wouldn't have the fast aperture capabilities of the more expensive lenses where you are able to retain the higher shutter speeds you would be after for the faster situations.

I would suggest trying to find a kit with a VR lens. You will really notice the difference and as you become more knowledgeable and experienced with your photography, I think you would get further mileage out of the gear before you may decide to upgrade.

Wilburn

jmcc99_98 wrote: »

Hi, Newbie here to the DSLR world.

I am just about to buy my first DSLR - Nikon 3200.

It is being offered with a non VR lens. Im just wondering will this make a massive difference to me as a beginner - ie am I better looking around for a deal with a VR lens.

I will be using it to begin with mostly for shots of the kids, maybe some landscape and also taking some shots at running events. It will be used both indoor and outdoor.

I dont want to get a lens which because of poor results will put me off photography.

It also comes with a VR lens.Or at least it did as I have it.Is it the 18-55 lens?

pixbyjohn

Have a read here>>>>>
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/image-stabilization.htm

Wilburn

OP I would not pay much attention to Rockwell. Grain of salt required

pixbyjohn

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-55_3p5-5p6_vr_n15/4

Wilburn

i cannot open dpreview etc link it ends :rolleyes

pixbyjohn

Wilburn wrote: »

i cannot open dpreview etc link it ends :rolleyes

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_18-55_3p5-5p6_vr_n15/4
It opens for me ok

RUK

Don't waste your time with the stock 18-55. Even if it's free. Get a 50mm 1.8 and move up to a 18-55 2.8.

The stock lens isn't horrible but it's not a good lens to learn photography with. It's more for point and shoot type of work

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

OP, at those focal lenghts, the VR isn't going to make a huge amount of difference.

If I were you, I would just buy the body and then invest in a better lens than the stock. Just my 2 cents.