Why No VR in Normal Primes?

[Frank Petronio]

Just wondering why we don't see the manufacturers add VR to their uber 1.4 lenses? Imagine if a Noctilux had VR and you could use it on a D700 -- you could probably shoot comfortably on a full-moon night with a stop or two to spare....

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

This is why I ended up with a Pentax DSLR...shake reduction is in the body, and is highly effective with old lenses. I shoot a screwmount SMC Takumar 50/1.4 all the time...it's great for gloomy woods or night interiors.

 

[rolleistef]

maybe the system is just too big to put inside a 6 or 7 element lens?

 

[user237428934]

If there was really a market segment for that, I bet Nikon or Canon or Sigma would offer this. The demand for that is just not big enough.

 

[rover]

This is why I ended up with a Pentax DSLR...shake reduction is in the body, and is highly effective with old lenses. I shoot a screwmount SMC Takumar 50/1.4 all the time...it's great for gloomy woods or night interiors.

Me too.


Try Sony, Pentax, Olympus...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Less need than with slow zooms? More difficulty in maintaining image quality with fast lenses? Bigger intermal elenents to move? Adds too much bulk to a relatively slim lens?

Dunno, but there are some ideas that occur to me.

Cheers,

R.

 

[snip]

This is why I ended up with a Pentax DSLR...shake reduction is in the body, and is highly effective with old lenses. I shoot a screwmount SMC Takumar 50/1.4 all the time...it's great for gloomy woods or night interiors.

Yeah, as soon as Pentax makes a FF DSLR I am throwing my Canon gear in the river.. Well not really I will sell it to buy a Pentax body 🙂

//Jan

 

[kshapero]

This is why I ended up with a Pentax DSLR...shake reduction is in the body, and is highly effective with old lenses. I shoot a screwmount SMC Takumar 50/1.4 all the time...it's great for gloomy woods or night interiors.

I wonder how slow of a shutter speed you can shoot at?

 

[ruby.monkey]

I wonder how slow of a shutter speed you can shoot at?

K100D, kit lens at 55mm, 1/8s:


This, if I remember correctly, was 1/6s:

I'd expect clean shots with my 300/4 SMC-M at 1/60s freehand, and 1/30s braced hand-held; and would happily shoot at 1/4s with a 50mm.

 

[pvdhaar]

I don't think it's a size/weight thing entirely. The Nikon and Canon 18-55/5.6 kit lenses with VR/IS show that it can be done at a minimum size/weight penalty.

 

[titrisol]

The Noctilux is a quite old design, adding VR to it would make it 3x more expnsive (it is Leica = overpriced)

With the SMC-M 1.7/50mm and the K100D (from my dad-in-law) I made some trial shots at 1/4 and 1/2 hand held and they turned out fine.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I don't think it's a size/weight thing entirely. The Nikon and Canon 18-55/5.6 kit lenses with VR/IS show that it can be done at a minimum size/weight penalty.

Dear Peter,

Yes, but I suspect -- I don't know -- that the VR elements in those lenses are quite tiny and therefore easier to move. Also, the mount-to-glass ratio is much smaller in (say) a 50/1.4 than in a zoom.

And, as I said earlier, it may well be much harder to maintain image quality in a faster lens that has higher image quality to begin with.

But I could easily be wrong. Maybe it is just demand.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[user237428934]

I don't think it's a size/weight thing entirely. The Nikon and Canon 18-55/5.6 kit lenses with VR/IS show that it can be done at a minimum size/weight penalty.

But those lenses are already smaller/lighter because they are for crop-sensors only.

 

[johnastovall]

I shoot comfortably now hand held by moon light with my Canon 5D and Canon 50/1.0 lens and see no need for any sort of VR.

Color by Moonlight in the style of Niépce.

Nor do I see it needed for my Noctilux either. Just a higher ISO for next digital m body.

 

[M. Valdemar]

Well, if you like totally out of focus photos "in the style of Niépce", then I guess you don't need VR, champ.

$8000 worth of camera and lens for a nice blurry box camera image.

I shoot comfortably now hand held by moon light with my Canon 5D and Canon 50/1.0 lens and see no need for any sort of VR.

Color by Moonlight in the style of Niépce.

Do you need a license for "light hunting"?

Nor do I see it needed for my Noctilux either. Just a higher ISO for next digital m body.

 

[johnastovall]

It's about light not sharp. Think Monet.

But it can get sharp wide open...

 

[cmedin]

This is why I ended up with a Pentax DSLR...shake reduction is in the body, and is highly effective with old lenses. I shoot a screwmount SMC Takumar 50/1.4 all the time...it's great for gloomy woods or night interiors.

Yeah, with SR and a fast lens (I use the Sigma 30/1.4) you can shoot in available light in most any situation. 🙂

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I had the Sigma 30/1.4 when I was using a Canon...I really liked it. I've occasionally longed for the Pentax version...

 

[kshapero]

Why do you think Canon and Nikon do not put VR in their bodies like the other guys. Is in body VR inferior?

 

[Al Kaplan]

It does nothing to help with subject movement. With practice you can learn to shoot at some pretty slow speeds. Lean against a wall or tree. Keep your feet half a meter apart. Tuck your elbows in against your body. Practice moving the tip of your arched index finger straigt up and down on the release button while nothing else in your hand moves. Go to a drugstore with an automatic blood pressure machine and practice breathing techniques, calming yourself, and see just how low you can get your blood pressure and pulse. Take a course in pistol shooting. These will all work with any lens, any camera, even with dead batteries...LOL I sure hope that Leica doesn't decide to turn M lenses into oversized monsters full of iffy electronics.