Nikon VR Lenses

[RonH]

I use the 18-105VR on my camera and it is so easy to forget to switch off the anti-vibration. Is it harmful to the lens if if is left on? I realise that you should not switch off the camera when the lens is active though Nikon state that this is not harmful to the lens ... it just rattles until you restart.
Hope a beaut festive season was enjoyed by all.

Had another search ... looks as if its OK to leave it in VR. Anyone disagree?

[Colin Southern]

Hi Ron,

I can't speak with any authority about Nikon equipment, but it's not an issue with Canon IS gear, which is probably similar technology.

[Bill44]

Ron I have the same lens as well as the 70-300VR, the only thing you have to worry about, according to Nikon, is to make sure you turn the camera off before changing lenses. I have seen a few Nikon reps not bother to do this on quite a few occasions.

[RonH]

Thanks for thoughts.
I will forget about it so it will most likely be left on! The 70-300VR lens sounds wonderful ... next Christmas present for me maybe! Though my pennies may stretch to the 70-300 'manual' instead if its worth having given the greater chance of 'vibration'.

[Blazing fire]

Rented it once and results were very good for such a cheap lens. Perfect for daylight shooting as the small aperature does not limit you excessively. Out of focus redention is decent (in fact very good) too.

[Dave Humphries]

~ The 70-300VR lens sounds wonderful ... next Christmas present for me maybe!

Though my pennies may stretch to the 70-300 'manual' instead if its worth having given the greater chance of 'vibration'.

I would rather go without than buy a non-VR lens, especially as I am not a regular tripod user. I just know that every time I got a good shot ruined by camera shake, I'd regret not waiting/spending the extra.

Get a few 'relis' to club together and go the extra mile next Xmas

[Blazing fire]

I heard that the new VR lens is significantly better than the AF-S or ED version. Read up bythom's review here.

"Surprisingly, there's quite a range of optical performance in just those three models. I don't recommend the original G version, for instance, as its lack of ED glass means that it has significant chromatic aberration issues that are easily seen. You'll note that I thought the ED version was pretty decent when I first reviewed it (back in 2001), and it has continued to be a modestly priced telephoto option for Nikon DSLR users in the ensuing years. The primary complaints about the ED version were its tendency to hunt, slow focus, and the slow variable aperture (f/5.6 at 300mm can put you into shutter speeds that are challenging for hand holding, even in good light).

What everyone wanted was a version of the ED lens with VR and AF-S. That's almost what we got.

...

In almost every performance category, the new version is better than the ED version. The ED version was a decent performer; the new VR version is an excellent performer.
Drawbacks

• 67mm filters. Those of us who had 62mm sets now have to move on.
• Stiff. The zoom ring action isn't the silky smooth one everyone wants.
• Not a 300mm. Yes, it's usable at 300mm, but this is where this lens' performance is at its weakest in almost every respect.
• Slower than the 70-200mm. The difference between f/2.8 and f/5.6 at 200mm on a fast moving object in low light is noticeable by anyone.

Positives

• 70-200mm excellence. In this range there's almost nothing to fault the lens on optically, especially on an APS DSLR.
• VR and AF-S. That's what we missed in the original lens, and that's what Nikon has given us in the replacement.
• Fits anywhere. It'll fit nose down in even shallow bags, making it a "carry anywhere" telephoto zoom. "

Due to the significant optical performance between the VR and older versions, I only suggest getting the VR one.

The mechanical construction of the lens is generally good. However, the zoom is indeed not as silky smooth like my 17-35mm f/2.8. It is rather stiff but not something I'll fret over.

[RonH]

I have just had this reply from Nikon Europe about leaving the lens VR switched 'on'. Doesn't look as straight forward as I thought?

Thank you for contacting Nikon regarding your VR lens,

It is ok to leave the VR switched on as long as the camera is turned on, but we do recommend turning off your VR before you power off your camera. The reason for this is because the VR mechanism needs to reset itself back to its starting or neutral position each time it is turned off. If you turn the camera off first then the VR system is frozen where it was last used and then when you turn the camera on again the VR system goes back to its starting point where it should have been. This can cause problems with the VR system if it is continuously left on and the camera is powered off.

If you have any further queries regarding this matter, please click the link above to update your question.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Ron,

Hmmm, that seems a bit of a drag

Although thinking about it; I tend to go somewhere, switch the (D5000) camera on, then leave it on (all day, if necessary), just relying on it "auto-hibernating" after a few minutes to save battery between shots. I still get a day's worth of shooting out of a charge and there's always the spare battery if needed.

So I suppose I'd only need remember infrequently
I might try to get into the habit.

Cheers,

[Hans]

Thanks for that Ron, I knew that the VR mode on uses more power but assumed leaving it on would not be a problem. Having read the above, I might start turning it off. Haven't noticed any probs yet though. Thanks for raising the question (I'm using the 18-105mmVR too...not bad for a kit lens, hey?)

[RonH]

...(I'm using the 18-105mmVR too...not bad for a kit lens, hey?)

Yep, it seems to be a very good lens and compact enough to lug around as the primary lens. Bit of a nuisance having to try to remember to turn it off but I don't think it can be a major issue ... seems that others have used VR lenses 'switched on' over long periods without problems popping up. I think that Nikon are being super cautious which is OK.