{"id":30991,"date":"2015-08-25T23:50:55","date_gmt":"2015-08-26T03:50:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/neilvn.com\/tangents\/?p=30991"},"modified":"2018-11-01T18:17:33","modified_gmt":"2018-11-01T22:17:33","slug":"ultra-wide-angle-lenses-with-stabilization-vibration-reduction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/neilvn.com\/tangents\/ultra-wide-angle-lenses-with-stabilization-vibration-reduction\/","title":{"rendered":"Ultra-wide angle lenses with stabilization \/ vibration reduction"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

Ultra-wide angle lenses with stabilization \/ vibration reduction<\/h1>\n

The need for stabilization in the ultra-wide angle lenses, might appear to be a slightly redundant feature. After all, camera shake is less of a problem the wider your focal length. On a 16-35mm lens, it would really seem to not be that important.<\/p>\n

Now, I sometimes\u00a0second-guess myself about what lenses I need. And what the gaps are in the lenses I have. The Nikon 14-24mm f\/2.8G<\/a>\u00a0(affiliate<\/em>) is a modern legend, and I love it. But with the bulbous front element, it can’t take filters. A polarizing filter and neutral density filter are staples for landscape photographers, or any photographer really that want more control over the elements in the frame. A polarizer cuts down on glare and reflections, and saturates the image. A neutral density filter allows for slower shutter speeds – river steams can become more ethereal if the movement of the water is allowed to smooth out with the use of an ND filter.<\/p>\n

With that, I bought the\u00a0Nikon 16-35mm f\/4G VR<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(affiliate<\/em>) specifically for the use with filters. At the time, the Vibration Reduction spec didn’t affect my decision at all. \u00a0 For Canon shooters, the\u00a0\u00a0Canon EF 16-35mm f\/4L IS<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0(affiliate<\/em>), is a spectacularly sharp ultra-wide lens. Read my\u00a0review: Canon EF 16-35mm f\/4L IS<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Then the VR \/ IS capability of this type of ultra-wide angle zoom, became essential.\u00a0With a recent elopement wedding in New York<\/a>, I wanted to play with the often-seen idea where your subjects are sharp, but the fast-moving people in Grand Central start to blur. This would need an extra-slow shutter speed. But tripods in Grand Central Station, will more than likely get the attention of security, and they will put a speedy stop to the photography. (You might remember this\u00a0behind the scenes video clip of the Profoto B2 review photo shoot<\/a>, where I was asked to move along.)<\/p>\n

Aside from\u00a0that consideration, a tripod would just be extra bulk while walking around Manhattan. I like working faster on a shoot like this.<\/p>\n

This is where the\u00a0VR \/ IS capability came in very handy. I asked the couple and their daughter to remain immobile for a while, and then I fired\u00a0off a few sequences.<\/p>\n

My camera settings for the image sat the top: \u00a01\/2 sec hand-held @ f\/8 @ 800 ISO<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Now, even with an ultra-wide angle lens at 16mm, that is a very slow shutter speed to hand-hold. But with the stabilization, I actually got a few frames where the three central people were sharp … and everyone around them that moved, blurred.<\/p>\n

With the central composition, and the little girl’s wide-armed gesture, your attention is drawn right to them … especially with the blur of people around them.<\/p>\n

The capability of this lens made this photograph possible. There might be\u00a0some photographers\u00a0cool enough to pull this shot off, hand-held with a non-stabilized lens, but I need the technology to drastically improve my chances of success here.<\/p>\n

So now I have reason to keep the 14-24mm f\/2.8 optic and<\/strong> the 16-35mm f\/4 VR too. There is duplication, but each lens has its own set of advantages.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Stabilized wide-angle zooms<\/h2>\n