Landscape, architecture and travel photography; upgrade to VR 24-70mm?

[JimFromAZ]

For landscape, architecture and travel photograpy, I currently have the Nikon non-VR 24-70mm f/2.8 and use it with my D850. Do I really need a lens with focal lengths below 24mm or should I upgrade my 24-70mm to VR? I've been looking at the Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 but half that range is already covered by my 24-70mm, so I'm only adding 17-23mm to my current capabilities. Do I really need those focal lengths? I don't think I'm interested in really wide angle shots, but who knows. I know Nikon has the 12-24mm as well.

 

[Steve W]

I guess you’re the only one that understands your shooting needs. I wouldn’t think of the 17-35 mm in terms of the zoom range you’re adding but consider the change in field of view. 24mm has FOV of around 84 deg and 17 mm is around 104 deg.

 

[Graham Clark]

I'm using the 24-70mm f/2.8 VR on the D850, find the VR really useful for interior architecture shots when a tripod or Speedlight is not an option. Similarly I don't need very wide angles though I do have the Nikon 20mm f/1.8 G if I do need wider than 24mm.

 

[Calson]

The VR is not as sharp as the non-VR version of the 24-70mm lens. Suggest reviewing your images and see if they tend to cluster at 24mm which may indicate that a shorter focal length lens would be beneficial. For travel I use the Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5G lens with its 77mm filter size as it is light and compact and provides excellent image quality.

I bought the Sigma 24-105mm f/4 IS lens for travel but it is impossible to manually focus it and that is a very limiting for landscape photography.

 

[JimFromAZ]

I guess you’re the only one that understands your shooting needs. I wouldn’t think of the 17-35 mm in terms of the zoom range you’re adding but consider the change in field of view. 24mm has FOV of around 84 deg and 17 mm is around 104 deg.

Thanks, Steve! Thinking of the change in field of view makes sense. Thank you.

 

[JimFromAZ]

I'm using the 24-70mm f/2.8 VR on the D850, find the VR really useful for interior architecture shots when a tripod or Speedlight is not an option. Similarly I don't need very wide angles though I do have the Nikon 20mm f/1.8 G if I do need wider than 24mm.

Thanks, Graham! I do like the option of having lower light, slower exposure capability, especially if I don't have access to a tripod.

 

[JimFromAZ]

The VR is not as sharp as the non-VR version of the 24-70mm lens. Suggest reviewing your images and see if they tend to cluster at 24mm which may indicate that a shorter focal length lens would be beneficial. For travel I use the Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5G lens with its 77mm filter size as it is light and compact and provides excellent image quality.

I bought the Sigma 24-105mm f/4 IS lens for travel but it is impossible to manually focus it and that is a very limiting for landscape photography.

Thanks, Calson. That's a good idea....see where most of my shots cluster....shorter end or longer end and decide accordingly.

 

[Steve W]

As Carlson suggests, a review of images and typical focal lengths helps decision making. Whilst the 24-70 is a great lens, this is the very reason I don’t own one. I shoot very little between 35 mm and 70 mm. To cover the times I do I carry the 50 f/1.8. Most of what I do is at 18-20 mm and 70+ mm. In terms of VR or non VR, I’d trade off slight difference in image quality to gave the VR. There are some many places now where tripods are banned or discouraged.

 

[ButlerKid]

For interiors, I couldn't be without my 14-24 and 24-70. No need of VR since interior shots are done on tripod. Travel photography with 24-70 doesn't neet VR unless you have a real problem holding the lens steady. For me, although it is not as sharp as the 24-70, the 24-120 mm is a better focal length for travel. I shoot a lot around 85mm...... YMMV.......

 

[JimFromAZ]

As Carlson suggests, a review of images and typical focal lengths helps decision making. Whilst the 24-70 is a great lens, this is the very reason I don’t own one. I shoot very little between 35 mm and 70 mm. To cover the times I do I carry the 50 f/1.8. Most of what I do is at 18-20 mm and 70+ mm. In terms of VR or non VR, I’d trade off slight difference in image quality to gave the VR. There are some many places now where tripods are banned or discouraged.

All good points, Steve. Thanks!

 

[JimFromAZ]

For interiors, I couldn't be without my 14-24 and 24-70. No need of VR since interior shots are done on tripod. Travel photography with 24-70 doesn't neet VR unless you have a real problem holding the lens steady. For me, although it is not as sharp as the 24-70, the 24-120 mm is a better focal length for travel. I shoot a lot around 85mm...... YMMV.......

Thanks, Karen! I'm gathering from everybody's feedback that the right lens depends on the application and how it is used (tripod or not, for example). I may still need that 14-24 because my wife fabricates custom window coverings and she wants me to take pics for her website.

 

[ButlerKid]

Thanks, Karen! I'm gathering from everybody's feedback that the right lens depends on the application and how it is used (tripod or not, for example). I may still need that 14-24 because my wife fabricates custom window coverings and she wants me to take pics for her website.

Don't chase lenses. Instead go shoot! Then if you discover you can't get a photo you want, decide why, It may be that you need a different focal length or need to learn a new capture technique or processing skill.

 

[ohpleaseno]

Four years ago, I went to Spain with the intention of getting some great shots of cathedrals and large spaces. Took my D750 and 20/2.8. It was all I used the entire trip.