18-105 vr f.3.5-5.5 or 24-70 f2.8?????

[danny1985]

trying to sort my gear out to travel as light as poss. do i go for the range of the vr lens or the wider aperture of the f2.8?

[Barney]

Two completely different lenses suiting different requirements so it's impossible to advise other than the 24-70 is no light weight lens.

[danny1985]

true they are, but will the vr benifit me to handhold my camera as well as the wide aperture on the 2.8? (shutter speed wise, if you get what i mean) can only take 1 lens with me.

[surf_digby]

Is low light likely to be an issue where you're going? Are you likely to be needing wider than 24mm (I'm also thinking you're using a DX camera).

If I could only take one, I'd go for the 18-105, UNLESS I knew that I needed a faster shutter speed. VR will reduce camera shake, but won't allow you to use a faster shutter speed to capture something moving.

[GeoffR]

Given that you can only carry one lens I would take the 18-105, it is more versatile and you probably don't have much of an idea of your exact requirements. The VR will, according to those who know, make up most of the difference in shutter speeds, except for moving subjects. With anything less than an FX body I wouldn't be without a lens that short, being restricted to something with the angle of view of my XA would be something to avoid.

[danny1985]

obviously not mate, but if im say on a beach at night or low light, will the vr allow me to hand hold at a slower shutter to get a sharper image than opening the aperture to 2.8 on the 24-70. is that a bit clearer? just trying to work out what lens would benifit me more thats all.

think ive decided now anyways. guna opt with the 18-105 and take my 50mm 1.8 for low light stuff. its only small so wont be a problem to carry about.