? about a coupla lenses i'm interested in

[jibber]

i found a Nikon AF-S DX 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR lens on Kijiji that's going for about $300 but i was hoping to get some insight/answers from someone before i buy it.

a. what would i need it for besides the zoom and is it even a good zoom lens?
b. what kind of photos is it perfect for capturing?

also i had a question about finding the perfect wide-angle lens by Nikon. here's a coupla photos that i stumbled upon and it seems to me that a wide-angle lens was used:

Canadian Pacific on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs141.snc4/36430_405377440946_600530946_4895838_2712451_n.jpg

i've been looking at the following Nikon lenses:

AF DX 10.5mm f/2.8G IF-ED - i like that it has a picture angle of 180 (diagonal)
AF-S DX 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED - might be a little pricy for me but way more affordable than the one below
or
AF-S DX 12-24mm f/4G IF-ED - too pricy for me but it's something i'd like to invest in if it's the better buy (as in quality/standard, better wide-angle lens and worth the price than the 2 mentioned above.

or if there are any other lenses by Sigma, Tokina or Tamron that'll be just as good... needs to fit on a D90.

anyone's insights/answers would be much appreciated.

- jibs

 

[tirediron]

$300 for a used 55-200? Way too much. Brand-new they go for $320 - 340 here in Canada. It's a decent, consumer grade zoom lens, generally the second lens kit lens available with the D40/50/60 and 3000/5000 bodies. The optics are good, not great, but definitely good, however the build quality is, IMO, lacking. What's it perfect for? Nothing? Everything? Somewhere in between I suspect. It's a useful focal-length range, but a bit slow for a lot of work (small maximum aperture).

The two images you linked to were indeed shot with super-wide lenses. The Nikon 10.5 fisheye is a very cool, but VERY specialized lens; I wouldn't recommend this until you're more sure of what sort of shooting you want to do, as I suspect it would likely languish in your bag once the novelty wore off.

The lens that I would recommend is the Tokina 11-16 2.8 - this is reputed to be almost as good as Nikon's 12-24 and 14-24 lenses and used tends to retail for somewhere in the mid $400 range.

 

[Bryce]

I have a DX 18-55 without the VR D40 kit lense I love it but can't use it because the plastic tabs broke that hold it in the camera.

I also have a DX 55-200 and I hate it. I realy get bad pictures with it and it is so slow I would miss getting a picture of a turtle crossing the road.

I just met a guy who has the DX 55-135 and it is nice and wide but he hates it and says it just don't keep up with him or the camera.

Having little expierience with these lenses and just the little I know about them I would never buy another one. Sluggish and poorly made from these three that I have seen. The only thing I believe they are good for is for use on a camera that needs them for the auto focus since cameras like mine have to have DX for autofocus. I use AF prime lenses manualy for standard pictures and a 70-300 for zoom and they are AF so when I get a better camera they will autofocus. For now I would just rather do manual than deal with the crappy pictures from my DX 55-200. As a matter of fact if you want it send me shipping money and it is yours.

 

[Bryce]

That lense brand new on amazon was $178. Just looked it up.

 

[adversus]

The AF-S DX 55-200 is ok, you can get it for about $200 now on sale at some places, running about $220 average.

I just replaced mine with a 70-300 and it's a ton better. Depends what you want though. I wanted more reach, so went with the 70-300 (it's also $600).

Punchline:
-Quality is OK, not stellar, but doesn't suck
-Light, but has that "cheap" feel due to all plastic parts/mounting ring
-Not very fast focusing
-Not very good in low light