How good is Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G lens

[akk123bcdk]

How good is this lens Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G lens. Nikon launched it last month I was consider buying a zooming lens can any one suggest me whether this one is good or not.

 

[ann]

i am not sure it is available on the open market yet.

They, meaning nikon, have several new lenses coming out this fall and i have requested my vendor let me know when they arrive so I can test them .If i remember correctly this may be in that group

 

[Infidel]

I had a similar question a couple of weeks ago: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...n-55-300-f-4-5-5-6-vs-70-300-f-4-5-5-6-a.html

Also, it looks like B&H has it available now: Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Zoom Lens 2197 - B&H

To directly address your question, it depends on what you expect out of the lens and what your budget is.

 

[shaunly]

I believe someone did a quick test over at DPreview.com forum.
Comparing 28-300mm, 18-200mm, 55-300mm, 70-300mm: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Seems like a very good lens. Comparable to the 70-300mm VR which is great as well.

 

[akk123bcdk]

I believe someone did a quick test over at DPreview.com forum.
Comparing 28-300mm, 18-200mm, 55-300mm, 70-300mm: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Seems like a very good lens. Comparable to the 70-300mm VR which is great as well.

K thanx I will look in to it.

I had a similar question a couple of weeks ago: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...n-55-300-f-4-5-5-6-vs-70-300-f-4-5-5-6-a.html

To directly address your question, it depends on what you expect out of the lens and what your budget is.

My budget is around $500 and I am comparing between Nikon 55-200mm and Nikon 55-300mm

 

[shaunly]

I believe someone did a quick test over at DPreview.com forum.
Comparing 28-300mm, 18-200mm, 55-300mm, 70-300mm: Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Seems like a very good lens. Comparable to the 70-300mm VR which is great as well.

K thanx I will look in to it.

I had a similar question a couple of weeks ago: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...n-55-300-f-4-5-5-6-vs-70-300-f-4-5-5-6-a.html

To directly address your question, it depends on what you expect out of the lens and what your budget is.

My budget is around $500 and I am comparing between Nikon 55-200mm and Nikon 55-300mm

the choice is obvious if you're deciding between these two. Why would you want less reach for not much of a price different.

 

[Destin]

You could also consider a used sigma 70-200 2.8 on ebay for a few more dollars, I see them go for ~550-600

 

[Infidel]

My budget is around $500 and I am comparing between Nikon 55-200mm and Nikon 55-300mm

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Given your stated budget and the 50% greater reach of the 55-300mm, I might suggest that the 70-300mm could still be a contender (B&H sells the new USA version for $519.95, refurbished for $399.95) but that's up to you.

the choice is obvious if you're deciding between these two. Why would you want less reach for not much of a price different.

Right now the 55-200mm sells for $219 (new, USA version w/ full Nikon warranty) and the 55-300mm sells for $389 (whoo! $10 price drop!). In percentage terms, that's a considerable difference, which only gets larger if you consider that there are refurbished 55-200mm lenses available for even less ($144.95, at time of this post...used is even cheaper). All prices from B&H website...too lazy to post up links right now.

 

[valt3r]

Link deleted.

 

[snowbear]

(spam)

Spam, reported