55-200mm VR

M1M · Jan 17, 2008

Would it be a good secondary lens for me?? I have the 18-55 stock lens too.

landscapes and People are my main focus. I will be shooting a lot of cars come spring/summer.

After reading this I am convinced its a good buy.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm

Sideburns · Jan 17, 2008

Take anything Ken Rockwell says with a grain of salt.

M1M · Jan 17, 2008

Sideburns said:
Take anything Ken Rockwell says with a grain of salt.

Ok. Fine.

Care to add any thoughts?

M1M · Jan 17, 2008

I will add I know he goes over the top. But he is no fool right?

lol

Antithesis · Jan 17, 2008

I had the 55-200 non-VR for a while and it was pretty sharp (similar to the 18-55). My only issue with it was how slow it was, but with the VR it might be a pretty good lens. I see them used for about $175, so I don't see why it wouldn't be a good buy. I may get one soon enough just to have a telephoto until I can afford something faster. The build quality isn't going to be that good, but should be better than the 18-55.

Garbz · Jan 18, 2008

No he's a fool. A cheap bloggist with a hobby that unfortunately gets a lot of site hits. I mean he reviews products he has never even used let alone owns.

If you want opinions on lenses it's hard to be www.photozone.de Their new site layout sucks but http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Nik...-200mm-f4-56g-if-ed-dx-vr-review--test-report their reviews are spot on most of the time and have lots of hard data not subjective crap.

The 55-200mm is a good lens for the price based on that review. As noted above it's a little slow aperture wise but to get an f/2.8 zoom like this you are easily $1000 out of pocket.