Nikkor AF-S 55-200mm VR or AF 70-300mm NON VR

[Mitch D60]

Which should I get? The 70-300 is only $200 (Canada) and the 55-200mm with VR is $300. If I go for the 70-300mm I'll get a farther focal length, but what are the cons?

 

[PhotoXopher]

Get the 55-200 with VR without a doubt (in my opinion anyway). If you want the 70-300 save up and get the one with VR or the Sigma 18-250 OS HSM.

 

[Mitch D60]

doesn't the 70-300 have a longer zoom, sorry I'm new.

 

[PhotoXopher]

100mm more, but it's not as much of a difference as you might think. Unless you're shooting with a tripod all the time I'd highly recommend VR (Nikon) or OS (Sigma).

Besides that though, there are optics differences between them that make the 55-200 better than the non-VR 70-300 which is why I never bothered with it.

I don't think I've ever read a bad comment about the 55-200 VR but I've read lots of negative comments about the non VR 70-300.

I guess it really comes down to your needs and how you'll use it.

 

[Mitch D60]

thanks, I'll go for the 55-200

 

[PhotoXopher]

I think you'll be pleased, enjoy!