NIKON 55-200mm AF-S VR DX--is this any good?

[mc1979]

The reason I ask is I found out hubby got me this for Christmas..I don't have it yet to look it at, it's in his truck that is not here..anyways, Is this any good? I looked up on Amazon reviews and it got good ratings. He only paid $149. from Walmart.com. You know the old saying, "you get what you pay for"...
If it's not really any better than my kit lens then I will return it. That's why he went ahead and told me so that I could if it wasn't good enough.

I have the kit lens for my D3000, which I never use any more, along with the 50mm 1.8, but I'm also getting kind of tired of it as well.

Is this a good lens for the money for portraits? Or should I just go ahead and spend extra?

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Have to say, when you say you are tired of your 18-55 and 50mm lens. What exactly do you mean?

They are both lenses capable of producing brilliant images, if the photos you are producing are not as good as you wish them to be. I'm afraid to say it is more likely 'user error' than the error of the camera or lenses you are using. I just thought I would make this point.

 

[kundalini]

I don't trust Amazon for photography equipment reviews. Have a look at these also.

55-200mm AF-S DX and DX VR Lens Review by Thom Hogan

Nikkor AF-S 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED DX VR - Review / Test Report

FM Reviews - Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED DX VR AF-S



However, from my experience, it is a decent consumer grade lens capable of very nice images.

 

[mc1979]

Josh, I'm happy with the quality of my 50mm, takes great pics, but i guess because it's fixed is what I mean, I want to try a little more flexibility. And yes this is a difference to me between the quality of my images with the 50mm and the kit lens...

 

[thierry]

Check out Amazon, 400+ reviews and it still has 4.5 out of 5 stars. People love this lens. I always refer it to people, it is very sharp for the low cost. It has fast focusing and is very lightweight. I have also got great bokeh with this lens so it is good for portraits. Amazon has it right now for $149 New and FREE one day shipping before December 31, 2011.
Check it out here: Amazon.com: Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR [Vibration Reduction] Nikkor Zoom Lens: Camera & Photo

 

[jolieteddie]

I have had the 55-200 since I bought my D60 over three years ago. I have captured some great images with it and it never disappoints. I sometimes think about upgrading to a more expensive telephoto zoom, but then I review what I've done with it and recall that it is a lightweight lens that is easy to carry around. My vote is that for the $250 +/- that it costs you won't find a better lens. It is not as rugged as more expensive lenses, but it has held up just fine for the 3+ years that I've lugged it around. Also, I've been tempted by the good reviews for the 55-300 version, but what keeps me back is that the front element on that lens rotates when you focus and zoom. The 55-200 does not. That is important to know when you a circular polarizer filter which I do quite often. So I pass on that one.

 

[prakhardeep]

Check out the 18-105. It beats 18-55 hands down and will give you some range to work with.

Keep 55-200 only if you plan to use that much FL else 18-105 is a great buy.

 

[Dillard]

Its an great, inexpensive lens. Granted, there are better out there with much larger price tags, its a great all around lens. The only issue with it that i know of is its lightweight. Being to lightweight, its not quite as durable. Just be careful and never force anything. (My brother snapped a mounting bracket a few years back on one due to its mostly plastic mounts and body). Buts its a great buy for the money!

 

[nickzou]

I've heard that the VR version is better than the 70-300mm VR II full frame lens. Haven't tried it yet or anything though.

 

[9ballprodigy]

Check out the 18-105. It beats 18-55 hands down and will give you some range to work with.

Keep 55-200 only if you plan to use that much FL else 18-105 is a great buy.

i have both and while you do get more range with the 18-105, the barrel distortion is really noticeable compared to to the 18-55 (which also has some, but not as much). now, if you do a lot of post production with your images before you let anyone see them, then it's ok because you can just correct it, but if you take your sd card straight to costco for prints, then you might want to reconsider. especially if you take a lot of landscape/horizon shots or architectural shots.

as for the 55-300 vs. the 70-300, the main reason you would get the 70-300 is because of the faster focusing motor. 55-300 isn't that great for sharp shots when the subject is moving fast. however, if you are using the 55-300 for wild life (and still ones at that), then it's all good. save yourself the 250 bucks and get some extra range to boot.

 

[wolfdale13]

55-200mm VR i think is enough, but if you have more money, 55-300mm VR 2nd maybe best choice

 

[PapaMatt]

The 55-200 vr is a Ok lens. The 50mm 1.8 is also a great lens for the price, and 18-55 is a prety good lens.
I like faster in zooms, 2.8 a Sigma 50-150 a or Tokina 50-135 both 2.8 are nice to have, give you some reach and room to breath, just my 2 cents