Nikon 70 - 300 or 55 - 200?

rmh159 · May 24, 2009

I'm interested in getting a telephoto and wanted to get some opinions on these two lenses. The VR versions are about $250 apart (which isn't a big deal) but I'm wondering if the 300mm zoom is really worthwhile. For the most part I'd use it for portraits and street shooting. Any advice? Can anyone speak to the lenses performance? Also, I likely won't have an opportunity to try each lens out before purchasing.

farmerj · May 24, 2009

I'd seriously look at the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8.

I have the 70-300 and am not overly pleased with it. I just can't seem to get an image that works or really makes me happy.

300mm seems to me at least to have a lot of noise.

70-300mm AF-S VR Lens Review by Thom Hogan

AtlPikMan · May 24, 2009

What other lenses do you have? For portraits and street shots im nice pics from it not so sure that would be the best range. If i had to choose between the two, id go with the 70-300vr. Ive seen very nice images from it.

epp_b · May 24, 2009

If you are looking at the 55-200, forget the non-VR version. The VR version has many improvements other than VR; it's a very good lens, especially for the price.

The 70-300 is also good, but pretty expensive for what is a plain-old variable aperture 70-300 lens.

For portraits, you might consider a prime like an 85/1.8. If you don't mind manual focus (and possibly manual metering, depending on your camera), 105/2.8 Series E lenses can be had for about $100 on eBay.

I have the 70-300 and am not overly pleased with it. I just can't seem to get an image that works or really makes me happy.

300mm seems to me at least to have a lot of noise.

Uh... noise has nothing to do with the lens other than the indirect effect of having to adjust your metering for a long focal length if you're hand-holding, but, then, that's more of a problem with the thing behind the camera

Crazydad · May 24, 2009

Of the 2 listed, the 70-300VR is definitely the choice. I have it and I think it is a great lens. And at 200 it is a lot sharper than the 55-200. Thom Hogan (whose review is listed above) even has it in his basic FX and DX kits. What Does Thom Use?

It is a bit slow in lower light, but if you are shooting still subjects the VR does work well.

Can't really speak for the Tamron or Sigmas, but they do give f/2.8 for not much more money and they do get good reviews so you may want to check them out.

turnbeaugh5 · May 24, 2009

I would agree with farmerj. Although I don't have the Tamron lens, you will want the faster lens in the long run. I have the 55-200 lens and am very happy with it, but it is very slow.