|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
Surely it is a fact that the Nikkor 18-200mm lens is the Princess of the Nikkor Lenses right now. However, it might save youfew bucks to take a really good look at the Nikkor 55-200mmVR lens. It is currently selling for around $(US) 230.00, about a third of the cost of the Nikkor18-200mmVR lens.
No, it is not really up to the IQ of the Nikkor 18-200mmVR lens, but surely it is a viable, and LESS expensive alternative that deserves your serious consideration. MT/Sarah |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 107
|
![]()
Not for me. They are two vastly different lenses because of the wide end. I need the 18mm. 55mm is too long for an all purpose lens.
And don't call me "Shirley".:lol: |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
Rodmeister-
I REALLY think that you have the wrong or INCORRECT impression. I am indeed suggesting a two lens combination. Firstly, I am suggestion the Nikkor 18-55mm lens., this is the primary lens for the D-40, sometimes called the "kit lens."Then to bolster that selection, I am suggesting that you add a SECOND lens, the Nikkor 55-200mmVR. With that TWO lens configuration you will effectively be able to reach from 18mm all the way out to 200mm. MT/Sarah |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 107
|
![]()
I see your point.You can save a ton of money. I just bought a D40x with the 18-55 and the price of the 18-200VR, around $800freaking dollars,makes me blanch. You can make a good argument that VR is more useful for the telephoto end, so the 55-200 makes sense.
The 18-200 saves you the trouble of lugging and switching lenses. This creates a real dilemma for me because, not only am I cheap, but lazy! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
|
![]()
rodmeister wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
And the IQ of the Nikkor 55-200VR is pretty darned good for a lens selling for around $(US) 225.00.
Here is a photo sample for you. MT/Sarah |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 45
|
![]()
The 55-200mm is a nice lens for a great price. The VR seems to work well. It's also very easy to carry around all day. Just got mine along with a D40. Here's a few of my first attempts.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
|
![]()
Nice shots, and yes I agree getting this lens is a chaper way to go if you already had a wide angle lens. Unless you have the 18-70mm you may in fact be better off going 70-300mm VR if you like telephoto lens. I guess is a big issue of people who just want to have one lens lugging around rather than changing it.
I believe we cant have best of everything, zooms down to what you willing to carry on a trip, and how sharp you want your pictures and at what budget you have. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
|
![]()
nexusworks-
The Nikkor 18-70mm lens (it used to be the kit lens for the D-70) at least in the USA is becoming more and more difficult to find in the shops. A combination composed of the Nikkor 18-70mm and the Nikkor 70-300mmVR lens is a nice set, but a somewhat heavy kit to carry about. Sarah Joyce |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 71
|
![]()
mtclimber wrote:
Quote:
The 18-200mm is a dream to many semi-pro or beginner lens, I wish Nikon never set the price too high in which they did, and quite a few, include myself cant afford. You probably wondering then why I am aiming 17-55mm as its bloody expensive. I think is my love that I like shooting wide angle and have always wanted really sharp pics for it. And yes thats even heavier than my current 70-300mm VR. Is likely I would sell off my 18-135mm if I find myself not needing it. the 55-200mm VR would definately be a right choice if you cant afford to spend on VR lenses. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|