|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 118
|
![]()
I'm contemplating a new camera next year. Either a D3000, D5000, or the new D3100. Leaning towards the D3100 .
For a lens, I'm looking at the 55-200 VR because of the discount to the 18-200 VR. I just loved the 18-200 VR that I had several years ago, but it's considerably more money. Has anyone purchased the Nikon 55-200 VR and wished they bought the 18-200 VR instead ? |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
|
![]()
This isn't a question about lenses, but shooting styles. ISTM that other people's experience on this question won't get you any closer to a reasonable decision for you. If your approach is best suited to a super zoom, the 55-200 (a nice lens in its own right, and a really good bargain, BTW) is just not going to get you there.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
|
![]() Quote:
if you like a one lens solution if you like convenience if you want to be always ready for a shot you wont go wrong with the 18-200 i am still yet to see the poor quality some speak of with this lens and i bought two of them. FWIW slr gear and photozone both claimed the autofocus speed on the 55-200 to be slow and thats the main reason i ran from pentax. Dave T&T Last edited by dafiryde; Dec 4, 2010 at 5:05 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 118
|
![]()
Thanks everyone. Purchased the 55-200 VR .
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 382
|
![]()
Don't do it! ... Just kidding.
![]() Congratulations. Hopefully you have had time to use it over the past couple week. I have the 18-55 and 55-200, and while I am looking to replace the 18-55 (worn out and repaired once), definately keeping the 55-200. It is a great lens. While might be tempted by the 70-300, not at all tempted by the 18-200 or the recently introduced 55-300. While most of my photos are on the short end, I like the performance, size and convenience of the 55-200 so much for extended telephoto beyond 200, I may create a void and skip to the 300 f4 prime - but probably 2 lens purchases away. Let us know what you think. Post some pics. Last edited by tizeye; Dec 31, 2010 at 8:26 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|