Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 12, 2008, 9:19 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 96
Default

Hi
I am thinking aboute 55-200 with or without VR. 50-60$ diference is not big monney but is it realy worth or nonVR lens is good enough. I have plan to buy another lens (90 or 105mm prime) so 50-60$ can help me litle.
Thanks
emes is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 12, 2008, 9:26 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Vr could never hurt, especially at long focal lengths. It won't help you with moving subjects, but for a $50-60 difference, I'd probably get the VR version. It's also newer, and probably a slightly better performer.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2008, 10:32 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

rjseeney wrote:
Quote:
Vr could never hurt, especially at long focal lengths. It won't help you with moving subjects, but for a $50-60 difference, I'd probably get the VR version. It's also newer, and probably a slightly better performer.
Hello, I've had the 55-200VR for three months now and I am totally satisfied. Dream mariage with my D50. A friend has the non-VR unit (bought along with the 18-55 coming with D50 kit at the time) and the VR version gives much more vibrant and shrap pictures. Plus, the VR really works. When I shoot, it saves me 4 out of 5 pictures I take in low light condition. That is at 1/30 even 1/20. At 200mm it's a winner. See for yourself at http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/ if you wish. Be sure to check out the tags though, I sometimes shoot with a Sony R1 and a faithfull Fuji S5200.

Karmin
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 3:13 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 195
Default

If you aren't too fussy with your lenses and don't study all the tech specs and reviews by the self proclaimed experts which litter the internet, the 55-200mm VR isa great little buy. Every now and then some companies decide to treat the masses with a little taste of what could be. The 55-200mm VR is one of those treats. For a small cheapo it takes great pictures...
fewpics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 3:40 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 93
Default

Hello again, I become gradually annoyed with the "cheapo" word used to desribe all lenses that are not prime or over 00000000$. The 55-200 and 18-55 are lenses in their own right and people like me that buy them are no stupid nor near bankrupt. Please stop using the word "cheapo" when a lens is under 500$. It's much humiliating and don't reflect anything. I still shoot with my D50 and I'm much much pleased and satisfied with it. Won't go for for a D300 in the near future not even a D80 or D60. "Cheapo"...it makes me...oh I want say it. It's too much of a sunny day.
Karmin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 4:34 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 195
Default

Karmin,,

You have to remember that words like cheapo,, cheapie, el-cheapo - (all of those terms) are just terms that describe a price variance from the top end stuff... Sure I use them,, but maybe like you I cannot afford the expensive stuff. I don't earn staggering amounts of money,, but I spend most of my pocket money on photography accessories. I guess there are those who would look at my lineup and laugh when compared to theirs... If you feel the term "cheap-xxx" annoys or belittles you, I will limit my use of them but they are just words, and not aimed at "anyone"but more used to point out that NOT all the good things in life and with a "NIKON" name badge on it, need cost an arm and a leg...!!!

Two things...

1. I have also bought a few of these lenses,, AND love them...

2. I NEVER ran them down as useless pieces of junk and said they should never be bought.

It appears to me that many people can be puzzled by some of the cheaper lenses with VR in them and just like me, wonder if there is a reason not to buy them because they may not perform,, given that most VR lenses may cost several times more... I always try to find some info on them before parting with my money. I have bought a 55-200mm VR and just a few days ago, the 18-55mm VR,, both which cost far less than I could have ever dreamed but I like them both and if you don't get too fussy about lenses,, they are great value.

However, if you look closely at them, you will see why they cost so little. Technically speaking, the pictures are ok but are not outstanding,, some people may see the reason to say they are not that good at all, but not me... They are all plastic and have bits missing compared to other lenses, usually not as manually adjustable. Their specs may not be up there amongst the best,,and are more software controlled by the camera. My 18-55mm VRhas no lens hood and now thinking about it, I don't think you can even mount one on it (bayonet type) because there is no mount slot. Still, I am happy I bought it and it only cost just over half the price of the 55-200mm VR... Now that is cheap and no mistake about it...

My most expensive lens is a Sigma 70-200mm DG ADO HSM and cost me about three times the price of the 55-200mm VR, new. By some standards, that is a very modest budget... Now, I am more looking at longer focal length lenses, up to 500 or 600 mm and also some of the finer wide angle lenses and a better macro's than I have at present but one thing stands in my way - You got it - MONEY,, or the lack of it. I hate to admit it but I can't afford any of the above at the moment... Let it go on record here and now - If I can pay these cheaper prices and get good, usable lenses with VR built into them, then so be it, I'll gladly take it... As forowning aD300, I worked long and hard previous to Xmas '07 and didn't spend much during that time. I bought the D300 a month ago but had aspirations of actually going after a D3. I know two other guys who managed to get D3's and they really have their heads held high. To them, a D300 is a good second camera to take to the beach for fun. To me, it's everything...!!!

Cheapie - is not a term used to describe you or me. It is a word used to describe a good deal (in this case), one that doesn't cost an arm, a leg and a pint of blood...
fewpics is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 AM.