|
| 
 enlarge | Brand: Nikon
Category: Photography
List Price: $249.99
Buy Refurbished: $139.95
You Save: $110.04 (44%)
New (21)
Avg. Customer Rating:  195 reviews
Media: Electronics
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
Fragile: No
Batteries Included: No
Optical Zoom: 3.6
Maximum Focal Length: 200
Minimum Focal Length: 55
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 3 x 2 x 2
MPN: 2166
Model: 2166
UPC: 018208021666
EAN: 0018208021666
Release Date: March 29, 2007
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 VR really works and the price can't be beat. June 7, 2007
37 out of 37 found this review helpful
I had the 55-200mm non VR version for about 5 months, sold it to essentally recover my cost, and bought the VR version as a replacement. The non VR version was very compact and light, and produced excellent photos, but the slightly larger VR version is so much more usable I don't miss the other lens at all. The VR works as advertised and allows me to take pictures at 3 times or more lower shutter speeds than the non VR version. While I would love the 18-200mm VR for the convenience, I will never be able to justify the $750 price, so my 18-55mm kit lens and this lens will likely cover my needs as long as I own my camera. I also seriously considered the 70-300mm VR, but couldn't accept twice the price for only 50% more reach. And at twice the length of the 55-200mm non VR version, it would be too awkward for me to carry around. I am very satisfied with this 55-200mm VR lens and if you are considering it, please give it a try. You will not be dissapointed.
 Good performance... But question yourself first. July 23, 2008
31 out of 33 found this review helpful
I bought this lens to complement the kit lens (18-55mm) that came with my Nikon D40. After about a month of using this lens, my fondness for it has depleted... let me explain:
The performance of this lens is quite surprising for its low cost. It's relatively sharp, and the colors are quite good. Obviously (since this is a cheap lens) the body of this lens is not rugged and up to pro standards, but average amateur photographers will probably not be disappointed by it. It is sturdier than the 18-55mm kit lens, but not A LOT sturdier. The bokeh (out-of-focus area rendering) that this lens produces is well controlled. It's un-distracting and smooth, but not "stunning."
At this point, you're probably thinking to yourself that this seems like a great lens for the price. It is... However, after only about a month of use, I have returned this lens, and bought the 70-200mm VR f/2.8 Nikkor. Why? Because I realized quite quickly that this lens (the 55-200mm VR) does not allow me to get many of the shots that I desire. The biggest issue with this lens is that the focus is very slow, and it tends to hunt a lot (meaning that it doesn't always get the focus on the first try). The other issue that *I HAVE* with this lens is its aperture. With a maximum aperture of f/5.6 at 200mm, it is quite difficult to get good shots on cloudy days, or indoors. This is the reason for the title of this review ("question yourself first").
Who are you as a photographer? Can you afford to take your time with 99% of your shots? Is most your photography of still life? Do you just want a lens that gives you more range, and don't care about the other details? If you answered yes to any of those questions, this lens might be the one for you. As I stated earlier, the performance is quite good for the price, and I personally have no major concerns with the optical quality.
If you answered "no" to the above questions, I advise you to reconsider your options before purchasing this lens. Do you need fast shutter speeds, fast focus, and the best of the best build quality for your photography? Then you may want to look into the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens instead.
Unfortunately, I didn't ask myself those questions before I made my purchase, and I was stuck with a lens that didn't satisfy the job. I missed too many shots due to slow focusing and slow shutter speeds, and that's why I bought the 70-200.
Now, the f/5.6 (versus f/2.8) aperture of this lens is a known limitation, so that is NOT why I gave it 4 stars out of 5. I gave it 4 stars because of the slow focusing, and usefulness (or lack thereof) of the VR (vibration reduction) system. So how about a direct comparison of this lens vs. the 70-200mm? Sure!
55-200mm f/4-5.6 VR AF-S Nikkor:
- Good optics. Good colors. Fair bokeh.
- Maximum f/5.6 aperture at 200mm (slow shutter speeds in poor light)
- Slow, slow, slow focus.. You'd expect better from an AF-S lens
- Not very useful VR system (it does sort-of work, and you will see it working, but it's not revolutionary)
- Average build quality. Roughly equivalent to the 18-55mm kit lens.
- Minimum Focus Distance: 3.6 ft. (1.1m).
- Price: approximately $200
70-200mm f/2.8 VR AF-S Nikkor:
- Extremely good optics. Beautiful colors. Beautiful bokeh.
- Maximum constant f/2.8 aperture through the zoom range (relatively usable shutter speeds in poor light)
- Insanely fast focus
- Excellent VR system. This lens is much, much heavier than the 55-200mm lens, yet I see LESS camera shake when using this one, because the VR system is much better.
- Amazing build quality. Solid as a rock, and heavy as a brick! (or maybe a few bricks...)
- Minimum Focus Distance: 5 ft. (1.5m). This is the only thing that I dislike about this lens.... I can't get as close to my subject as I can with the 55-200mm lens.
- Price: approximately $1650 (from a reputable dealer like B&H)
Concluding thoughts: Obviously, you get much greater quality, for a much higher price. Analyze yourself and decide if the extra quality is worth the high price for your photography. If you shoot action, or you just shoot everything (like me) the 70-200mm lens might be worth it (for me, it is). If you don't need lightning fast performance for your photography, then the 55-200mm lens should have sufficient quality to meet the majority of your needs.
I hope that this review has aided you in making a purchasing decision. If I was a foolish reviewer, I would have given this lens a rating of 1 out of 5 stars, because it's virtually useless to me now. However, I gave it a rating of 4 stars because that is what I feel it's worth in terms of the price to performance ratio (for an average shooter).
Good luck with your photography!
Light weight lens ideal for traveling May 15, 2007
29 out of 29 found this review helpful
This is a light weight lens, ideal for traveling.
This lens is quite sharp from 55mm to 105mm wide open. From 135mm to 200mm, you may need to step down or do some post-processing to sharpen the image a little. VR works as advertised. You general gain about 3 stops. For instance, you should be able to get reasonably sharp images at 1/15 sec at 55mm, and 1/30 sec at 200mm.
Vignetting (darker corners) is not noticable from 55mm to 105mm. Vignetting is very pronounced wide open from 135mm to 200mm. Again, stepping down one stop relieves the problem.
If you are looking for optical excellent telephoto zoom, you may want to consider 70-300mm VR. If you need a lens you can take with you without breaking your shoulder, this lens is a good choice.
The obvious next step for Nikon D40x owners... September 24, 2007
23 out of 23 found this review helpful
If you own a Nikon D40x with its stock autofocus zoom lens rated at 18-55 mm new digital style and equivalent to 26-83 mm old style, this is the obvious next step purchase. Rated at 55-200 mm new style and equivalent to 83-300 mm old style it's small, light and really does cut out camera shake to allow genuine "point & shoot" at its higher focal lengths, giving you a "tripod-less", perfectly matched combination of two autofocus Nikkor lenses covering a full 18-200 mm new style (26-300 mm old style). Just perfect... and, for the price, stunningly good value.
Great lens, great price, make sure you get the VR model August 18, 2007
21 out of 21 found this review helpful
My camera came with a 17-55mm kit lens and I was salivating over the idea of saving up and getting the 17-200mm lens. The quality of the kit lens itself became apparent when I took identical pictures with different lenses and the kit was clearly better. But that elusive 17-200mm- it cost 750 bucks (at least) IF you could find it in stock, and reports were that the quality was uneven- some individual lenses worked better than others. I don't have the option of trying out several lenses- I have to order online and get what I get. So when THIS baby came out, I tried it and loved it. Yes, you have to lug an extra lens around and swap it out, and if that's an issue for you then take your chances with the more expensive one. But for a fraction of the cost I expanded the range of my camera. Usually I'm in a situation where I'll probablly only need one or the other- the kit lens for indoors or parties, the telephoto for going to the zoo or camping or whatnot. My only warning: Earlier models of this typoe of lens don't have the vibration reduction. You might find the same focal range in a Nikor lens for less money, but it probably won't have "VR" attached to the name. This is a cery handy feature when shooting at the far end of the zoom scale without a tripod. I highly recommend making sure you get a lense with this feature. (Note: I'm not an expert, just a hobbyist who shoots a lot of pictures.)
|
|
|
2005-2007 Zone1electronics All rights reserved.
| |
