Nikon 55-200 vs. Nikon 55-300

Started Nov 11, 2010 | Discussions thread
RussellG
Regular MemberPosts: 455Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon 55-200 vs. Nikon 55-300
In reply to jmbass, Nov 11, 2010

I have found the 55-300 to be as sharp as my old 70-300 VR lens. It's certainly lighter but well built for its class. It's a bit more solid than the 55-200 and with a metal mount.

Focus speed is about the same as the 55-200. It has VR II as opposed to VR I in the 55-200, but it seems to take just a tad longer to kick in when compared to the 55-200. I don't find this a problem however. It does a very good job at 300mm.

Images are nice and contrasty. I'm pleased with the colours and sharpness.

I would say this lens is perhaps a tad better than the 55-200 which is a good thing since the 55-200 is no slouch.

The bokeh is nice like the 55-200 so I will use it for portraits. I really liked the 55-200, but, for not much more size and weight, you get an extra 100mm with slightly better IQ.

If you need a bit more focusing performance, I'd go with the 70-300 VR.

I would say that if you like the 55-200 but want a bit more reach, then you'll probably enjoy this lens (and save a bit of money too).

-- hide signature --

Kind Regards,

Rusty

 RussellG's gear list:RussellG's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7100 Nikon D90 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow