70-300vr vs 55-200 interms of iq ?

[ferrai]

is it worth the extra $500 to top up for the 55-200vr speaking interms of iq

[Die Hard]

Originally Posted by ferrai is it worth the extra $500 to top up for the 55-200vr speaking interms of iq

Worth why not ? 70-300mm VR FX lens with ED glass. 55-200mmVR DX lens No ED glass. You can try it out then you will know why

[TonyOng]

i thought 55-200 got one ED glass?

[Die Hard]

Originally Posted by TonyOng i thought 55-200 got one ED glass?

Ooo.... My wrong yes 1 ED glass for the 55-200mmVR & the 70-300mmVR have got 2 ED glass & the weight of the 70-300 are 745g is much more heavy than the 55-200mmVR.

[TonyOng]

Originally Posted by Die Hard Ooo.... My wrong yes 1 ED glass for the 55-200mmVR & the 70-300mmVR have got 2 ED glass & the weight of the 70-300 are 745g is much more heavy than the 55-200mmVR.

true that 70-300 is heavier.

[YSLee]

Nope, not in that sense. But the 70-300 has an extra 100mm reach. If you need that, you'll need that, no running away from it with a cheaper and shorter lens.

[Numnumball]

The Nikon 70-300mm VR offers the best compromise of size, weight, price and iq among all Nikon's tele zooms. Note that this cover DX and FX, whereas 55-200 is only a DX lens

It's definitely better than 55-200 in terms of iq and on top of that it covers an extra 100mm.

Which is a perfect match with ur kit lens (which will cover u from 18-450mm) *becos of the cropping factor*

Just my $0.02 worth

Cheers

[YSLee]

Why does everyone insist that the 70-300 is better? It's not really. It's based on the 70-300 consumer lenses of the late 90s, and all of them suffer from a drop in image quality at the 300mm end.

The attraction lies in the fact that it is 300mm with VR. If you value this combination at a decent price that's the only way to go. For consumer telezooms of this calibre I still don't trust 3rd party manufactrers.

[csnap]

Originally Posted by ferrai is it worth the extra $500 to top up for the 55-200vr speaking interms of iq

With the extra $500, u will get:
1) More weight
2) Longer range
3) Better VR system with 2 modes
4) Better built
5) Metal mount
6) Full frame lens
I’ve used both 55-200mmVR and 70-300mmVR.
In terms of IQ, 70-300mmVR is better in my opinion but the difference is not that big.
55-200mmVR is also a great lens for the price and IQ produced.
So it depends on your shooting requirement to decide the suitable lens.
Below are 2 threads I’ve taken with the 2 lens for your reference.

Cheers!

55-200mmVR
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=446150

70-300mmVR (#3 onwards)
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=485532

[ferrai]

thanks for helping

[tropiccana]

visit this site to give u more idea in iq...

http://photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests

[luntut]

to me, if you are not an equipment junkie nor a professional photog.. then go for the cheapest one. you will be surprised at the quality that you get frm the 55-200.

if you need the range, get the 70-300 VR.

if you need to look more macho with bigger lens and bigger hoods, get the 70-300VR. or the 70-200 VR.

if you prefer to travel all day with your camera and not get weighed down by your gear, get the 55-200 VR.

and we haven even talked about the stuff you can shoot with those 3 lenses. to me, they excell in shooting different genres of stuff. and your shooting style will pretty much determine wat lens to get.