Should I trade NON VR for VR lens?

[JonCasper]

So I just got back into photography recently purchased D5300 bundle from a local camera shop and I am happy with everything but questioning if I should change one of the lenses. I got a nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6g ed in the bundle and was thinking of trading it in and getting the nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6g ed VR version of the lens because I think I am going to be doing a lot more hand held shooting. Is the VR going to help me or can I do without it? Is there ways of shooting what I want with what I got? Is there a better lens I should be looking at in the price range? Keeping it or selling doesn't matter either way. This is pretty much the only issue I am having with all my new toys so I am open to any suggestions on this topic or any topic you may think will help me out.
Thanks!

JonCasper

 

[jay_dean]

Unless you're shooting at fast shutter speeds, the VR will help you, especially hand holding.

 

[J-see]

So I just got back into photography recently purchased D5300 bundle from a local camera shop and I am happy with everything but questioning if I should change one of the lenses. I got a nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6g ed in the bundle and was thinking of trading it in and getting the nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6g ed VR version of the lens because I think I am going to be doing a lot more hand held shooting. Is the VR going to help me or can I do without it? Is there ways of shooting what I want with what I got? Is there a better lens I should be looking at in the price range? Keeping it or selling doesn't matter either way. This is pretty much the only issue I am having with all my new toys so I am open to any suggestions on this topic or any topic you may think will help me out.
Thanks!

JonCasper

VR certainly will help you handheld but to the question if you could do without; people have been shooting more than a century without VR.

The question to which only you can answer is not; How much do I require VR? but; How much do I desire VR?

 

[mikew_RIP]

Sort of disagree with J-see there,the question to me is How much do I require VR? you wil need to answer that.

 

[J-see]

Sort of disagree with J-see there,the question to me is How much do I require VR? you wil need to answer that.

It's different for all but we've all been shooting handheld in the past when VR still had to be invented.

There are also ways to improve slow shutter shake by using short bursts but it won't work as well on every cam. I can take a pretty slow shot on the DX without VR when using the burst trick but I can't always do the same on the FX since its shutter slam is much worse.

VR is nice with long lenses but up to 200mm I have always been shooting without in the past. Evidently, the odds improve once you can use VR.

But can you do without? Certainly.

It's for all different. For me VR is not high on the list of requirements. For others it might be.

 

[ttmctoad]

I prefer VR lenses because I can't hold my camera still enough at longer focal lengths. Not sure how long you've had your camera, but it might be prudent to use the non-VR lens for awhile and see how your shots turn out and don't be surprised next month if you've found a lens that you'd rather have than than the 55-200VR. I purchased a used 55-200VR shortly after I upgraded to the D7100 and I've since purchased an 18-140VR and I'm currently shopping around for a used 70-300VR. As you can see, I jumped the gun on my 55-200VR purchase and will likely never use it. I've learned a lot in the past few months just by reading this forum and other forums and by using my camera.
Patience=fewer regrets.

 

[J-see]

It will also depend upon what he shoots and how he shoots.

I couldn't take a slow shot when hand holding the cam while using live-view even if my life depended upon it. People that are used to shooting live-view will probably have less problems with it. There's also some technique required for shooting handheld which is a bit easier for those of us that have been shooting the more lethal kind.

ttmctoad makes a good point too. Be sure you'll be using the lens in the future before you trade the one for another and end up maybe not really using that other. I got some dust-collectors that I wouldn't have if I before buying them would have known what I do now. We can suffer some sort of tunnel-vision at times when it comes to gear.

 

[Rick M]

I wouldn't trade unless to make a more significant upgrade. The next best lens price and IQ wise is the newer Tamron 70-300 VC. A bit more than the 55-200 VR and less than the Nikon 70-300 for the same (or better) IQ.

 

[FastGlass]

The other thing to consider is when to use it. Using VR in certain circumstances will actually cause blurry images. I almost never use VR. Mostly because I forget it's there. If I where buying a lens and the upcharge wasn't significant. I would choose it. Why? Because it's there if I ever need it.

 

[nickt]

If you are new to this, I would hold off and make sure 55-200 is what you really need (or want). A 70-300 is something to think about. I have that Tamron that Rick mentioned. In the beginning, I got the 55-200 when I got my d3100. I found it was not what I wanted. 200mm was not enough zoom for a lot of the wildlife shots I was after. The 55-200 is a nice light lens though and I held onto it for that reason. The 70-300 is a good bit heavier. So consider if you might want more zoom first, but if 55-200 works for you and you can trade over without too much expense, go for it. VR is nice to have, but plenty of folks do without it.

 

[Eyelight]

If I'm not mistaken you can pick up used but "like new" VR versions for around $100 bucks. Any camera store that deals Nikon and takes trades will have several on the shelf that have barely been used.

There is also a newer version of the lens that is lighter, has the newer VR, but of course cost a bit more.

Need or not will depend on how well you hold the camera and the type of shooting you do. The things that will benefit from VR would be:

- Shaky hands
- Shooting in lower light
- Adding depth of field
- Shooting video
- Focusing on small subjects

 

[JonCasper]

Thank you all for the good advice! I figure I am going to keep messing around with it for awhile to see what I like. Ill keep doing my research for the time being and then one of these days upgrade to the right lens. I might even go for a macro for my next purchase who knows but I defiantly appreciate all the information you guys shared. Here is a couple recent shots I took with my 35mm!

 

[SteveH]

I wouldn't trade a 55-200 just to add VR - As others have said, the 70-300mm's (Either Tamron or Nikon) are the way to go.

I bought the 55-300mm to go with my D3100, but when I upgraded to the D7100, the better sensor really shows up the lower quality of the 55-300 and I would imagine it will be similar with your D5300. Find a shop with a 70-300 and have a go with one on your camera.

 

[aroy]

Unless the VR is latest, there is no point. My 16-85 has the earlier version of VR, and unless I give it time to stabilise, it softens up my shots 25% of the time. My 18-55 has the latest version, and the VR has never softened up a shot..

 

[carguy]

I wouldn't trade unless to make a more significant upgrade. The next best lens price and IQ wise is the newer Tamron 70-300 VC. A bit more than the 55-200 VR and less than the Nikon 70-300 for the same (or better) IQ.

I'm with Rick on this one. Knowing what I know now, I would have not even bought the 55-200 when I did. I'd look to make an upgrade then sell the 55-200mm when you can.