Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
D5100
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX or Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ZekeMenuar" data-source="post: 55797" data-attributes="member: 8718"><p>When I bought my D3100 a year ago I was faced with the same question. I went with the 55-200. It's lighter, faster and a tad sharper and it takes the same filters as the 18-55. That's important if your on a budget. ND filters, polarizers etc aren't cheap. The 55-300 takes 58mm filters and they aren't cheap either. </p><p>I don't regret picking the 55-200 for a minute. The 55-200 is my walk-around lens and gets the most use of my four lenses.</p><p></p><p>I bought a refurb 55-300 a couple of months ago at a ridiculously low price. It has great image quality, but, it's a brick. It sometimes has trouble locking on to a subject past 200mm. In order to keep it from hunting I focus at 200mm, lock onto the subject and zoom out to 300mm. It finds the subject every time using that method. If you are in a hurry to get a shot, the 55-300 isn't the lens, the 55-200 is.</p><p>As the weather gets better I'm using the 55-300 more often. It's pretty nice having the extra range when I need it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ZekeMenuar, post: 55797, member: 8718"] When I bought my D3100 a year ago I was faced with the same question. I went with the 55-200. It's lighter, faster and a tad sharper and it takes the same filters as the 18-55. That's important if your on a budget. ND filters, polarizers etc aren't cheap. The 55-300 takes 58mm filters and they aren't cheap either. I don't regret picking the 55-200 for a minute. The 55-200 is my walk-around lens and gets the most use of my four lenses. I bought a refurb 55-300 a couple of months ago at a ridiculously low price. It has great image quality, but, it's a brick. It sometimes has trouble locking on to a subject past 200mm. In order to keep it from hunting I focus at 200mm, lock onto the subject and zoom out to 300mm. It finds the subject every time using that method. If you are in a hurry to get a shot, the 55-300 isn't the lens, the 55-200 is. As the weather gets better I'm using the 55-300 more often. It's pretty nice having the extra range when I need it. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
D5100
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX or Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR?
Top