Lens help!

I am trying to put together a nice little package of lenses for my 3200 and ran into a problem. I have the 18-55 kit lens that came with the camera and a 50mm F/1.8, now I am wanting to get a telephoto lens. I cant seem to make up my mind between the Nikkor 70-300mm F/4-5.6 G or the AF-S 55-200mm F/4-5.6. While auto focus is great it isnt everything, especially when the 70-300mm is $100 less. I tend to be all over the map as far as photography. I do a lot of landscape, wildlife, portraits and street. Me and the wife also go to a lot of concerts and festivals so needing something with plenty of reach and good in low light will come in handy as I cant always swing front row seats. So I was wondering if anyone had experience with any of these two lenses. Is the extra reach of the 70-300 worth forgoing autofocus? Or is the 55-200 plenty for a beginner? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

I was under the impression that the 70-300mm was actually capable of autofocus (AF-S 70-300mm IF ED VR) or are you looking at a different lens?

Also, if it is this lens then for $100 cheaper than the 55-200mm, it makes more sense to get it.

I have the 55-200mm and for my needs, it is more than sufficient.
I do have a lens upgrade plan which if I ever implement would mean I would then be after a 70-300mm, but as it's a costly option currently, its all on hold

**My 2 cents worth** I'll guarantee that if you buy the 55-200, you'll wish you had gone to the 300. That's what happened to me.

I believe the 70-300 you're talking about is manual focus without VR and retails in the neighborhood of $160 For concert shooting, you're going to have to really boost the ISO to get a decent shutter speed and overcome motion blur.

I'd suggest you look at the AF-S NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR (around $400) or the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED (around $600)

Don't forget to check out off brands also. Sigma makes some nice zooms like the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS (around $300)

Yup, like Mike said, the same thing happened to me, too. I got the 70-300 manual, but then regretted it. Sold it and got the AF-S 55-300 VR lens. World of difference. And I've heard good things about that Sigma lens, too, and a whole lot cheaper!

Sorry about that I was refering to the non-VR 70-300mm lens. I went with the 55-200mm, partially due to budget and ease of purchase. I am still learning the hobby so tend to try and stay within my budget, for now atleast! Thanks for all the feedback.

Tim, the 55-200 is a very good lens... I still have mine though I have upgraded to the 55-300 for the longer reach for wildlife..

You will enjoy it!

Pat in NH

For the extra money you'd spend on the 70-300 AF-S VR... would be well worth the extra cash. Even if you went refurb or good used from a brick mortar photo shop.
If you can't do that.. nothing wrong with the 55-200

For my D3200 I have the 18-55 kit lens. But I have been using the 16-85 and 70-300 and 35mm DX as my kit.

If you ever go FX... the 70-300 is also a fx lens.

Not to hijack this thread but this is along the same topic that I have questions for. I have a 55-200 Nikon lens and was looking at a the 55-300 Nikon lens but for $400 would I really notice a big difference between the 200 and 300? I also checked out the Sigma 70-300 which is half the price but has no vibration reduction. Think that may be worth buying? Not sure what to do, I don't really need the 55-200 if I buy the 55-300.

Gumbys69 said:

Not to hijack this thread but this is along the same topic that I have questions for. I have a 55-200 Nikon lens and was looking at a the 55-300 Nikon lens but for $400 would I really notice a big difference between the 200 and 300? I also checked out the Sigma 70-300 which is half the price but has no vibration reduction. Think that may be worth buying? Not sure what to do, I don't really need the 55-200 if I buy the 55-300.

Click to expand...

Yes, you definitely would notice a difference.. a sizable one too..
i have tested all 3 mentioned, and you can appropriately stack them in order of price - the most expensive being the better one.
go for the max your budget allows

So is the no vibration feature on the Sigma going to be a big deal?

Gumbys69 said:

So is the no vibration feature on the Sigma going to be a big deal?

Click to expand...

Only if you are going to shoot at 1/30th of a sec. and slower.