Help me in choosing Nikon 55-300mm vs 55-200mm

Hi Pros,

I have D5100 with 18-55mm Kit lens along with nikon 35mm f/1.8g af-s dx lens. It's been ten months now & I have planned to get a zoom lens for me, Pros please help me in choosing between Nikon 55-300mm vs 55-200mm. I am totally confused which one should I go. :apologetic:

Thanks,
Naresh

Is the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII out of the question?

Because that would be my suggestion over either of the other two.

Horoscope Fish said:

Is the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII out of the question?

Because that would be my suggestion over either of the other two.

Click to expand...

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII it is very expensive when compared to other two, that why I would like to prefer between 55-300 & 55-200.

Other question is how often we need 200 ~ 300 range? people says Auto focusing become cranky between that range.

I found the 55-300mm to be an excellent lens. I had the 55-200 and it was good, but not as good as the 55-300. It just feels more solid and takes better pics. The extra 100mm makes it worth the extra cost alone.

What do you mean by cranky? It focuses pretty fast.

nareshkumar1985 said:

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S VRII it is very expensive when compared to other two, that why I would like to prefer between 55-300 & 55-200.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I was afraid of that. It's the far superior lens in my opinion but if a choice must be made between the 55-200 and the 55-300 I'd go with the 55-300.

nareshkumar1985 said:

Other question is how often we need 200 ~ 300 range? people says Auto focusing become cranky between that range.

Click to expand...

Personally I rarely use my big zooms. I find I get a LOT more use out of my fast primes, wide-to-medium zooms and ultra-wides, but that's me and my shooting style. What is you shoot primarily?

I bought my 55-200 years ago when I only had the 18-55. Had I known then what I know now, I'd much rather have the 55-300.

Also, If you don't mind not having a warranty, you could get the 70-300mm used. They go for about $350.

Like Horoscope Fish said, it is a better lens. It's not a DX lens like the others, has ED elements, internal focus (IF), VRII, etc. In other words, it's more of a pro lens and will work on an FX body if you ever upgrade.

I would suggest the VR version for anything above 150 mm because you wouldn't be able to always have a tripod with you all the time. the 70-300 VR is a very affordable lens. Pre-owned is going at USD 350 or even lower.

Or you could get the Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens used for about $200.00

Cranky in the sense the focus takes little time when the zoom is in between 200~300 ( got info from the shop near by) not sure how far it is true. I frequently trek a lot (twice a month) hence I am looking for a zoom lens, or please advice me should I look for any other type of lens. My budget is $300 may be I can push it to $350.

Cameta Camera has the Nikon 70-300mm VR refurbished for $349. And it includes a 1 year warranty.

Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G VR AF-S ED-IF Zoom Lens - Factory Refurbished includes Full 1 Year Warranty

Between the two you are asking about i would go for the 55-300 with it you can choose not to use the extra 100mm much but if you go for the 55-200 you can never use the extra 100mm.

mike

mikew said:

Between the two you are asking about i would go for the 55-300 with it you can choose not to use the extra 100mm much but if you go for the 55-200 you can never use the extra 100mm.

mike

Click to expand...

​That's excellent logic, far better too much than not enough.

nareshkumar1985 said:

Hi Pros,

I have D5100 with 18-55mm Kit lens along with nikon 35mm f/1.8g af-s dx lens. It's been ten months now & I have planned to get a zoom lens for me, Pros please help me in choosing between Nikon 55-300mm vs 55-200mm. I am totally confused which one should I go. :apologetic:

Thanks,
Naresh

Click to expand...

I had a 55-200 but wanted more "reach". Sold it to buy the 55-300 and have no regrets...

Pat in NH

I own the 55-200mm, 55-300mm, and have experience with the 70-300mm. First, the 200 is great but it always just fell short. For example, when shooting the moon I just couldn't reach out far enough to get the craters and texture of the moon. So right there it rules out the 200. Between the 300's - The 70-300 is more but it is sharper and better. So from my experience it would go like this.

1. Buy the refurbished or new 70-300mm without hesitation.
2. If I was uncomfortable with refurbished and I couldn't swing the extra $$$ for the 70-300 then get the 55-300 and you will be happy.
3. Knowing what I know now, and from experience, this lens is not an option since the 55-300 is within your budget.

​

I have the pre VR 55-200 and am planning on replacing it with the 70-300 once I have saved up for it. Personally, I think the 70 to 300mm would be the better choice, even refurbished. You can get a refurbished one for about $350 at B&H Photo, Adorama, and other places. If you already have $300 towards a lens, save a little more and go with the reburb 70-300. Just my opinion.

A couple of years ago I was thinking on getting the 55-200 or the 55-300, had a look at both, the 55-300 felt a little better made, the 55-200 has a plastic mount, where as the 55-300 has a metal mount, in the end I went for the 55-300 and the extra 100mm has come in handy at times, and I've had no problems with the focusing at the 300mm end, so I'd recommend going for the 55-300.

I can onl;y speak about the 55-300. It serves me in almost every situation well. Nevermind low-light, Shooting Ballet or Gymnastic performance as well as landscape, zoo and flying objects like planes, birds.

I just bought the 55-300 to replace the 55-200, far better with the extra reach as already stated, don't know anything on the 70-300

@ All,

Thanks Guys for your valuable information. I will save the extra money and go for 70~300mm which has more sharpness and build quality.