Lack of funds - 55-200 VR or cheapo 70-300 (Nikon)

Daysleeper40

Daysleeper40

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,184
Name
Fi
Edit My Images
Yes
I posted a question last week about which 70-300 lens to get for my Nikon D60 - and came to the conclusion that the Nikon AF-S VR version was the best choice.

HOWEVER - lack of funds has made me rethink this. I only have about £200 to play with at the moment so could opt for a cheaper sigma lens.. or should I just get the nikon 55-200 AFS VR lens instead?

I'm interested in nature and macro photography and at the moment I only have the kit lens. Will the 55-200 give me enough reach to play with for now and will it be a better purchase in the end than a cheaper 70-300 lens? I can always save up again for the Nikon 70-300 but I really want to get another lens asap as I'm finding the kit lens really limiting.

Any advice is more than welcome! :help:
 
I'd wait until you can afford the lens you want as it could be an expensive mistake if you decide you want the 70-300mm VR after all.
 
wack61 said:
I'd wait until you can afford the lens you want as it could be an expensive mistake if you decide you want the 70-300mm VR after all.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking long term I would get both - the 55-200mm seems a good range for a walkaround lens. I could be wrong of course :shrug:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
You could always save up for a bit longer and go for a secondhand 70-300 VR...
Click to expand...

I have been looking around for a second hand one but not much luck yet... there is one in the classifieds but seller not sure if they want to split.

I got very excited outside LCE today until I realised the second hand one in the window was not the AF-S version :bang:
 
So no one thinks much of this idea then :p
 
Get a used 55-200 VR now and sell it when you have enough for the 70-300 VR. If you buy right you shouldn't lose any money at all. I don't have and haven't used the 55-200 VR but I've read it's a good lens and excellent value.
 
Go for the 55-200vr. I personally like the vr functionality and it served me well. You could always sell it the later. You might even find that 200 is enough. I used to have an 18-200 but found so few of my shots were over 100 that I would be better to sell it and invest in something else (a D90). Heads up, MPB have a used one for £154 :thumbs: (a 70-300vr will be double that if you can find one)
 
Thanks both - I'm still completely undecided to be honest. Maybe I should just wait and get the Nikon 70-300 :shrug:

If I want to shoot wildlife then I'm thinkingrealistically I'm going to need more reach. Thanks for the tip about MPB - I havn't come across them before, are they well respected?
 
Daysleeper40 said:
Thanks both - I'm still completely undecided to be honest. Maybe I should just wait and get the Nikon 70-300 :shrug:

If I want to shoot wildlife then I'm thinkingrealistically I'm going to need more reach. Thanks for the tip about MPB - I havn't come across them before, are they well respected?
Click to expand...

Two things 1 - mpb are 1st class. 2 - You will never think that you have enough reach for wildlife.

The trick with wildlife, and I assume small birds, is to keep still and let them come to you.

You have £200 saved already, wait and get a 70-300VR, you are already halfway there.
 
the 55-200 is great for the money
id get a new one for £180 ish try

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/B000O161X0/


great for the money then when you have money get the more expensive one

fyi - does depend on what your shooting this isnt the fastest lens in the world

hope that helps
 
I've gone through a similar dilema over the last lot of months. I started by buying the Tamron 70-200 2.8 (new) sold that abd bought a Sigma 70-200 2.8 (used) and now sold the Sigma and saved up and paid out for the Nikkor 70-200 2.8. Not yet recieved it, but I know that its the lens I should have bought. The good thing about lenses though is that you tend not to loose that much on depreciation so if you needed a stop-gap lens then the 55-200 is decent for the money.
 
Thanks for the replies everyone. I finally decided that I would get the 55-200 today and just ask for money / vouchers for christmas to put towards the 70-300. Went out at lunchtime to try to buy one... did anywhere have one?

NO! :bang:

May still get the SH one frm MPB but I'm quite wary of buying SH as I don't really know what I'm talking about yet. Don't want to get stung.
 
Daysleeper40 said:
May still get the SH one frm MPB but I'm quite wary of buying SH as I don't really know what I'm talking about yet. Don't want to get stung.
Click to expand...
Not usually one to promote free advertising but I have received stellar service from MPB which is why I highlighted the item for you. To put your mind at rest:

"Warranties on all equipment
All of our used photographic equipment comes with a 6 month warranty and all new items come with manufacturer's warranty"

Taken from:http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/top-reasons-to-buy-from-mpb/ They answer the phone pretty quick too :thumbs:
 
The 55-200 wouldn't have enough reach fro wildlife, BUT it will focus very fast and has vr. The 70-300 are great lenses when used on bodies with an af motor. When I had a D40X, I bought a tzmron 70-300 with built in motor for motorless nikons. However, compared to the normal 70-300 on a nikon d80 for instance, the af is rubbish. Its dead slow and often won't focus, just does whiring noises. So, either the 55-200 or save for the nikon 70-300 vr afs. Or get a nikon with an af motor...!!!
 
Thanks for the help everyone - I have bitten the bullet and bought the SH 55-200 AF-S VR form MPB... now I just have to wait for it to arrive!

If anyone is interested / looking for this lens too - I snapped up the mint copy but they also have a "near mint" condition one up for sale at £149 + £9 delivery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top