55-200 VR vs 70-300 VR

[Peisqo]

Hi guys, i've been playing around alot with my D40 .. and my interest is growing :) I think it's about time i get a telephoto lens ... with the limited choice i have ... i think i'm only down to these 2 lens :

1) 55-200 vr
2) 70-300 vr

I have just 1 question here. Is there any formula to calculate how far is that 200mm zooming to ? i mean .. i think the 2nd lens cost almost double of the 55-200 right ? I just wanna know .. is that extra 100mm worth the cost :P

I guess I will be using the lens to shoot animals. Which means I can't get very near to them... and candid shots of human/kids seems to be interesting as well ... Also panning seems to interest me alot. So might get into F1 or things like that .. ( i started panning horses lol ) .. anyway .. yea .. hope u guys get the idea .. i really wanna know how far can 200mm and 300mm go ...

[csjian]

the diff not only 100mm, the 70-300mm more solid, better quality than 55-200mm..my own opinion to share. if possible just bring ur camera to the shop & try out this 2 lenses then u will know what i mean.:D i just decided to hold on & save more $ to get 70-300mm then getting 55-200mm

so if u do have budget, i will suggest go for 70-300mm.
some more 70-300 got "active/normal" mode, which 55-200 dont.

[Peisqo]

the diff not only 100mm, the 70-300mm more solid, better quality than 55-200mm..my own opinion to share. if possible just bring ur camera to the shop & try out this 2 lenses then u will know what i mean.:D i just decided to hold on & save more $ to get 70-300mm then getting 55-200mm

so if u do have budget, i will suggest go for 70-300mm.
some more 70-300 got "active/normal" mode, which 55-200 dont.

Oh it is better quality ? But 55-200 VR is not that bad either right ? It's just bad compared to 70-300 ? 55-200 has to be better than the kit lens right :P Mind explaining what does the "active/normal" mode does ?

I would appriciate if anyone of us here has these 2 lens would take a shoot at 55mm and 200mm .. or 70mm and 300mm .. that would be a great guide for me :)

[csjian]

Oh it is better quality ? But 55-200 VR is not that bad either right ? It's just bad compared to 70-300 ? 55-200 has to be better than the kit lens right :P Mind explaining what does the "active/normal" mode does ?

I would appriciate if anyone of us here has these 2 lens would take a shoot at 55mm and 200mm .. or 70mm and 300mm .. that would be a great guide for me :)

ya..actually both r good lenses. just my opinion, if i have budget i will go for 70-300 VR.

active/normal mode. was the VR mode, which active mode for u like u r in a moving object like car...

u actually can find the sample of 55-200VR in SA. just use the search option.

[ShaolinTiger]

70-300mm VR is a superb lens, save the extra and buy buy buy!

See most of my Kharu pictures are taken with this lens, plus all the birdpark pictures.

[hclai]

i try both the lens when i purchased it.....the 55-200 VR is more plastic feel as compare to 70-300 VR one. somehow i still prefer the 70-300 VR and believe me, it just feel more solid , and better build (17 elements in 12 groups, including 2 ED elements), the 55-200vr ( 15 elements in 11 groups, including one ED element), the 70-300 VR got 2 ED Glass man. well...maybe the difference of 1 ED glass element is not noticeable with human eyes..... , as u r talking about shooting animal, go to the zoo for 1 day and u know what i mean.... u will definitely wish u want more....that is where the 100MM come in.

currently i m using 17-50 2.8 Tamron and 70-300VR , as for portrait shot, 70-300vr delivered nice half body shot as well and sometimes when i jalan jalan in FRIM i use it to shot insect like dragonfly and butterfly, there is where it serve more of is purpose of 'macro' shot since i haven't got myself a macro lense. and those 'macro' shot that u shoot, u cant do it with 200 to really get a good result, i mean...u cant really go near the insect else they will fly away... and nicer bokeh...since it is 300mm as compare to 200mm.


if u r really into motion shooting , save ur money for 70-200 2.8 VR, that is a sport & action lens.

what is ur shooting style much likely will differ what type of lense u will use as combo, just some example to share, like...i like to shoot during my fren;s wedding...to capture the happy moment , so, in this case i need a SB800 and 17-50 (actually 18-135 will be better, can take from different angle in the house and cover most of the range when u r inside the house)will do fine since u dont hav time to change lens. when u goto zoo/safari, u will need the 70-300VR 90% of ur time.

again when u travel u either carry together 17-50 2.8 lens & 70-300 VR as combo or u carry 18-200 VR to cover most of ur range. 17-50 2.8 come in handy if u visit some muzuem in oversea whereby they dun allowed flashing. So, u hav to decide. 18-200 VR on a broad day light will cover all ur traveling picture and u only carry one lens. if u like night scene , 17-50 2.8 lens serve better job.

[karheng]

Oh it is better quality ? But 55-200 VR is not that bad either right ? It's just bad compared to 70-300 ? 55-200 has to be better than the kit lens right :P Mind explaining what does the "active/normal" mode does ?

I would appriciate if anyone of us here has these 2 lens would take a shoot at 55mm and 200mm .. or 70mm and 300mm .. that would be a great guide for me :)


The D40 Kit lens the AF-S 18-55 f/3.5 - 5.6 ED DX kit lens is a very capable lens. It's not the best but it's VERY GOOD VALUE for money...Just that the build quality isn't excellent.

The 55-200 VR is on par with the kit lens, but i feel the built is slightly better, however, I still trust my kit lens on many occasions....

[Peisqo]

ya..actually both r good lenses. just my opinion, if i have budget i will go for 70-300 VR.

active/normal mode. was the VR mode, which active mode for u like u r in a moving object like car...

u actually can find the sample of 55-200VR in SA. just use the search option.

i see ...

70-300mm VR is a superb lens, save the extra and buy buy buy!

See most of my Kharu pictures are taken with this lens, plus all the birdpark pictures.

Definately sounds great huh ? Dang .. kena poison d haha ..

i try both the lens when i purchased it.....the 55-200 VR is more plastic feel as compare to 70-300 VR one. somehow i still prefer the 70-300 VR and believe me, it just feel more solid , and better build (17 elements in 12 groups, including 2 ED elements), the 55-200vr ( 15 elements in 11 groups, including one ED element), the 70-300 VR got 2 ED Glass man. well...maybe the difference of 1 ED glass element is not noticeable with human eyes..... , as u r talking about shooting animal, go to the zoo for 1 day and u know what i mean.... u will definitely wish u want more....that is where the 100MM come in.

currently i m using 17-50 2.8 Tamron and 70-300VR , as for portrait shot, 70-300vr delivered nice half body shot as well and sometimes when i jalan jalan in FRIM i use it to shot insect like dragonfly and butterfly, there is where it serve more of is purpose of 'macro' shot since i haven't got myself a macro lense. and those 'macro' shot that u shoot, u cant do it with 200 to really get a good result, i mean...u cant really go near the insect else they will fly away... and nicer bokeh...since it is 300mm as compare to 200mm.


if u r really into motion shooting , save ur money for 70-200 2.8 VR, that is a sport & action lens.

what is ur shooting style much likely will differ what type of lense u will use as combo, just some example to share, like...i like to shoot during my fren;s wedding...to capture the happy moment , so, in this case i need a SB800 and 17-50 (actually 18-135 will be better, can take from different angle in the house and cover most of the range when u r inside the house)will do fine since u dont hav time to change lens. when u goto zoo/safari, u will need the 70-300VR 90% of ur time.

again when u travel u either carry together 17-50 2.8 lens & 70-300 VR as combo or u carry 18-200 VR to cover most of ur range. 17-50 2.8 come in handy if u visit some muzuem in oversea whereby they dun allowed flashing. So, u hav to decide. 18-200 VR on a broad day light will cover all ur traveling picture and u only carry one lens. if u like night scene , 17-50 2.8 lens serve better job.

Thnx for the thorough explanation :) made everything clear there ..

The D40 Kit lens the AF-S 18-55 f/3.5 - 5.6 ED DX kit lens is a very capable lens. It's not the best but it's VERY GOOD VALUE for money...Just that the build quality isn't excellent.

The 55-200 VR is on par with the kit lens, but i feel the built is slightly better, however, I still trust my kit lens on many occasions....

Yea i think the kit lens is good for wide angle ..

Oh ya .. anyone knows the price of these 2 lens in malaysia ?

[csjian]

i see ...



Definately sounds great huh ? Dang .. kena poison d haha ..



Thnx for the thorough explanation :) made everything clear there ..



Yea i think the kit lens is good for wide angle ..

Oh ya .. anyone knows the price of these 2 lens in malaysia ?

55-200mm VR : RM850
70-300mm VR : RM1800

both price u can get it from J-One Mr Jason.
I have tested both lens there. :P

[Peisqo]

icic ... wah it's more than double the price wor ... Anyways im in Aus now hehe .. juz wanna compare the price .. if alot difference then i might wait till i go back only buy lor ...

[csjian]

icic ... wah it's more than double the price wor ... Anyways im in Aus now hehe .. juz wanna compare the price .. if alot difference then i might wait till i go back only buy lor ...

what is the price in Aust??

u can survey the price for both places so may b the time u come back u can do a Mass order for all SA members :D

[Peisqo]

lol ... haven't go check ... probably go this weekend gua ... hand super itchy on the 70-300 la :run_away:

[ascii]

55-200mm VR : RM850
70-300mm VR : RM1800

both price u can get it from J-One Mr Jason.
I have tested both lens there. :P

double of the price...:?..
hmm.. out of budget liao'..:floaty:
need to wait another 4 months for that..:(

[wongmunheng]

Go for 70-300 VR! I've been using this for the last 3 months. It's superbly sharp for portraits at 70mm, though as expected soft at 300mm. AF is very fast. Strongly recommend to anyone, esp new comers, as it's extremely fun to use this. Though pricey but worth it. Absolutely no regret.

[jameslow]

i support 70-300 VR too, no regret lens!!

[Mavik]

I was at the bird park over the weekend and was shooting with the 55-200mm VR lens. Still not close enough even at 200mm so I am pretty sure the 300mm will come in handy at times like those.

But then again, what do you intend to shoot with either of these lenses?

[apocalypse]

i find my 70-300 to be soft at 300 mm too... VR works great and just that i am not too happy with the 'softness'... not crisp to be exact...