Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

55-200mm lens for Nikon D3100

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    dnk_ephoto
    19 Aug 2012 - 10:01 AM

    Hi,

    Any recommendations for a 55-200mm lens suitable for a D3100. Doesn't have to be Nikon but should be VR and AF. Price range? Less than 250 quid...preferably less than 200.

    Thanks!

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    19 Aug 2012 - 10:01 AM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    strawman
    strawman  1022010 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Aug 2012 - 10:21 AM

    Hi are you aware that the D3100 is available in a kit with the 18-55 and 55-200 Vr lenses for @ 500. A budget lens I have used that works fine is the 55-200 from Sigma @ 160 last time I looked. Metal mount, decent sized focusing ring and a usm focusing motor.

    For pricing advice are you looking at Camera price buster? It helps find the best price.

    Last Modified By strawman at 19 Aug 2012 - 10:22 AM
    cameracat
    cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Aug 2012 - 10:38 AM

    You would be wiser to consider the Nikon 55-300 option, Beats the hell out of the 55-200 is all areas, Then provides you with an extra 100mm of reach....Smile

    Tip: Don't buy cheap alternatives, Its almost like throwing money away and the results may disappoint....Sad

    Buy wise buy once.....!!!

    213hardy
    213hardy e2 Member 6555 forum posts213hardy vcard England
    19 Aug 2012 - 11:13 AM

    I had a Nikon 55-200 for my D3000 and although a good lens i decided to upgrade to 55-300, as cameracat says beats to hell out of the 200, managed to find a 2nd hand one in the epz clasifieds.

    Den

    dnk_ephoto
    19 Aug 2012 - 4:46 PM

    Thanks for the advice.

    I've just got hold of a D3100 new for 350 quid and the 55-200 VR DX on Amazon is 146 so I've not missed out with the dual lens deal.

    In another thread, it was advised to go for an ED type so the 55-300 VR ED is 235 on Amazon.

    Would this be a good choice?

    For the Sigma lens, is that image stabilised? If not, does it need to be or should you only be going for VR types if you intend to shoot in good light/with a tripod?

    For second hand lenses, is there some buying advice. E.g. what to look for in terms of operation, damage etc?

    strawman
    strawman  1022010 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Aug 2012 - 8:52 PM

    The sigma has is but I have not tried the nikon so unable to advise on what is best. It also has ultrasonic motor that tends to help give reasonable af speed, but like everything it has to be remembered it is a budget lens

    Jestertheclown
    19 Aug 2012 - 9:00 PM


    Quote: the 55-200 VR DX on Amazon is 146

    I've had that page bookmarked for a couple of weeks and every time I look, the price has changed!

    It's gone fro a low of about 130.00 to over 180.00, then back down again with all sorts in between.

    If you keep your credit card handy and strike at the right moment, you could just bag a bargain.

    Last Modified By Jestertheclown at 19 Aug 2012 - 9:00 PM
    dnk_ephoto
    19 Aug 2012 - 9:27 PM

    You're not kidding, Jester. I thought about writing some kind of script for monitoring prices on and draw a graph or whatever as Amazon prices seem to fluctuate across the week, if not the month.

    I waited to buy a HTC phone off there and it crept from 220 to 190 and back again over a period of time.

    They obviously know when people are most likely to be buying things...e.g. the weekend. Or do they reduce prices at the weekend when savvy people are comparing prices vs shops when they're out in them? I also wonder whether the prices go up in the last week of the month (when people get paid) and go down as the month goes on as people may be less able to pay the price.

    A bit cheeky but, like you say, if you bide your time, you can get several tens of pounds off the same item.

    Just out of interest, what is the model number of that Sigma?

    Jestertheclown
    19 Aug 2012 - 9:44 PM

    I don't know about the Sigma that John's referring to but I've had this one bookmarked as well. It also has a moveable price but it doesn't seem to vary as much as the Nikon one.
    I can't comment on how good, or otherwise, it is. I've never used one and only know what I read in the reveiws, which seem favourable and some of which indicate that it does a better job than the very similar spec. Tamron version but as I say, that's only what I've read.

    Bren.

    chavender
    chavender e2 Member 3214 forum postschavender vcard France1 Constructive Critique Points
    20 Aug 2012 - 10:24 AM

    FWIW, I recently bought the Nikon 55-200 for my D5000 and love it to bits.

    I have also been using it for macro (close up really) with a 12mm extension tube for flowers etc and the results are very good.
    In my view for the money it`s a cracker.

    Bill

    dnk_ephoto
    21 Aug 2012 - 11:29 PM

    Nice to know! I've not seen terrible reviews of these Nikkor lenses, even the non-ED ones. From what I've seen, they may not be top drawer but the performance for the price is very good.

    Forgive my ignorance here but when I see a lens is "55mm-200mm" or "55mm-300mm", I think of it as a zoom (telephoto) lens. If a lens is described as a "55mm-200mm macro", is there something special about it that makes it only suitable (or better suited) for close/macro?

    Ta!

    Shedboy
    Shedboy e2 Member 2Shedboy vcard United Kingdom
    23 Aug 2012 - 11:13 PM

    The Nikon 55-300 is an amazing lens for the money, Razor sharp with vr, has a metal mount unlike the 55-200

    I've been using one for a year now and love this lens.

    See photo 'Spring Robin' on my Portfolio.

    Regards

    SimonGrindle
    11 Sep 2012 - 10:48 AM

    I recently bought this lens for 150 and can say its definitely worth the money!
    The frame of it feels cheaply made and its plastic, but its light weight and works a treat!

    peterjones
    peterjones e2 Member 123951 forum postspeterjones vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    11 Sep 2012 - 7:29 PM

    The reviews I have read re the Nikon 55-300 (242 approx) put it on a par in terms of results with the redoubtable 75-300VR which comes in at about 440; some of the less expensive Nikon lenses e.g. 18-55, 18-105 and 55-200 are remarkable value for money giving very impressive results.

    dnk_ephoto
    11 Sep 2012 - 7:47 PM

    Thanks for all the replies.

    I went for the 55-300 ED VR (240 quid) in the end. It's provided some very nice results so far!

    Just tried to register it on the Nikon website and they don't appear to list a DX 55-300 G ED VR in their list.... (?)

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.