 |
|
|
fsiagian
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 23, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 1212
|
|
Review Date: Aug 12, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
light, sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality but not a big problem
|
|
|
I just bought this lens so cheap. Very light and sharp. Nice for walking around. The pictures are amazing for the price. Not 2.8 but VR really helps.
|
|
 Aug 12, 2012
|
|
jessi74
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 22, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Nov 5, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, good VR system, compact. Way better at f/8 and /11 than any lens this cheap has any right to be. Should be in everyone's compact kit. Look for refurb versions for as little as 150, and get the VR version.
|
|
Cons:
|
Terrible MF capability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 5, 2011
|
|
Bjorns
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 31, 2011
Location: Iceland
Posts: 0
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2011
|
|
TomislavJ
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 8, 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 26
|
|
Review Date: May 14, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
great bokeh, sharp pictures, price
|
|
Cons:
|
slow auto focus
|
|
|
this is my favourite lens for portraits because it has so great bokeh. it's also great for street photography, architecture, boats on the see and nature. because of price it's almost "must have" in your photo bag!
|
|
|
May 14, 2010
|
|
william Graham
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 11, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Weight, Price
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
You can buy this lens for as little as £120. This is not a pro built lens, It is an absolute bargain though. It does have a plastic mount but these have been around for a lot of years now and seem to have stood the test of time. As long as you don't carry your camera around by the lens or take it to extreme weather I can't see any problems. Because of the VR you can take pictures with this lens that would be impossible to get with most other nikkos no matter how much you pay. This also goes for the 18-55 VR another bargain.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2008
|
|
Nichigo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 24
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great beginning lens. VR helps quite a bit. Sharp for this class of lens. CHEAP!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
The AF is VERY slow...
|
|
You can't beat the performance of this lens for the price. The range, sharpness, and VR features are great. I picked this piece of glass up for $100 used...and it's been good to me ever since.
The one caveat is that this lens' AFS is painfully slow for me. I do alot of panning shots on cars at race events, and the lens was just too slow to focus at times.
Then I remember that I paid $100 and i'm instantly consoled 
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2008
|
|
veroman
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3522
|
|
Review Date: May 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
|
An excellent lens at any price ... an amazing lens at its low price. This lens and the 18-55 VR are my two travel lenses. I take no others.
|
|
|
May 22, 2008
|
|
svladcjelli
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 29, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp and contrasty - at least on my D40
|
|
Cons:
|
Built... but on the other han, one can't expect miracles for the price...
|
|
|
The lens produces nice pictures without the D40 exceeding the capabilities of this lens. A nice and easy to carry package that gives astonishing results - keepin the price in mind.
This lens fits perfectly in my set with the D40 and the 18-55 Lens. I use this set for occasional photography on the run - when I don't want to carry the bigger ones (Normally Canon DSLRs, some L-glass and others).
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2008
|
|
runamuck
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Oct 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5612
|
|
Review Date: Mar 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, sharp sharp. Wonderfully light and easy to handle.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build quality--It feels flimsy, plastic build
|
|
|
A photo mag said you should steal this lens if you can't buy it. It's a great performer. I consider it a poor man's 70-200. It sees a lot more use than my 70-200 f2.8. I don't use it unless I will specifically need the f2.8 or f4.
I got mine shortly after its introduction and paid $250 for it. I could feel ripped off, but the performance makes it a steal at almost any price.
The build quality isn't up to its higher priced bretheren, but the plastic does make it light and easy to carry.
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2008
|
|
Doug Weasner
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 24, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 221
|
|
Review Date: Mar 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $150.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Solidly sharp and largely free of distortion, CA, etc. VR helps.
|
|
Cons:
|
Build definitely reflects the low price point, AF performance is merely adequate.
|
|
|
Sharp? It nearly outresolves the sensor on my D40 at f8, is still very good at f5.6, and it is usable wide open. I haven't observed CA, distortion, or any other optical shortcomings.
VR is good for about two extra stops of hand-holdability - think between 1/40 and 1/60 depending on the level of your technique at the long end. Team this lens up with standard zoom for DX, and you'll have a two lens combo that is conistently hand holdable at 1/60 or better without breaking the bank.
This is not a high-speed lens (sports, birding, etc). Neither the aperture nor the AF meet such demands. However, it delivers great snapshot results and is an excellent value.
|
|
|
Mar 7, 2008
|
|
tol1l1yboy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 12, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 106
|
|
Review Date: Mar 4, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $225.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price
Pictures
Bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic Build
|
|
|
For the money this lens is incredible. It was the second lens I got for my Nikon and although I don't use the range of this lens much every time I do I am pleasantly surprised by how good the images it produces look. Sure it isn't a 70-200 f/2.8 lens but it is also 1/10th the cost! I think it produces consistently better photos than the 70-300mm vr lens and I use this one more often! It is a fantastic walk around lens coupled with a tamron/sigma 17/18-50mm lens.
|
|
|
Mar 4, 2008
|
|
MagicNikon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1919
|
|
Review Date: Dec 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Inexpensive, Lightweight, Sharp across the range (for my purposes), Little or no CA's, Nice and Contrasty, Nice bokeh. Short Min focus distance. VR works great!
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow AF despite AF-S, Cheap build,
|
|
I like it so much I bought it twice!
I had this lens for my D200 before I briefly switched to Canon. That switch didn't last long, so when I picked up a new D300, I knew I would be adding this lens again along with some actual pro quality glass. I have no qualms putting this right next to my 17-55 or 12-24mm DX lenses.
This lens is sharp wide open from f/4 at 55mm all the way to f/5.6 at 200mm. It only gets better stopped down. Color and contrast are great. Bokeh isn't bad considering it's already at f/4.5 ro so when at portrait range. I do use this alot for quick informal portraiture. One of the things I like about it, is that since it is VR enabled, I can hold the cam in one hand, and hold a flash off cam with my left hand. VR works great here. Steady, sharp shots, every time.
On a DX camera, 50-55mm is about as long as I want on the wide end of my tele. 70mm just is too long in some situations. I prefer the extra width hera compared to the 70-300mm or 70-200mm VR models. Especially, if I'm tight qaurters. That was what originally drew me to this lens. It's very unobtrusive too.
This lens will not be that great for sports. It focuses kind of slowly. Max apertures aren't wide enough in dimmer cloudy conditions either. Build quality is what you'd expect for $225.
There is no dout that this lens will provide you with alot of great images despite its deceptively low price tag. You owe it yourself to consider this one.
I have plenty of samples that are worthy of your attention.
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/229800459-XL.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/229799874-XL.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150162398-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150620588-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150612079-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150611776-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150610683-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150610442-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150608708-L.jpg
http://jbsteinke.smugmug.com/photos/150608432-L.jpg
|
|
|
Dec 9, 2007
|
|
camerapapi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 15, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 4760
|
|
Review Date: Nov 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $140.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonably inexpensive. Good image quality. Light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Mostly plastic construction.
|
|
|
The copy I have is the original without the VR. I was looking for a light lens to take in my bag when traveling to make my load lighter.
This is a light lens, made mostly of plastics and of reasonable good quality.
This lens and the 18-55 kit lens I found indispensable for light traveling. When coupled with the D70s, the camera and lenses make a great combination. I am sure the same goes for similar cameras like the D40, D50 and D80.
If you use these lenses with the camera on a tripod (not applicable to the VR copy) and use sound photographic techniques, expect very good images. I never go beyond 13x19 and at those sizes the quality is there. At 200mm and wide open it is slightly soft but once again, focus carefully, use a tripod and cable release and be ready for good images.
With my lens I found that at f8 and f11 I get my best images along the entire focal length. With the D70s the images need just a touch of contrast but with the D2H the contrast is back so contrast seems to depend on the camera used. Colors and details with my copy appear very good.
Although these lenses are designated as silent wave technology do not expect the performance of professional lenses. If I use the D2H then AF is lightning fast so do not expect great AF performance with the amateur cameras and that is the market Nikon targeted for these lenses.
The late Galen Rowell used the old, plastic 80-200 f4-5.6 for his hikings and this lens is not much more different except that it covers the convenient 55mm focal length.
If you need a professional lens in this range, obviously this lens is not for you. If you need a lens to travel light and you are careful with your photographic techniques, you should be happy with the 55-200 lens.
Finally, assuming you drop it or loose it, used ones (like mine) are priced so reasonably that it is not necessary to pay for the repairs when for the same price you can have a new one.
This lens, based on my observations, is highly recommended.
William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
13
|
46448
|
Aug 12, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$164.38
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
6.46
|
9.46
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
