# 55-200mm or 70-300mm lens?



## GA_mayne (Jun 14, 2010)

I own a Nikon D3000 and only have the kit 18-55mm lens. I want a more powerful zoom lens so I can take some real nice longer range photos without having to zoom and crop on the computer.

Now, would you recommend the 55-200mm VR lens? or the 70-300mm lens?

I like how the 55-200 is VR, but the extra 100mm of focal length is pulling me in...

70-300mm - http://www.cameta.com/Nikon-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-G-AF-Zoom-Nikkor-Lens-10851.cfm
55-200mm - http://www.cameta.com/Nikon-55-200mm-f-4-5-6G-VR-DX-AF-S-ED-Zoom-Nikkor-Lens-24875.cfm


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Jun 15, 2010)

55-200VR. 

The vanilla 70-300 isn't a very good lens, the 55-200VR should outperform it.


----------



## Alan92RTTT (Jun 15, 2010)

First I'll throw in the 3rd option 70-300 with VR
Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G VR AF-S ED-IF Zoom-Nikkor Lens

IMO skip the non VR lens unless all your shooting is tripod based its just too long to be useful. 

Given the price of the 55-200 its hard to pass up.  

Since the D3000 is probably your 1st DSLR and the 18-55 your first lens the 55-200 is a great match.


----------



## GA_mayne (Jun 15, 2010)

Well I guess I didn't look hard enough to find the VR 300mm lens.  I also was thinking that the 55-200 would outperform the 70-300.  I was just looking around and those two fit my interest as well as my price range.  I also think that the 70-300mm is more than I need anyways.  Looks like I'm going with the 55-200mm VR lens.


----------



## fastr1red (Jun 15, 2010)

I have them both, the 55-200VR gets most of the work except when I get to Philip Island to shoot the bikes. Then the 200 never comes out, it's the 70-300VR and the Sigma 50-500OS.
If you don't really need the length, you'll fine the 55-200VR is great.


----------



## djacobox372 (Jun 15, 2010)

The 70-300mm you linked to is an af lens... it won't autofocus with a d3000.


----------

