Review on Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR Zoom Lens with Vibration Reduction, New in Bulk Packaging (White Box) by Park Seo Jun

You should not expect miracles from a lens for 7 thousand, so the listed shortcomings are very conditional. I really wanted a TV with a stabilizer in addition to the complete 18-55 (Nikon D3000 camera) Market analysis at the time of purchase produced 3 results - 55-200 (which is what we are talking about) - 55-300 and 70-300 VR (they did not fit the budget, they cost 13 and 24 thousand, respectively). "Non-native" lenses were not considered for purchase. For what purpose did you buy? I wanted to decide whether I need such FRs, but there was no one to take it to play with. Decided - needed. Moreover, it is more necessary than 18-55 (which is now gathering dust on the shelf, and instead of it, the 35th fix is ​​working rather successfully) The lens is light, large enough, not very well assembled, the zoom ring rotates too easily, the assembly does not leave a feeling of a quality thing. (I took it out of the box - I was upset). Shoots better than it looks. Excellent autofocus faster and more accurate than a whale. The lens is exclusively for shooting outdoors in good lighting (minimum focusing distance is about a meter, a lot of light is normal photos), I tried it as a portrait lens - so-so. Sharp somewhere from 7.1. Washes on the long end. In general, the quality of the photo is at the level of a whale lens (it was not without reason that my camera was equipped with a double kit of 18-55 and 55-200). To get acquainted with telephotos, it is quite possible to buy one for yourself, decide whether you need a telephoto or not. If needed, we collect money for 70-300 vr, if not, we sell it and buy a 35 mm fix with the proceeds.