Header banner
Revain logoHome Page
Adam Libera ᠌ photo
1 Level
336 Review
0 Karma

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 Adam Libera ᠌

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I'm amazed! It was definitely worth the money!

Here are photos taken by my husband and I using a Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 VR lens: all my lenses were Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 VR and Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 she returned to 18-55 f/2.8, but I still reach for the Nikkor 55-200 f/4-5.6 and d300 such as the Sigma 70-200 f / 2.8 macro HSM or Tokina AT-X PRO 50-135 f / 2.8 leave the Nikkor 55-200 f / 4-5.6 VR for the second camera - as a lens for vacation trips and other situations when I don’t want to take more expensive and heavy optics or I’ f/4-5.6 there are some! ) for those who want to shoot both a portrait, a reportage, mm at the long end is not enough), I hope my review will help you in choosing a lens.

Pros
  • This is a real find! 1) For me, these are, first of all, Built-in motor, VR, I don’t want to remove the 55-200 more contrast, more expressive than they really are (than what we see with our eyes) 4) I always focus on one point, in the portrait it is, of course, But ringing sharpness appears on one frame out of 3-5 (if focal lengths of 135-200 mm are used and the aperture is open) Bokeh! 6) Perfectly holds backlight, there is no drop in contrast and sharpness! Here is an example comparison with 18-55 VR (Nikon d3000 camera): page=6 7) An image stabilizer that comes in handy! 8) Convenient round hood (not petal) this may be a disadvantage, but for me it is an advantage when shooting in snow, Less noise than pictures taken with a Nikkor 18-55 when shooting with a 55-200 lens in normal lighting, you can raise the ISO to 800 without any problems, the noise is almost imperceptible, easily corrected by noise reduction, while with the Nikkor 18-55 noise already appeared at ISO 400 Filter diameter – 52 and to the 18-55 Price!
Cons
  • 1) In addition, there is a plus: with an aperture of f / 4-5.6, the depth of field is greater than with f / 2.8, therefore, the probability of hitting it is greater! plastic is lighter :)