Sooo... is anyone anticipating the impending release of the new Nikon 55-200mm VR AF-S? I know I'm pretty excited, (1.) because the range seems to complement the D40 kit lens very nicely (obvious marketing technique, but good nonetheless) and (2.) it's only 250 bucks, effectively leaving you with an 18-200 VR for half the price. That dude Ken Rockwell seems to think that this lens will be the "lens bargain of the year." Any thoughts???
Sorry in advance for the whine. Why is it that people seem compelled to hold this person up as the source of all photographic knowledge? We constantly see posts saying he says this or he says that of he pronounces that the world will end if you don't pass on the message he is providing. I get sick of it.
Well I guess that was sort of my question... Do you agree with the guy? Are you anticipating this lens. Or is Nikon leading me on a wild goose chase to buy every piece of hardware tailored specifically for the d40? I can't decide if I really have lens options, or if Nikon is leading me to BELIEVE I have options Sorry to have irked you. Is that guy (Rockwell) lacking cred on this forum??? Is he a member??? Are these questions I shouldn't be asking???
Let's just have a conversation about the lens itself, and not get hung up on what someone else has posted about it, please. Mr Rockwell has only held a prototype (apparently), so I'd rather wait for some real reviews.
The non VR 55-200 is a really good lens and a cost effective way to get 200mm. If the new VR version is as good it will be a great buy. I think I would rather have this small light low cost lens then the 18-200.
I'll the first to say, YES. I'm am looking forward to seeing and testing this lens. The focal range, price point, and features (VRII) are most attractive to me. To be honest, I never even considered the non-VR version when it came out, but after mulling around for ages to find a DX lens to replace my heavier 70-210mm f/4-5.6, this may be the one.
However, its attention will compete against a 75-150mm on its way. For me, the clincher would be a larger max aperture, but I suppose one can't get everything in a small package. Personally I would love to see a 75-150 f/2.8 DX from Nikon, I don't even need more than a 2X zoom range, otherwise the new Sigma or Tokina may have to do.
It is actually available today (the D40x was also apparently received by U.S. dealers today). I preordered one a couple weeks ago and my card was charged today and my order tracking page on the ritz website shows that the lens was shipped fed ex earlier today.
This is my first post, so if I am doing something wrong here, be kind on me.
Anyway, I got one as well and I have taken a few shots as well. So far my impression of the lens is pretty favorable, but I've only used it for about an hour. AF is quiet and fast. I am by no means an expert so cannot comment of the specifics of the lens quality, and only share some images.
Anyway, these are the shots. They are modified a bit, mostly just resized and sharpened. I'll post a couple of full res shots as well in a sec.
The new VR 55-200 seems to have a totally different optical construction compared to the non-VR version. Has anybody had the chance to compare the optical performance of the two lenses? Is the mount of both lenses constructed of plastics?