[condor]

Originally Posted by josejoseph

Have you thought about Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6?

No, not looking at super-zooms. Looking at specific / specialized lenses.

Secondly, the 18-300 is 44k on Amazon. We can get the 18-140 for less than 20k. Remember that the line-up is led by the 200-500 mm

[soumen.blore]

Looking to buy a telephoto zoom lens and considering the nikkor 55-200. Will be using it with my d5500 and primarily want to capture wildlife. Considering the same lens because of the price and decent reviews. The other lenses I currently have is 18-55 kit lens and the 35mm prime lens.
Has anyone used the same and will it be sufficient as a starter zoom lens or shall i be looking at nikkor 55-300 or the tamron 70-300.

[condor]

Originally Posted by soumen.blore

Looking to buy a telephoto zoom lens and considering the nikkor 55-200.
Has anyone used the same and will it be sufficient as a starter zoom lens or shall i be looking at nikkor 55-300 or the tamron 70-300.

55-200 will not be sufficient for wildlife. Though 70-300 is better, but even that would not be sufficient.

If taking the 70-300, take the Nikon 70-300 VR . It's good.

[soumen.blore]

Originally Posted by condor

55-200 will not be sufficient for wildlife. Though 70-300 is better, but even that would not be sufficient.

If taking the 70-300, take the Nikon 70-300 VR . It's good.

Thanks for the quick response, Is it good to start with 55-200 and later add the nikkor 200-500 to my kit. Asking as the current budget will allow 55-200 and 70-300 will be a bit of stretch and probably have to postpone till next month

[condor]

Originally Posted by soumen.blore

Is it good to start with 55-200 and later add the nikkor 200-500 to my kit. Asking as the current budget will allow 55-200 and 70-300 will be a bit of stretch and probably have to postpone till next month

The 55-200 will not be enough. Hence that is out.

Nikon's 55-300 would be better than the Tamron 70-300. But even that is 20k new (before any discounts that you may find).

You could also look at a used 55-300 for now, and once you gain sufficient experience - and you have outgrown the 300, you can look at a better lens. At that point, you will also be able to figure out which lens you would like to go with.

Take a VR version (either 55-300 or 70-300). Dont go for the 7k non-VR version of the Nikon 70-300

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by condor

The 55-200 will not be enough. Hence that is out.

Nikon's 55-300 would be better than the Tamron 70-300. But even that is 20k new (before any discounts that you may find).

You could also look at a used 55-300 for now, and once you gain sufficient experience - and you have outgrown the 300, you can look at a better lens. At that point, you will also be able to figure out which lens you would like to go with.

Take a VR version (either 55-300 or 70-300). Dont go for the 7k non-VR version of the Nikon 70-300

The 70-300 VR is a very vfm lens. I got many favourite wildlife shots with it.

[harsh79]

Originally Posted by soumen.blore

Is it good to start with 55-200 and later add the nikkor 200-500 to my kit.

Don't. I made this mistake. It's awful in low-light and at 150-200mm the quality leaves a lot to be desired.

[condor]

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

The 70-300 VR is a very vfm lens. I got many favourite wildlife shots with it.

Yes, the current VR version one is good ! But OP mentioned that it would be a stretch. Hence suggested a used 55-300. He could also go for a used 70-300 VR, which I have seen to go for 20k also.

[ajay_satpute]

Originally Posted by harsh79

Don't. I made this mistake. It's awful in low-light and at 150-200mm the quality leaves a lot to be desired.

The new 55-200 VR II lens is fantastic throughout the range. And i am not sure how many of us do wildlife photography at night or in very low light. For all normal scenarios, its a great lens. Also, its a good VFM. The 70-300 is a VR I lens which is one generation older. However, it does serve the purpose as everyone mentioned.

[nilanjanray]

Originally Posted by condor

Yes, the current VR version one is good ! But OP mentioned that it would be a stretch. Hence suggested a used 55-300. He could also go for a used 70-300 VR, which I have seen to go for 20k also.

Well, the OP did say that it was a matter of one month

Originally Posted by ajay_satpute

The new 55-200 VR II lens is fantastic throughout the range. And i am not sure how many of us do wildlife photography at night or in very low light. For all normal scenarios, its a great lens. Also, its a good VFM. The 70-300 is a VR I lens which is one generation older. However, it does serve the purpose as everyone mentioned.

Condor was talking about reach here, not aperture or 'slowness' of a lens. 200mm on a D5500 is fine for animalscapes, but not for closeups, unless one gets very lucky.

[condor]

Originally Posted by harsh79

Don't. I made this mistake. It's awful in low-light and at 150-200mm the quality leaves a lot to be desired.

Looks like you have the prev version 55-200 VR. Agree with Ajay Satpute here. I have the 55-200 VR-II and it does not look that bad. While not in the range of a 70-200 for pic quality, it is a nice lil lens worth it's price tag.

Originally Posted by nilanjanray

Well, the OP did say that it was a matter of one month

Missed the one month part. !

The new 70-300 VR is about 30k. OP can get one & keep it, me thinks ..

[soumen.blore]

Originally Posted by condor

The new 70-300 VR is about 30k. OP can get one & keep it, me thinks ..

Thanks for all the suggestions everyone, have decided to wait for a month and get the 70-300 mm.
Also not a fan of used stuff, so would wait for 11 days and get a new one. Meantime its time for making some calls to find the best price.

[Aston Singh]

Guys, need some advice. I'm getting Nikon D5000 + Nikon 18-55mm lens for 10k. Someone known to me is selling it so I am confident about the condition of the camera and the lens. He just upgraded his camera so now he's decided to sell this one.

Is it a good deal? I am a complete amateur and this would be my first DSLR. Till now I have strictly kept it to smartphones and point-and-shoot cameras. My usage is going to be very basic and I am really not looking to spend any more for a camera since my inclination towards photography isn't that strong, at least for now!

[kozhissery]

Originally Posted by Aston Singh

Guys, need some advice. I'm getting Nikon D5000 + Nikon 18-55mm lens for 10k. Someone known to me is selling it so I am confident about the condition of the camera and the lens. He just upgraded his camera so now he's decided to sell this one.

Is it a good deal? I am a complete amateur and this would be my first DSLR. Till now I have strictly kept it to smartphones and point-and-shoot cameras. My usage is going to be very basic and I am really not looking to spend any more for a camera since my inclination towards photography isn't that strong, at least for now!

Yes it is a good deal. The advantages are
1. You are buying from a known person.
2. This is basic kit and its better than 3000 or 3100
3. It has tilt screen (for new users this is convenient)
4. It has bracketing

Just make sure that it has not been used for more than 70k clicks. Personally found out that above 60k or so the clarity goes own a bit.

[Aston Singh]

Originally Posted by kozhissery

Just make sure that it has not been used for more than 70k clicks. Personally found out that above 60k or so the clarity goes own a bit.

How do you check this? From what I know, the camera has not been used extensively.