DSLRUsers.com

This is kinda old news, but I would like some advise from you guys.

I realize that both the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lens has a newer VR version. Is it worth it to spend a little more to get the VR for the 18-55mm? I know for the 55-200mm one, the VR option will be a useful one.

I would say there wouldn't be too much of a difference unless you shoot slower than 1/30 regularly, in any event I'd say you may as well save up for the 17-55 2.8 which is a lot better.

If you're going to have a 18-55VR and 55-200VR you might also consider bypassing both and getting a 18-200VR and not have to swap or carry an extra lens.

Why not save up some more and go for a 18-200mm VR? Its the 18-55 and 55-200 combined in one with VR.

what lens do you have now ? the 18-55VR is hell sharp, much more so than the 18-200. its also super light and super cheap so its a great little lens imo.

the main issue i see with it is that the front element rotates so no polariser can be used if you ever wanted to use one.

Well, currently I have no lens. My 18-70mm is not working and am still looking for the lens to replace that. I was at firstly contemplating on getting the 18-135mm, but it seems like not very good reviews on it.

And oh, reason why 18=200mm VR is not an option because a student, I am on a budget.

if youre gonna get the 18-55, then imo it would be silly not to get the VR option. apart from having VR it is also a better lens optically. cant really get cheaper than this lens.

see if someone wants to get rid of their kit lens that came with the D40/D60 you can probably pick one up cheap.

lefei wrote:Well, currently I have no lens. My 18-70mm is not working and am still looking for the lens to replace that. I was at firstly contemplating on getting the 18-135mm, but it seems like not very good reviews on it.

i had the 18-135, but that was before i got srs, so i guess my memories of it are a lil rosier than it really is, but i loved that lens. i totally agree with the 18-200 being not that great.

i vote the 18-55VR if ur on a tight budget, have u considered the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8? not to exy, sharp and fast
but note that the 18-55VR will get u so 2.8 equiv on the 18mm end easily

aim54x wrote: i totally agree with the 18-200 being not that great.

Whats not great about it??? Comparing it to the other lenses in this discussion it more than holds its own.I have not tried the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 but its not a multipurpose lens. I have plenty of sharp images from my 18-200VR and I would say inthe 18-70 range is as every bit as good as the kit lens.

MATT