DSLRUsers.com

Here is a shot of what could quite possibly be a new Nikon lens the AFS 55-200 DX, also in the shot is the new 18-55 DX so I would imagine it is real. Don't like the colour, but who cares about that. Sorry for the size but wanted to show the lens plate.

Where did you find this?

I saw this too Glen - I don’t like what appears to be pure plastic lens

sirhc55 wrote:I saw this too Glen - I don’t like what appears to be pure plastic lens

Chris,
These will pair easy with the Drebel and you're not going to order it aren't you?

Interesting. I guess this is the 'D50 enthusiast kit', 18-55 DX + 55-200 DX, instead of 18-70 DX and 70-300 G for the D70(s). I'm not expecting much in terms of build or image quality though!

Original link

http://akam.no/images/nikon/speilreflek ... _d50_3.jpg


found it mentioned on dpr but if you follow this link back you see all sorts of interesting images including sensors, etc

Link to pic of D70s

http://akam.no/images/nikon/speilreflek ... S_10_l.jpg

MCWB wrote:Interesting. I guess this is the 'D50 enthusiast kit', 18-55 DX + 55-200 DX, instead of 18-70 DX and 70-300 G for the D70(s). I'm not expecting much in terms of build or image quality though!

Trent,
Don't worry about it too much! the body (camera) mount will be stripped off if you attach your 80-200 lens on it.

better shot of the new lens. Birddy I think you are right

At least it is AFS, not bad for entry level (wonder who they are trying to compete against)

One thing I do find interesting. The glass is marked as ED ...

And do these lenses look to anyone else supiciously like the old APS lenses ???

Yes, it's completed range 18-55/ 55-200, special designed for the newbies, no need to have a long explanation and it's a new strategy from Nikon to lure all the newbies to their entry level of DSLR

How cheap will the 55-200 be, Birdy?

In both quality and price?

Nnnnsic wrote:How cheap will the 55-200 be, Birdy?

In both quality and price?

I've seen them today at Maxwell (just briefly) but did not get/ have the price.

Going by leek's $80 70-300 G purchase the other day, I'd guess about $50 at the local pawn shop!

You know, this camera looks much better in black.

Nnnnsic wrote:You know, this camera looks much better in black.

You can paint it in black or camo

MCWB wrote:Going by leek's $80 70-300 G purchase the other day, I'd guess about $50 at the local pawn shop!

You'll be surprised! these lenses will be on eBay and the last bid will be over few grants rare

Birddog, don't want to swap your 58 1.2 Noct for one do you
Leigh I agree, glad you said it, thought I might be just old and conservative (which I probably still am)

Birddog114 wrote:

sirhc55 wrote:I saw this too Glen - I don’t like what appears to be pure plastic lens

Chris,
These will pair easy with the Drebel and you're not going to order it aren't you?

The only ”drebbling” I do Birdie is called ”Dribbling” and it is normally in connection with Nikon (well - maybe not always their lenses)

With AF-S and ED, this new 55-200 is a far step ahead of the 70-300G consumer telephoto zoom. Sounds interesting - Nikon hoping to catch a larger market share and lure them into into the lens range. Wise marketing move IMO.

Onyx - remember that the average photo consumer is price driven and knowledge deficient (all that concerns them is Megapixels) - so it really comes down to the price

Where is the focus ring? is that it on the front?

It might be AF-S and ED but not IF

Glen wrote:Link to pic of D70s

http://akam.no/images/nikon/speilreflek ... S_10_l.jpg

What is that lens on the D70s? It's not an 18-70....

johndec wrote:

Glen wrote:Link to pic of D70s

http://akam.no/images/nikon/speilreflek ... S_10_l.jpg

What is that lens on the D70s? It's not an 18-70....

28-80.

gstark wrote:

johndec wrote:

Glen wrote:Link to pic of D70s

http://akam.no/images/nikon/speilreflek ... S_10_l.jpg

What is that lens on the D70s? It's not an 18-70....

28-80.

I certainly hope that they not planning to have that heap of cr@p as their "kit lens" in Australia

Damn... that would be a silly replacement wouldn't it.

I can just imagine the guys at Harvey Norman rejoicing.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking... the HN special.

"Sir, the 80mm lens, exclusive to HN will give you that extra reach compared to the inferior 18-70mm lens other retailers will try and get you to buy"

johndec wrote:Yeah, that's what I was thinking... the HN special.

"Sir, the 80mm lens, exclusive to HN will give you that extra reach compared to the inferior 18-70mm lens other retailers will try and get you to buy"

Good sales techniques

Did you say ”Sales Technique” Birddog They would not (generally) have a clue

sirhc55 wrote:Did you say ”Sales Technique” Birddog They would not (generally) have a clue

Chris,
Same as the Car salesmen

I have more info...it's a 10.5mm f/1.2 to 1500mm f/1.2 VR and it costs Aust$ 145.35
Now get back to bed, all of you.

Matt. K wrote:I have more info...it's a 10.5mm f/1.2 to 1500mm f/1.2 VR and it costs Aust$ 145.35
Now get back to bed, all of you.

Does that include GST?

OK guys... Lay off Hardly Normal for a while...
I bought a graphics card (Ooh... sorry - a Video Accelerator) from there on Saturday and the young guy who served me was very knowledgeable and helpful... As it turned out, he also happened to be a D70 owner and I referred him to this site...
If we keep slagging off HN, he's just never going to come out of the closet...

johndec
That depends...are you using purchasing method one or two?

Leek, no matter how good you thought the deal of buying a video accelrator from Harvey Norman was, let me comment on how stupid that probably was.

The last time I was in one of their stores, a few weeks ago, the highest video accelerator they had for a Geforce 5250 and were selling it for well over what I can find it for and what it's worth.

Nnnnsic wrote:Leek, no matter how good you thought the deal of buying a video accelrator from Harvey Norman was, let me comment on how stupid that probably was.

The last time I was in one of their stores, a few weeks ago, the highest video accelerator they had for a Geforce 5250 and were selling it for well over what I can find it for and what it's worth.

Stupid???? Hmmm!!!! Quite a strong word Leigh!!!

I actually conciously compromised on the GeForce 5700, which was about in the middle of the range they had in HN Chatswood...

I just happened to be in Chatswood Chase and HN was the closest...
Maybe I could have saved $25 by shopping elsewhere, but these days I really can't be that bothered on something in this price range...

My time and energy is worth far far more than $25...

johndec wrote:I certainly hope that they not planning to have that heap of cr@p as their "kit lens" in Australia

Check the other photos in the same directory, and the 18-70 can be found. I think it's just that one shot that has the 28-80 on it.

I withdraw.

Perhaps not stupid, but unwise, leek.

For how good the 5700 is, perhaps you should have looked for a 9600XT or a 6600 / 6600GT.

Regardless, I hope you didn't pay an excess amount for a 5700LE, the lower power version of the 5700, leek.
The 6600 or 6600GT would have been in the same price bracket at the 5700 (in fact, the 5700LE should be in the same bracket at the 6600 and the 5700 Ultra or regular variety should be in the same bracket as the 6600GT) and would probably suit you or last you better.

I must admit that a lot of this thread, that I think implies that these new lenses are probably not so hot and a possible honeytrap for newbs went over my head - however if the 55-200 DX will work with Nikon TCs, and has ED glass, is there any reason it couldn't make a servicable long lens? (I realise I may be advertising my ignorance here, since I don't know whether any DX lens can work with a TC - I'm just hoping!)

...I know the 70-200 VR with a TC would be streets better, but that's way out of my league.

I'm finding that planes and opposite sides of lakes are just that little bit too far away with my Sigma 70-300 - but I don't think the lens can take a TC (at least from what I can work out from the Sigma website). The Nikon website indicates the Nikon 70-300 G doesn't take a TC either, and although the 70-300 ED will take a TC, it is generally not considered (without the TC) to provide better results than the much cheaper G equivalent.

I'd really like some sort of lens or combination that will reach to 400, but haven't managed to identify a solution that's not at the very high end of the market (with the possible exception of the Bigma, which is far too big and heavy for me to control, even if I could afford it!).

Any ideas about whether this new lens might fit the bill for me?

ru32day,

What is your budget, to assit people to find an appropriate solution to your problem.

You may want to consider this lens:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/le ... 200_28.htm

With APO EX tele-converter 2x EX, it works as an AF tele-zoom lens from 140mm to 400mm F5.6.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/show ... 102&cat=37

Well if this new 55-200 ED is not just ED in name, it should be a formidable contender in the lightweight consumer tele zoom market, especially with AF-S. If it delivered in the image quality department, it will overshadow the 70-300's including Nikon's own. I don't think teleconverter would be desireable, firstly because of the lens' slow max aperture, and its compact size seems to suggest no space behind the rear element for the TC to protrude into, not to mention that a TC would easily cost more than the price of the lens itself.

Like the 80-200 f/4.5-5.6 that's one of the lesser known gems of the early 90s; this could be the new plastic fantastic must have for everyone wanting a little reach. I'm hoping it comes with a metal mount like 99% of Nikon lenses even in the consumer range; and UNLIKE the current Nikkor 28-200G.


Plz read the above post bearing in mind I am emotionally unstable... I'm hoping the 55-200 gets to market really soon so I can get my hands on one as I'm lacking photographic reach and I'm really badly missing my 80-200 (many missed opportunities already)!

I've seen and touch one the new sample of Nikon 55-200 ED at Nikon Disti. yesterday, and surely it's the one will overshadown the 70-300G and it's similar or less than the WORST Nikon 28-200G version.
I think Nikon is bringing it to the consumer market who doesn't have lot of photography knowledgeables or don't want to source the right lens for their uses and let say: "a lens for every occassion".

Hey look at the range: it covers from 18mm wide to 200mm tele in two lenses, make the newbies in DSLR's market happy and the salesmen in the Dept. stores has the easy job to do.

All of the comments here are coming from people that spend hours each day on Photography forums (okay well the mass majority) posting and scrutinizing pictures. Nikon isn't giving anyone crappy lenses, they're giving them exactly what they want as well as what they need. A lot of people are upgrading to DSLR's and don't need high dollar lenses, they only want the freedom that SLR's give over the compact, and the lesser quality isn't going to bug them one bit. They may not be really educated, but they don't need to be. The average person probably isn't planning on selling any images, or blowing them up to full size, they simply want more freedom (ISO, apeture etc) as well as general quality. Most of these people don't even know where to look for the lens quality issues, and wouldn't ever need to shoot anything @ f2.0. I think that Nikon with this move is servicing and helping the photography needs of many people who aren't so concerned about lens quality.

(Que U2's "It's a Beautiful Day). THANKS NIKON!!

On another note, when I bought my F80 I was talking to a pro who was shooting with a N80 (US and Black). When I finally got mine it was brushed grey and I brought it over to him and I said, "I sort of wish it was black" He looked at me like I was crazy and said "it's the pictures man." I felt like the biggest donkey.

Thanks for your collective wisdom.

fozzie wrote:ru32day,

What is your budget, to assit people to find an appropriate solution to your problem.

You may want to consider this lens:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/le ... 200_28.htm

I think this lens may be a bit heavy for me - I really struggle to hold the camera steady at the best of times (I have some niggling overuse injuries which I think contribute to this problem) and often use a tripod or monopod as a result, but I would like a lens that I have some hope of using handheld (I do try to use Ron Reznick's holding techniques, but even these get me only so far).

As to budget, I'd be stretching the friendship with "significant other" at AUD$1000 all in.

I take the points that others have made about lens quality, however the best quality lens is not going to produce a sharp shot if its used by someone who can't manage to hold it steady

Birddog114 wrote:it's similar or less than the WORST Nikon 28-200G version

Hope you'll forgive a few questions, then, Birddog.

..does this mean that you think the 28-200G is a better lens? (I might be able to stretch to one of these, esp if I can find a 2nd hand TC). Out of the 28-200G and the 70-300ED, which do you think is the better lens?

Is your judgement of the 55-200 ED referring to sturdiness, or quality of results/glass itself? (sturdiness doesn't matter so much to me - my lenses get treated with kid gloves and if one gets dropped, it's insured.)

ru32day

..does this mean that you think the 28-200G is a better lens? (I might be able to stretch to one of these, esp if I can find a 2nd hand TC). Out of the 28-200G and the 70-300ED, which do you think is the better lens?

In comparison with the 55-200DX/G lens, it's worst than the 28-200G (Not the old 28-200 D version)

You can't compare the 28-200G with the 70-300ED, they are apple to orange and with their difference focal lenght. (I'm talking about the 70-300D not 70-300G version)

Is your judgement of the 55-200 ED referring to sturdiness, or quality of results/glass itself? (sturdiness doesn't matter so much to me - my lenses get treated with kid gloves and if one gets dropped, it's insured.)

I have a play with it in ten minutes, the built not as good as the 28-200G or 70-300G, did few shots and it hunts and hunts non-stop.

Thanks, Birddog - very helpful info as always. Maybe I'll just have to live without extra length for a while until my technique improves and/or I can afford a better lens.