New Nikon 55-200DX lens.

[Jim_Tardio]

For those who haven't seen it...

<p>

<a href="http://nikonimaging.com/global/news/2005/0420_04.htm">Nikon's

55-200DX lens</a>.

<p>

Not the quite the speed I would have liked, but possibly a useful lens

for Nikon's digital bodies.

[ilkka_nissila]

I think Nikon is trying to bridge the gap between compact digital cameras and DSLRs. Pretty lightweight lens, but the max aperture is disappointing. Nikon still doesn't see the need for an f/4 telezoom.

[ShunCheung]

Again, Nikon's focus is the low end. This is likely going to be some cheap $100 zoom for those consumers who would otherwise buy a digicam.

[sl attanapola]

What is wrong with the maximum aperture?

It equates to a 100-300mm/f4-5.6 in a very compact body.

Lots of people use the equivalent optic on 35mm SLRs.

If it is optically OK it would make a great travelling lense due to it's small size!

 

If you want to have a "faster" lens you would have to spend much more money or buy an older secondhand lense.

[fourfa]

they're gonna sell a bundle of these. if the optics are good it would make a lovely backpacking lens

[michaelbrochstein]

I for one am thrilled by the announcment of the 55-200, it is definitely (assuming test reports show it to be reasonably sharp etc) what I have wanted for a long time and fills a hole in their lineup.

 

It is not meant to be the fastest, will probably not be as sharp as their pro level glass and will be much cheaper than their fast pro level glass. What it is is a great lightweight travel lense and will replace the 70-300 in many kits. It is *very* light and fairly small.

 

My guess is that its quality will be similar or better to the 18-70 which has proved to be a good value. If test reports are favorable then I expect that I will be the owner of one sooner than later.

 

Combine it with the 18-70 and you can cover 27 - 300mm (35mm equivalent) with two very light and compact lenses. Now if Nikon can design a 16-55mm lense then I could get the 35mm equivalent of 24-300mm in two compact lightweight (and not very expensive) lenses - a perfect travel combo.

[abbilder]

Hello!

 

This might be a nice lens, but what meens "compact SWM" Seems that something is diffeent to the normal SWM.

 

Today, they launched two consumer boddies with consumer lenses, may be - if a D90 or D200 will come, they announce a telezom lens to fill the gab between the 70-200 AFS and this 55-200.

 

The old but good 80-200 is for me not realy an alternativ for the D70, because the AF on this lens is much to slow (one reason I love my analog F90x).

 

At the moment, the only lens between the 70-200 and the now new 55-200 with AFS seems to be the 24-120 AFS VR lens. May be I have to get this lens, to get a lens ranging in the 200 mm area - the 70mm of the 18-70 are often to less tele.

 

Best wishes

Axel

[ilkka_nissila]

In my experience the AF 80-200/2.8D N has sufficient AF speed for most practical applications of the lens. Even on the D70. The only problem with the D70 is its AF accuracy, which is pretty terrible, and I am not sure if AF-S / no AF-S affects this. Maybe it does. However, it is quite obvious that pictures from the 80-200/2.8 would literally blow away pics from this new lens. Believe me, if not, you will see if you try.

[dan_brown14]

I'll reserve judgment. If this lens is sharp at f5.6 on the long end, it's worth taking a look

at. I like the lowly 80-200/f4.5-56D-AF ("plastic fantastic") Nikkor. This diminutive AF-S

DX might be just the ticket for daylight work in a grab-and-go bag.

[ilkka_nissila]

Dan, are you kidding? There has never been any variable aperture something-f/5.6 telezoom which was half useable wide open at the long end, by any manufacturer, and if there were such a thing, it would have cost at least $3000 or something. But maybe this will be it.

[lostinhigh]

Check out the first preliminary reviews of the lens, with full-sized pics here:<br>

 

<a href="http://www.photocameramag.com/news/NikonD50.html">Nikon D50 First Review</a>

<br><br>

Some speculation on what the price ($249.95 in the U.S.) of the lens might be is posted here:<br>

 

<a href="http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6466-7762">Nikon announces D50, D70s</a> (at the bottom of the page)

[ilkka_nissila]

Based on those images, the 55-200 seems to be capable of about 1/3-1/2 of the resolution of the camera at wide apertures. That's not very good, but it may be better than a compact digicam.

[lex_jenkins]

What Shun said.

 

The co-mission of the D70 and primary mission of the D50 is to persuade those who might otherwise buy a P&S digicam to instead buy into the Nikon system, with lenses, flashes and accessories they can carry over into more expensive bodies if they wish.

 

Considering the the maximum aperture of some variable aperture zooms on P&S digicams is f/6.3 or even f/8, many folks would consider anything faster a significant improvement. Especially considering that those slowpoke superzooms can't even autofocus properly at the longest focal lengths, so the users never get to see what a properly sharp photo looks like.

 

Believe it not, this can only be a good thing for Nikon, as long as the quality is up to snuff. I just don't want to see a repeat of the EM, which I've always considered to be Nikon's darkest moment and stinkiest brain fart.

[ilkka_nissila]

Actually, the mission of the D70 is to sell Nikon users into digital, and the purpose of the infamous viewfinder and Multi-CAM 900 are to sell the D2X in great numbers to these D70 users. :-)

[wilfred_wong]

"Actually, the mission of the D70 is to sell Nikon users into digital, and the purpose of the infamous viewfinder and Multi-CAM 900 are to sell the D2X in great numbers to these D70 users. :-)"

 

That's exactly what i think... but i hope i'm not going to fall to their evil plan. I still want something between D70 and D2X....ie, a digital F100-like camera. thinking how many i times i've used a F4S compare to F90X and other cheap SLRs, i really don't want a cam that force me to 've the vertical grip.

 

i think i won't get the 55-200. just wish they'll release something like 50-200 or 50-150 f4 VR.

[larry n.]

I find that digicams wide open perform better than any of my cheap Nikon DSLR zoom lenses (aka, the 18-70 DX lens). And the reason is very simple: I don't scrutinize, enlarge or expect much out of the digicam images. I think for this reason some people would be disappointed with lenses such as the 55-200Dx. In all honesty, I would be much happier with a 12X panasonic digicam zoom.

[sander_vesik]

I think one interesting trend in Nikon lens announcements has been that they have all been AF-S lens. Could it be that say in 10 years low end Nikon bodies will only work with AF-S lens as the last parts of mecahnical coupling have been removed?

[abbilder]

Nice aspect,

 

but I think its a question of marketing: The same AF-System as the PROs use

AND even using a relatively slow AF-unit as CAM900 gives you a very good AF-speed in combination with AFS. Have you used a Non-AF-lens at the D70? I try to avoid whenever possible.

 

By, Axel

[ilkka_nissila]

I don't think Nikon will remove the in-body motor as every year they introduce lenses which can only AF with it. So many high-end lenses are not AF-S: 10.5 DX, 14/2.8, 105/2, 180/2.8, 50 mm, they simply can not afford to drop it. Even quite many of Canon's lenses are not USM. However, they should add a proper AF motor to the low-end bodies so that we're not forced to pay $5000 for a D2X (yes, I know about the D2H(s)).

 

Wilfred, I think we're all destined to succumb to the temptation and get the D2X ... it's inevitable .. but thankfully, it is also a nice body, not just a good AF motor. By the way, the D2X AF motor is very quiet and it makes using AF lenses quite pleasant in comparison with many other bodies.

[john_nordstrom1]

What a frenzy these "things" put us in. Obsessing over the needful things that Nikon puts out in front of us like rabid dogs for the next toy. Years ago I sold all my Nikon gear in order to keep food in our mouths and a place to live, and now years later, have a D70 perched on the edge of my computer desk, contemplating the idea of which brand of 12-24 lens to get. It makes me reflect on one really important thing I learned from a Nikon associate during a training lecture in Chicago is, that all we really need is a 50mm lens. It just comes down to either getting closer or further away from the subject and composing. Not that it will stop us from buying, that's what we do, but, . . . . . . .