SLRGear.com: Interactive Lens Reviews and Opinion.
Digital Camera ReviewsDiscuss lenses in the SLRgear.com Forums (separate login!)



Reviews Views Date of last review
6 230135 11/14/2013
Recommended By Average Purchase
67% of reviewers $313.50
Reader Review Rating Averages
Readers' rating for
Construction Quality
Readers' rating for
Image Quality
Readers'
Overall Rating
spacerspacer
7.00
spacerspacer
7.50
spacerspacer
8.00
nikon55-300f45-56g.jpg


Keywords: Nikon Nikkor Tele Zoom DX APS-C AF-S VR II Stabilized tested


Cretu Stefan

Registered: November 2013
Posts: 2
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by Cretu Stefan
Review Date: 11/14/2013 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 6 

 
Pros: zoom range - bad construction
Cons: poor in low light

This lens is for beginners who want to experiment with focales distances.This lens can be used especially in daylight. Example photos can be seen here
http://cretustefan.smugmug.com/Galleries/D7000-55-300-VR2
valt3r

Registered: January 2013
Posts: 3
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by valt3r
Review Date: 1/18/2013 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: None indicated| Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Good for portraits
Cons: none

Almost all portraits from http://3foto.ro are made with 55-300mm on D7000. Tele lens means no distortion and blur background.
d5100_Nikon

Registered: June 2012
Posts: 3
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by d5100_Nikon
Review Date: 6/25/2012 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $250.00| Rating: 7 

 
Pros: sharp up to 200mm, metal mount
Cons: soft from 200-300mm, heavy

This one is going back. I got it at a huge discount with my camera purchase but I chose wrong. I should have gotten the better cheaper 55-200mm lens. I wanted the extra reach the 300mm should offer but it's only sharp up to 200mm so what's point? Ok, I guess if you aren't picky and want to zoom in but I'd like to be able to zoom in and still get a sharp picture out of it, not just an acceptable one. Now I'm screwed because I can't get the other lens at the discounted price I could have gotten it at when I bought the camera. Oh well.


I did get nice pics with this lens, but it took many many not so great pics to get the few good ones. Too unreliable in my book.
Rx7chi

Registered: April 2012
Posts: 1
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by Rx7chi
Review Date: 4/21/2012 Would you recommend the product? No | Total Spent: $249.00| Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Light long zoom range
Cons: slow focus and soft images

I got this lense on sale at Amazon before Christmas glad I did not pay a lot for it. I got a 55-200 kit lense with my Nikon 5100 its a good lense for a kit lense I got the 55-300 for more reach as I do wildlife and sports for the high school soccer games. If you keep it in the 55 -200 range its pretty sharp as long as your stop down in F-8 to F-11 in the 300 range sharpness drops off you have to be in F8-F11 to get decent sharpness also its a little slow to focus and lock this is a basic kit lense but with a metal mount but it's light and plastic. I plan to get rid of it and maybe get the Tamron 70-300 would not recommend this lense
davidgarth

Registered: March 2012
Posts: 1
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by davidgarth
Review Date: 3/29/2012 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $400.00| Rating: 9 

 
Pros: small, lightweight, good image quality
Cons: softens a bit past 200mm

I am a recently retired part-time pro photographer with high standards of image quality. Now that I'm retired, I wanted to have a lens to take on pleasure (non-$$) trips that was lighter and smaller than the 70-200mm f2.8 and 300mm f2.8 lens I've owned for years. I'm just too old to lug the heavyweight stuff around unless someone is paying me. (Well, the truth is I'm too old even if they are paying me.)


This lens has exceeded my expectations. From 55 up to nearly 200mm its sharpness is very comparable and only slightly less than my 70-200. At these focal lengths it's sharp wide-open and very sharp stopped down a bit. At 200-300mm it's noticeably less sharp than my 300 f2.8 but still very usable for most things. (But that's comparing $5,300 lens that weighs more than 6 pounds to a $400 lens that weighs in at just over a pound) The VRII is noticeably better than my VRI lens.


It's light and small enough that I can always include it in my "pleasure-trip kit": a Nikon D5100, 12-24, 50mm f1.8G, and 55-300. That lets me take high quality stills or videos from 12mm to 300mm (18mm-450mm full-frame equivalent) in a package that weighs only about 5 pounds. Amazing! I highly recommend this lens.
RussellG

Registered: October 2010
Posts: 1
Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor review by RussellG
Review Date: 10/17/2010 Would you recommend the product? Yes | Total Spent: $355.00| Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, light, VRII, inexpensive
Cons: Rotating front element, questionable hood quality (new design)

This lens is pretty much a longer version of the 55-200 which is a great lens in its own right. I saved over $100 by getting this lens over the 70-300mm.


The zoom is smooth and image quality is as good as the venerable 70-300 VR lens, perhaps a bit better to my eyes (especially at 300mm).


There's some CA as expected but nothing to worry about.


VR is the second version like my 16-85mm and works very well at 300mm. The only thing I noticed about the VR is that it takes a half-second or so to stabilize, so you have to be a bit patient before you press the shutter.


Auto focus is not the swiftest and is about the same as the 55-200 and perhaps not as fast as the 70-300 so this may not be a good sports lens.


It's a nice light lens for its range. Build quality is okay (although the metal mount is a nice touch).


The hood is a new design and snaps on to the front element (easier to put on for sure because you don't have to line up any notches). It's always loose so it rotates freely (not too easily though). To remove it, you have to depress two tabs and pull it off. I don't get the feeling this is a solid design here and worry that any bang on the hood will break it off. I'm hoping it's sturdier than it feels and I think Nikon got a little cheap here.


In the end I think Nikon built a nice, light lens here and, despite some minor niggles, I prefer it over the 70-300 for my purposes (general photography - family & scenics/wildlife - no sports).


If you like the 55-200 but want more reach, then this is your lens.


Highly recommended.


 






This document copyright © 2009-2014, SLRgear.com, all rights reserved.