[Pauline]

Hello
this is my first proper post (after intro), and no doubt the first of many questions that I hope you wonderful pixaloes will help me with.

Two days ago I purchased my first DSLR, the Nikon D40, which came with the standard 18-55mm lens. I know I shouldn't run before I can walk, but I have been looking at an additional lens. What I would like to know is, is the right one please?

Jessops.com - Nikon 55-200mm f/4.-5.6 AFS DX VR Lens (Black) - Jessops.com

I will be taking photographs of dogs, (both portrait and action), landscapes, people (but not 'serious' portraits), and I also like buildings and 'local' wildlife, (not lions and tigers and bears oh my).

I can't afford to spend much more than this, and I know I am limited to buying Nikon lenses, so I would be grateful to know if this will suit my needs. (Should I ever learn to use the camera properly ) Also is the VR worth the extra money? (I do have shaky hands sometimes, and stabilty can be a problem as I suffer with arthritis).

TIA
Pauline

[Charlotte]

Hi Pauline + welcome to pixalo

I have the 55-200mm for my D50, but without the VR. It's a useful zoom to have.

For the price, this one looks good, and yes, the VR will definitely be a boon for you ... being a telephoto lens, any shaking from your hands will be quite exaggerated at the long end, i.e.200m. You will still have to hold the camera reasonably steady, but the VR definitely helps - I have VR on my macro lens, + find it very helpful indeed.

With your two lenses (if you do get this one) covering most focal lengths (it will start to get expensive to go beyond 200mm), you should be very well covered, and as such, I'd say the 55-200mm would be an excellent choice for you at this juncture

I'd advise you to shop around for it tho', as Jessops' prices are rather erratic.

[Dabhand16]

Originally Posted by Pauline

and I know I am limited to buying Nikon lenses, Pauline

No So, Pauline! Sigma make a range of lenses that are compatible with your camera.

The Sigma 18-200 with stabilisation is cheaper than the equivalent Nikkor, and is almost as good. It might be just right for you. It is a bit dearer than the one in your link, I've seen them advertised for £330.

Charlotte is quite right in saying that the longer the lens, the more difficult it is to hold steady, so a lens with stabilisation will probably be a better buy, even if it is dearer.

It might be worth trying the lens in a shop before you buy if you anticipate this could be a problem, but you might not get such a good price.

[liljj323]

Originally Posted by Dabhand16

The Sigma 18-200 with stabilisation is cheaper than the equivalent Nikkor

the old sigma 18-200 is, but the new one that has HSM (required to AF on the d40) is just as or more expensive.

i have used the niokn 55-200vr and i loved it ( flower on Flickr - Photo Sharing! ) <sample shot

it is by far the best lens for the price ($250 US) very sharp and the vr is wonderful.

[Dave]

Cameras2U are doing the lens for a good price of £175

[Pauline]

thanks for your help everyone

Originally Posted by Dabhand16

No So, Pauline! Sigma make a range of lenses that are compatible with your camera.........................

I first looked at the Canon EOS but found the Nikon easier to hold, and it was then that I thought the salesman said you had to buy Nikon lenses - maybe I misunderstood? Anyhow that's good to know, thank you.

Originally Posted by Dave

Cameras2U are doing the lens for a good price of £175

ooh thank you - kind of you to find that for me

I'll let you know how I get on. Thanks again