Lens for DSLR

[SJRosa]

Just about to buy what I need to finally persue one of my passions Photography. I am needing someone to explain to me the difference between the use of lens you use? I am purchasing a Nikon D40 kit. Now whats the difference between the 70-300 lens vs the 55-200mm

[Stflorian]

This is not a direct answer but it's worth checking it out DX Dream Team Lenses

You can also find more info about these lenses

[OsmosisStudios]

You... you link to KR. We cant have any of that around here *brandishes weaponry*

55-200 VS 70-300.
1: Range. Depending on the kit you got, you likely have an 18-55 as a basic kit lens. Well, the 55-200 extends that range without a gap. The 70-300 goes farther (longer range) but gives you a gap between 55 and 70. To some that's too small to worry about, to others its a deal breaker

2: Range. 200 vs 300mm is a rather hefty difference that you dont notice until you try them both out.

3: Build. The 55-200 is a consumer-grade lens and, as such, has a plastic mount and is entirely plastic. Controls arent the greatest. The 70-300 is a pro-sumer-grade lens and, as such, is much more solid and has a metal lens mount. It's also heavier, so that may be a drawback.

4: Features. The 55-200 comes in 2 flavours, non VR and VR. In either case, though, the focus ring on the lens is practically useless and there is no focus distance scale to speak of. The 70-300 comes in 3 flavours, but the latest (and only recommended one) has VR, a true-blue focus ring and a great distance scale (with an IR dot to boot). Of course, these things may mean nothing to you and can be totally unimportant.

5: Aperture. The 55-200 is a 4-5.6 and the 70-300 is a 4.5-5.6. They're roughly the same, but neither is particularly fast. So you wont be shooting evening sports with them anytime soon.

The big thing is whether you want a light-weight, simplified telephoto or a heavier, featured telephoto.

[Elmo]

I read a little different question so let me answer the question I read.

Disclaimer: I am going to use a Full Frame Sensor in the calculations to avoid starting a&^$%*$ contest on how the crop factor applies. Also I do not want to take time to do the calculations and the ones for FF I remember.

Let’s start with a normal lens. A normal Focal length lens allows the camera to record an area about equal to area clearly seen by the normal eye. The focal length of this lens will be about equal to the diagonal length across the sensor. As the sensor is about 24x36 mm the diagonal length is about 43 mm. 50 mm is what the industry has said is normal.

Any lens with a focal length over 50 mm is considered a telephoto. As the focal length get longer the telephone power increases. The approx power is the lens focal length divided by 50 (actually 44 is closer) so a 100 mm lens is about the same as a 2 power telescope. A 600 mm lens is about equal to a 12 power telescope.

As the focal length decreases below 50 the angle of view increases (Wide Angle Lens). Due to wide angle lens design an angle of view (power) calculation is not simple like a telephoto. Our only way to determine a WA lens coverage is to look it up in the mfg’s specifications. I can be assumed that the Angle of view will increase as the focal length decreases (as long as you do not compare brands).

So I see in your question the 55-250 will cover a wider angle but not as strong a telephoto as the 70-300.

Of course I might have misread the question. Sometime I do that.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by SJRosa

...Now whats the difference between the 70-300 lens vs the 55-200mm

About $300.

The main thing with those two lenses you want to be asking yourself, though, is "is f/5.6 as a maximum aperture at the long end of the lens going to be wide enough?"

[SJRosa]

Originally Posted by Elmo

I read a little different question so let me answer the question I read.

Let’s start with a normal lens. A normal Focal length lens allows the camera to record an area about equal to area clearly seen by the normal eye. The focal length of this lens will be about equal to the diagonal length across the sensor. As the sensor is about 24x36 mm the diagonal length is about 43 mm. 50 mm is what the industry has said is normal.

Any lens with a focal length over 50 mm is considered a telephoto. As the focal length get longer the telephone power increases. The approx power is the lens focal length divided by 50 (actually 44 is closer) so a 100 mm lens is about the same as a 2 power telescope. A 600 mm lens is about equal to a 12 power telescope.

As the focal length decreases below 50 the angle of view increases (Wide Angle Lens). Due to wide angle lens design an angle of view (power) calculation is not simple like a telephoto. Our only way to determine a WA lens coverage is to look it up in the mfg’s specifications. I can be assumed that the Angle of view will increase as the focal length decreases (as long as you do not compare brands).

So I see in your question the 55-250 will cover a wider angle but not as strong a telephoto as the 70-300.

Of course I might have misread the question. Sometime I do that.

Thanks very helpful!

[SJRosa]

Originally Posted by inkista

About $300.

The main thing with those two lenses you want to be asking yourself, though, is "is f/5.6 as a maximum aperture at the long end of the lens going to be wide enough?"

I don't know anything about aperture yet, Would u mind helping me understand that?

[SJRosa]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

You... you link to KR. We cant have any of that around here *brandishes weaponry*

55-200 VS 70-300.
1: Range. Depending on the kit you got, you likely have an 18-55 as a basic kit lens. Well, the 55-200 extends that range without a gap. The 70-300 goes farther (longer range) but gives you a gap between 55 and 70. To some that's too small to worry about, to others its a deal breaker

2: Range. 200 vs 300mm is a rather hefty difference that you dont notice until you try them both out.

3: Build. The 55-200 is a consumer-grade lens and, as such, has a plastic mount and is entirely plastic. Controls arent the greatest. The 70-300 is a pro-sumer-grade lens and, as such, is much more solid and has a metal lens mount. It's also heavier, so that may be a drawback.

4: Features. The 55-200 comes in 2 flavours, non VR and VR. In either case, though, the focus ring on the lens is practically useless and there is no focus distance scale to speak of. The 70-300 comes in 3 flavours, but the latest (and only recommended one) has VR, a true-blue focus ring and a great distance scale (with an IR dot to boot). Of course, these things may mean nothing to you and can be totally unimportant.

5: Aperture. The 55-200 is a 4-5.6 and the 70-300 is a 4.5-5.6. They're roughly the same, but neither is particularly fast. So you wont be shooting evening sports with them anytime soon.

The big thing is whether you want a light-weight, simplified telephoto or a heavier, featured telephoto.

okay, thanks beginning to understand a bit better. And I would want lightweight. I'm new to this so what exactly is telephoto? Do you have any examples as to what you've explained?

[OsmosisStudios]

Telephoto is considered anything with a focal length longer than the normal (normal = diagonal measurement of the image plane/sensor). On a crop body that's anything longer than about 35mm (50mm equivalent).

The only thing I can really demonstrate is the range. I've got a few shots for you:

Here's the comparison between 55 and 70mm. I've moved a bit sideways between shots, but not forwards or back

And here's a comparison between 200 and 300mm. The framing changed, but the focal length is the big changer.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by Elmo

I read a little different question so let me answer the question I read.

Disclaimer: I am going to use a Full Frame Sensor in the calculations to avoid starting a&^$%*$ contest on how the crop factor applies. Also I do not want to take time to do the calculations and the ones for FF I remember.

Let’s start with a normal lens. A normal Focal length lens allows the camera to record an area about equal to area clearly seen by the normal eye. The focal length of this lens will be about equal to the diagonal length across the sensor. As the sensor is about 24x36 mm the diagonal length is about 43 mm. 50 mm is what the industry has said is normal.

Any lens with a focal length over 50 mm is considered a telephoto. As the focal length get longer the telephone power increases. The approx power is the lens focal length divided by 50 (actually 44 is closer) so a 100 mm lens is about the same as a 2 power telescope. A 600 mm lens is about equal to a 12 power telescope.

As the focal length decreases below 50 the angle of view increases (Wide Angle Lens). Due to wide angle lens design an angle of view (power) calculation is not simple like a telephoto. Our only way to determine a WA lens coverage is to look it up in the mfg’s specifications. I can be assumed that the Angle of view will increase as the focal length decreases (as long as you do not compare brands).

So I see in your question the 55-250 will cover a wider angle but not as strong a telephoto as the 70-300.

Of course I might have misread the question. Sometime I do that.

Thanks Elmo, great post about the basics!