Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR DX AF-S Nikkor

(From Nikon lens literature) Nikon Corporation is pleased to announce the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED, a compact, lightweight 3.6x zoom lens featuring a host of state-of-the-art optical technologies such as the Vibration Reduction (VR), Nikon ED glass element and SWM (Silent Wave Motor). The AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED has been specifically designed to complement the D80 as well as the upcoming D40 and D40x cameras. And it delivers outstanding performance at a remarkably affordable price.

The compact zoom lens offers powerful zoom performance of 55-200mm (providing a picture angle equivalent to an 82-300mm lens in 35mm format) and is suitable for every type of photography from candid portraits to sports, nature and wildlife photography.

The Nikon Vibration Reduction (VR) system enables users to take substantially sharper handheld pictures at slower shutter speeds. With this lens, users can take sharp pictures at shutter speeds approximately 3 stops slower* than would otherwise be possible. The VR system minimizes image vibration in the finder, making shutter release timing and image composition easier.

The AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED also incorporates proven Nikon features and technologies such as the SWM, which offers quiet and smooth autofocusing, and one ED glass element that provide higher resolution and high-contrast images.

The AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED is the only entry level VR lens at a very affordable price.

*Under Nikon measurement conditions.

Test Notes

Whether you call it Vibration Reduction (as does Nikon) or Image Stabilization (as do Canon and several others), it's a feature with real utility for most shooters. It obviously wont' do anything about blur caused by subject motion, but the ability to reduce the effects of camera shake can make a big difference when shooting under limited lighting, particularly at telephoto focal lengths. Given that VR usually adds a hundred dollars or so to the cost of a lens, finding it on a lens selling for $200-250 is a real surprise. True, this particular lens' VR is based on an older version of Nikon's technology, but Nikon says it still provides a good two f-stops worth of shake reduction. That is, you should be able to shoot at shutter speeds four times slower than whatever level you need to get sharp handheld shots without VR. (We're working on a way to measure VR performance, hope to have some initial results published in the next month or so. - Preliminary results for the 55-200VR weren't that great, we've asked Nikon for a second sample.)

VR is all well and good, but how does well does this lens perform its main task, namely delivering sharp, distortion-free images?

Sharpness
The Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR does pretty well in the sharpness department, particularly considering its selling price. It is a "DX" lens, meaning it has an APS-C size image circle, and so isn't compatible with Nikon's full-frame film cameras; this helps the price somewhat. But still, $200-250 for a VR-enabled lens is a remarkable price point, making its very decent sharpness performance all the more noteworthy. Like many inexpensive zooms, it's sharper at shorter focal lengths than at long, the worst blur performance occurring at 135mm in our DxO tests. But even its worst isn't all that bad, the softest point coming in at under three blur units. That's a blur that's easily noticeable when compared against the best lenses we've tested, but is as good as that of many lenses likely to be considered by even relatively well-heeled amateur shooters. The 55-200mm VR's blur characteristics are also unusually uniform across the frame, with much less variation from center to edges than we're accustomed to seeing, particularly in this price range. Sharpness improves somewhat as you stop down, but images never get truly crisp. At the risk of sounding like broken record though, the 55-200mm VR's image quality does exceed expectations for its market segment.

Chromatic Aberration
The 55-200mm VR's chromatic aberration was also something of a pleasant surprise. It begins on the low side of moderate at 55mm, drops to truly low levels through the middle of its focal length range, and then rises to the high side of moderate at 200mm. At 200mm, average CA remains fairly low as you stop down, but maximum CA increases, meaning you'll see more CA in the corners and edges, and less in the center as you close the aperture. Across the entire range though, CA is better than that of many more expensive lenses, again drawing attention to the excellent value offered by this lens.

Shading ("Vignetting")
I guess it was inevitable that something had to give in the design of the 55-200mm VR, and it turned out to be shading. Light falloff in the corners of the frame is quite pronounced when shooting wide open across the entire focal length range, decreasing more or less linearly as you stop down; falling to about 1/4 EV two stops down, and 1/10 EV or less at three stops below maximum aperture. These are much higher levels of shading than we're accustomed to seeing in the lenses we test, but it's worth noting that shading isn't too hard to correct in recent versions of Photoshop, so a solution at least exists. (Even if the software package involved costs more than twice as much as the lens in question.)

Distortion
While the 55-200mm VR's shading performance was well below average, geometric distortion is in line with other lenses sharing its focal length range. It starts at about 0.25% barrel distortion at 55mm, changing to about the same amount of pincushion at 70mm, increasing thereafter to a maximum of 0.5% pincushion at 105mm, and then decreasing again to about 0.35% pincushion at 200mm. That's a noticeable amount of pincushion, but not more than we've seen in many other lenses we've tested in the past. (And again, recent versions of Photoshop make it fairly easy to correct even significant amounts of geometric distortion.)

AF Operation
As befits a DX-series lens intended for use with the lower end of their camera line, the Nikon 55-200mm VR sports an internal focus motor, as evidenced by its AF-S designation. This means it will work with the D40 and D40x, or any future Nikon bodies lacking an internal AF motor. AF operation isn't blazingly fast, but isn't bad either, it taking roughly a second for the lens to slew from closest focus to infinity. As is the case with many modern AF lenses though, the price for this fairly fast AF performance is a relatively limited amount of travel on the manual focus ring, making manual focus a bit touchy.

Macro
Macro performance is fairly typical for a non-macro lens, with a minimum coverage area of 97mm at a lens-subject distance of 0.95m (1.3 feet) when shooting with our D200 test body.

Build Quality and Handling
Build quality is better than we'd normally expect from a "budget" lens, with smooth operation of both the manual focus and zoom rings, and no play between lens components. Another happy discovery was that this lens is an internal focus design, so there's no rotation of the front element/filter threads during focusing, nor during zooming for that matter. This makes the lens well-suited for use with polarizers, graduated neutral density filters, or other front-element accessories sensitive to rotation. The lens isn't an internal-zoom design though, as the barrel extends about 37mm beyond its minimum length as you zoom from wide to tele.

While we did find this lens a little tweaky to focus manually, it was otherwise a very nice-handling optic. Operation was quite smooth, and while it has a largely plastic construction, its feel was quite nice and relatively solid. The zoom ring operated smoothly, but took enough force that we were surprised to find the lens prone to zoom creep, if only slightly. That is, if you hang a camera with the 55-200mm VR attached around your neck, the lens will maintain its zoom setting fairly well as long as it isn't jiggled too much. Vibration will cause it to creep to more telephoto settings over time though, so you'll likely want to make use of the zoom lock when carrying it for extended periods.

While fairly solid-feeling, the all-plastic construction makes the 55-200mm VR light enough that it balanced very nicely on our D200 test body and isn't too unwieldy, even on smaller bodies like the D40 and D40x.

Alternatives

Being designed for subframe sensors, there aren't a lot of lenses yet that cover the specific focal length range of the Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6 VR, and of those available, we've tested only a very few. Besides a direct match for its focal length range though, potential purchasers may also be comparing performance against the long end of the 18-200/250mm "vacation zooms", or perhaps against the shorter end of 70-300mm lenses. Comparison with all possible options would thus be a rather tedious process, so we'll restrict our discussion here to a subset of the alternatives that we've tested.

Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor ~$170
This is the original, non-VR version of this lens, intended as an inexpensive complement to the traditional 18-55mm kit lens bundled with many of Nikon's entry-level SLRs. It's less expensive and does OK for its price, but for the slight increase in price in the VR version you get image stabilization, significantly better sharpness, as well as a noticeable reduction in chromatic aberration and distortion.

Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S DX VR ~~$800
Nikon's ultimate travel lens, the 18-200mm is also equipped with VR image stabilization technology; however, it's a newer version, VRII, able to make photos at shutter speeds four stops slower than required without stabilization, rather than the 55-200mm's two stop improvement. Optically, the 55-200mm is a bit more solid; sharper at the same focal lengths and apertures, as well as exhibiting less chromatic aberration, distortion and vignetting. That said, it is nowhere as versatile as the 18-200mm, which covers the entire range from wide to telephoto, which accounts for and perhaps excuses some of its optical shortcomings.

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC ~$300
The Sigma 18-200mm exhibits corner softness wide open across its full range of focal lengths, where the Nikon 55-200mm is much better-controlled; when both are stopped down to about f/8, both are very sharp, the Nikon being a hair sharper on our test results. Obviously these are different beasts, with the Sigma being optimized to handle both the wide and tele ends of the focal-length spectrum. Chromatic aberration and distortion are better controlled on the Nikon, while Sigma does well in controlling vignetting.

Tamron 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical IF Macro AF ~~470
Another case of corner softness wide open, where the Nikon performs better across all focal lengths. Stopped down to f/8, both lenses perform well, but the Nikon is still sharper across the frame; at the telephoto end, the Nikon is a fairly uniform 2 blur units across the frame, while the Tamron is sharper at the center, but hits highs of 4 blur units in the corners. Not surprisingly, chromatic aberration is better controlled on the Nikon, vignetting is better on the Tamron, and distortion is similar between the two lenses.

Summary

If we haven't said it enough through this review, lenses that used to cost this much didn't have much to offer other than the savings in the wallet. The Nikon 55-200mm VR isn't a perfect lens - there are some obvious issues with vignetting, and its focus mechanism is a bit of a step backwards from even slightly more expensive AF-S models. However, it's sharper than most alternatives, controls chromatic aberration well, and distortion isn't a real issue. Paired with Nikon's basic 18-55mm kit lens, you would have a full range of focal lengths in two lenses, for half the overall price of the Nikon 18-200mm super-zoom. With a real improvement in optical characteristics from its predecessor design and the addition of VR image stabilization technology, you can't do much better for the price.

Sample Photos!
Beginning in July 2007, we now provide sample photos of two laboratory test targets to help in our readers' evaluation of the lenses we test. The VFA target should give you a good idea of sharpness in the center and corners, as well as some idea of the extent of barrel or pincushion distortion and chromatic aberration, while the Still Life subject may help in judging contrast and color. We shoot both images using the default JPEG settings and manual white balance of our test bodies, so the images should be quite consistent from lens to lens.

As appropriate, we shoot these with both full-frame and sub-frame bodies, at a range of focal lengths, and at both maximum aperture and f/8. For the "VFA" target (the viewfinder accuracy target from Imaging Resource), we also provide sample crops from the center and upper-left corner of each shot, so you can quickly get a sense of relative sharpness, without having to download and inspect the full-res images. To avoid space limitations with the layout of our review pages, indexes to the test shots launch in separate windows.

To see the sample shots from this lens captured with this lens on our test body, just click on either of the thumbnails below, and scroll as needed in the window that appears.

Still Life shot

VFA target