The opinion about the so-called "soup zoom" as the DX 55-300 is indeed far apart. I find that it gives me a huge margin. It has an up to 16.7-fold magnification. So I get in the zoo, each animal, as I want to climb before the lens, without the enclosure. One reads about the lens that is not suitable for sports photography. I use it almost constantly to outside-frame to photograph my boys during sports (eg, skiing, football, handball) indoors and from a distance. The result, I think it's great. Maybe I'm so not a photo exhibition, but it was enough for the family album definitely with very nice results. The quality convinced me of the entire focal length range and the lens is still pleasantly light. A disadvantage, especially when compared to alternative Nikkor DX 55-200mm VR II is the co-rotating front lens if you want to use a circular Pofilter. The degenerates then fumbling for: Set only focus, fix and only then turn Polarizer. In addition offers the DX 55-200 with the lower filter diameter chance for the lens itself, the DX kit lens 18-55, the stunning DX 35 mm and the DX 85 Macro together to use the same, cheaper, smaller filter. But in favor of higher magnification I zuehe in the case before the 55-300 because these drawbacks for me are less severe than a lower magnification. It is one of the most popular lenses of my little equipment. This should be easy on a small budget, so I can have it always with you, but be as sufficient for every situation. Along with the kit lens 18-55 VR II I cover a huge focal range without overlap with low weight. For this I use the still extremely handluche and affordable Nikkor DX 35 for low light situations (especially often in Innnenbereich). My equipment is completed then the small but powerful new hard flash Nikon Speedlight SB 500. So I have everything I need, may it always in a relatively small camera bag (I use the LowePro Event Messenger 150) with you, without a lot of weight have to bear.
