Is the extra pair of 55-200mm lenses worth it for the priceof the bundle?

So I'm about to buy soon my first dslr camera. I've been eyeing the nikon D3300 recently. At $500, it comes with the camera itself and 18-55mm lenses. However, jumping the price to $600 gets me an additional 55-200mm lenses. I'm currently am asking if that $100 price jump is worth it in the end. I mostly plan on taking shots with little zoom, but I may occasionaly need the additional zoom. Should I buy the additional lenses or not and deal with the lesser range of potential zoom?

Here's a link to the camera:

http://www.amazon.com/...00W46QZWU/

I think you will soon find the 3x zoom of the kit lens to be quite restricting, so adding the 55-200mm will extend your combined zoom range to 11x.

This is still poor compared to many of the popular travel zooom compacts like the Panasonic TZ60.

You could buy an all-in-one zoom lens for your new camera like the Tamron 16-300mm, but it is not cheap, doubles the weight of the camera, and makes compromises in terms of image quality.

see:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/...di_ii.html

18-55mm is one lens - that's how zooms are described.

The 55-200mm is another lens - you have the choice of one lens or two.

I'd suggest buying the twin lens kit, then putting the 55-200mm to one side until you build up the experience to use it.

The 55-200 zoom for $100 is a bargain.
A telephoto like that is the lens a large number of people buy soon after realising that the 18-55 kit lens doesn't have mush reach.
Get the 2 lens kit!

The extra cost of the 50-200mm lens included in an "outfit" is a good way of throwing away $50.00 if you do not buy the kit. I with more than 40 some odd years under my belt with professional photgraphy (weddings {film}.) bought the camera with the 18-50mm lens and the first lens I NEEDED was the 55-to-200mm! I bought a Tamron 18-200mm which I "thought" would be the end all to end all. I was mistaken this lens is too heavy to lug around and not sharp enough to out do your magnifying glass in your desk drawer. I sold the Tamron at a big loss and bought the 55-200mm. The result? If you buy or ad the 50-200mm lens AFTER you buy the camera it cost you about $50.00 more in the long run!
MORAL to this story: BUY the camera in "kit" form with both the 18-55 AND the 50-200mm!

That lens doesn't come in a pair.

The 55-200mm is one lens. It's a zoom lens.

The 18-55mm is one lens. It's a zoom lens.

Yes, it's worth buying the camera with the two zoom lens. Otherwise, you restrict yourself to the max zoom level of the kit lens. It wouldn't be long before you regretting not buying it.

It's not a pair, it's one 55-200mm lens. Yes, it's worth it. I've had photos published using the 55-200mm VR lens.
You'll get one 18-55mm and one 55-200mm… Go for it.

Yes very much worth it unless you can afford the one with the 70-300mm instead.

Yes, it is a very good deal.

Nikkor 55-200VR is an excellent lens. Yes, it is all plastic (except for the lens element) and it is one of the least expensive zoom lens in Nikon's line up. But, sharpness and resolution you get out of that lens is just incredible. I have one. Because it is all plastic, durability may not be the best but it withstood 5 years of use and is still going.

When I say it is a good lens, I'm comparing it with some of Nikon's best lenses. I also have 70-200VRII f/2.8. If I'm carrying a DX body, I just take 55-200 and not worry about it.

Someone is suggesting you should get 16-300 lens. Don't! Every lens is a compromise. Basically, wider the zoom range, more compromise engineer had to make to make that huge range possible. Nikon also has 18-200mm. It sure is convenient but you bought an INTERCHANGEABLE LENS camera. I'd recommend 18-55 that camera comes with and the additional 55-200 to make it complete. It's much cheaper way to do it also.

If you wanted to buy a 55mm to 200mm lens later, or any type of tele zoom lens, it would cost you more than $100. So go for that deal.