I have been reading this rag on and off for more than 30 years.
Many of their product tests over the years have stunk of advertiser butt
sniffing. I understand  the principle that you should not bite the hand that
feeds you.
However to this jaded consumer sensibility their review of the new Nikon
55-200 lens causes epigastric discomfort and a tight feeling in the chest.
I know, I know. The magazine exists to sell ad space and nothing more.
Unfortunately too many people will read PopPhoto and think they are getting
reliable advice.
I did not expect miracles when I bought this lens. I wanted a light
telephoto to carry for travel purposes.
I expected the lens would have the ability to focus and reasonable
distortion. These are not excessive expectations for a lens that retails at
$280.
When I exchanged it for the second and tried a third sample it began to dawn
on me what a piece of junk this lens really is.
I use Nikon almost exclusively and generally admire their products and I am
definitely not a Nikon basher.
I realize this lens is not being marketed as Nikon's best.
A sad truth is that at this price point more people are likely to buy this
lens than Nikon's better lenses and think the 55-200 is representative of
what Nikon is capable of producing or what they should expect from a "good"
lens.
The worst PopPhoto could say about this utter piece of junk is that it is
slow to focus.
They also claim that distortion is very low.
Utter bullsh*t.
Try this lens out at your dealer: try to focus on a light source and see
something more than a smear; that is if you do not fall asleep waiting for
the autofocus to key in on even this high contrast subject. Could it be
excessive flare that prevents the autofocus from stabilizing? Mechanically
unstable gearing in the lens?
Focus, auto or manual, on a grid and look at it through the zoom range and
decide for yourself if Einstein was right or wrong about the curvature in
time and space.
Nikon has actually managed to put out a lens that is worse than the average
28-200 zoom.