I've taken a few classes on photography and read a few books as well. I've read the stickies here and on a few other forums but there is one thing which is still eluding me. What are the major differences between the following lenses, and what will the effects on my photos be?

Before we look at the lenses lets assume the following about the photos:
1. Photos will be full zoom all of the time
2. Photos will be on the lowest F-Stop possible.
3. Photos will be shot a good distance from the subject with the intent to blur the background.

Now for the Lenses:
1. http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-VR-Vibration-Reduction/dp/B000O161X0/ref=br_lf_m_1000637791_1_4_s_o_p?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=1284042782&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_t=1401&pf_rd_i=1000637791&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=07HJ7N4BK31JT8ZJ2AHY
2. http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-200mm-VR-II-Digital/dp/B002JCSV8U/ref=br_lf_m_1000637791_1_5_ttl?ie=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&s=photo&pf_rd_p=1284042782&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_t=1401&pf_rd_i=1000637791&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=067DT0GPP8XY90G6AA3N

What I already understand:
1. The more expensive lens has a constant F-Stop.
2. The more expensive lens has more Dispersion Elements, and thus sharper, higher quality photos.

So how much of an affect will the lens difference really have on my photos if say I'm at a zoo shooting photographs of animals from far away?

Thanks for any answers you might provide

A lot. You said it yourself. "The more expensive lens has blah blah, and thus sharper, blah blah." The VRII is much sharper at all focal ranges and at all f-stops. It is also a much faster lens. However... Unless you're making money off of photography, you have thousands to spend, or you are shooting fast action sports. There is no need for the VRII. If you still think you want a better lens, you can save yourself a thousand dollars and buy the Nikon 80-200 2.8 that was released some years ago. You can buy it used for around $800 and new for around $1000.

This post was edited by CitizenScuba on Jan 31 2011 12:23pm

Alright another quick question.
My current lens is: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-18-70mm-3-5-4-5G-AF-S-Nikkor/dp/tech-data/B0001YEOCU/ref=de_a_smtd

Can you explain why my current lens has a zoom ratio of 3.8x but the 200mm has a zoom ratio of 3.6x ?
Logically, to me anyways, it would seem that a 200mm should be able to zoom further in... what am I missing here lol?

70/18=3.888......
200/70=2.857
200/55=3.6363...

generally the best lenses are <3x zoom

and no comparison between the lenses
the 70-200 2.8 vr2.... is amazingly sharp, you will easily get that blurred background, everything about it is just brilliant
the others are basic lenses, you might have problems blurring the bg at times, not good in low light
etc

Best rule of buying photo equipment: you get what you pay for.

Lol that is the rule of thumb with most things in life

@Jayandnix: Thanks for the info, very helpful