On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:07:31 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 11:02:44 -0700, "RG" wrote:

I'd have to visit and talk to the folks at TriState. I wouldn't want to
give a number
without having made the decision to go for another boat, which would be a
big
decision for me (not like trading up from a D70 to a D200).


I've decided to stay with my D70 body for now, although the D200 would be a
very nice upgrade. However, it's all I can do to not run out and get my
hands on this new lens that was released the same time as the D200. It
would appear to be the perfect default lens for a Nikon DSLR, and I actually
think I would get more benefit from spending $750 on this lens than on
upgrading the body itself. A great range of focal length and I'm a huge
believer in image stabilization technology. Fortunately, they are very hard
to come by right now, which is keeping me from joining the hunt.

http://tinyurl.com/dsevd



That *is* a nice looking lens. Have you seen any reviews on it? I bought this one:
http://tinyurl.com/aruez and then decided it was too big to carry on the trip we
made. Now I'm considering selling it. I ended up with the 70-300mm lens,
http://tinyurl.com/cn9r5, with which I've been pretty happy.


I'm astonished anyone good photographer would even consider a "super
wide to super tele" lens. The optical challenges alone lead to some
serious compromises.

Are considering 70mm as 'super wide'? Or were you referring to the lens being
considered by RG?

One thing is certain, if it's a Nikon lens, selling for $750, it's not a piece of
junk.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes