Harry Krause wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

Harry,

I am really looking at the 18-200 VR as a light weight travel lens so
you don't have to keep changing lens. It won't be as sharp, as the fast
70-200 F2.8 but it will do when I don't want to carry the extra lens.
It is one lens that will work in 90% of the situations, plus the 18-200
VR is 3.8" long and weighs 19.8 oz. so it is easy to carry.

Since I am looking at buying the D200 the 18-200VR won't really be a
duplicate, it will be a comparable lens for my camera. See the way a
compulsive mind can justify things.

Do you have a Tokina 12-24 you are interested in selling?


Nope. But I've read up on it, and it seems to be a great lens for the
price, performing about as well as the Nikkor of the same range, but for
half the price.

I'm still not convinced, by the way, that zoom lenses are as "sharp" as
fixed focal length lenses of "equal" quality. I've not seen the equal,
in any zoom lenses, of the old Nikkor 105 2.5, or the old Nikkor 180
2.5, which, if memory serves, weighed about four pounds. It was *the*
sports-action lens of its or any time. I owned a 105, but I never could
justify the big glass 180. I did borrow one once in a while. These were
beautifully made lenses, too, the non-glass portions machined out of
quality metal parts, not assembled from cheap plastic.

I know that in the 35mm SLR world, that multi-focal length zoom lenses
don't hold a candle to fixed focal length lenses. I'd bet the same with
DSLR