Hi--

>I have seen the 15/5.6 mentioned, but have not seen one available on the
>used market. The other problem is shooting available light interiors,
>which is my prime reason for the superwide. I am not rejecting the f5.6,
>but suspect I would be giving up just too much speed. But I need to
>track one down and take a look. Thanks for your response.
johnchap@erols.com

There is no speed loss, since the 3.5 is poor in the corners until
well stopped down, the f5.6 is OK at f5.6 (and has much less linear distortion), it can be hand-held easily (I've successfully hand-held
commercial interior slide-work at 1/4 second with it - and if you are at
normal distance from moving subjects, magnification is far less than normal,
so subject movement is less obvious), and the viewing image is good (and
easy to focus, with sharp finders - though I prefer scale-focusing this
one). I often see one or two in Shutterbug for roughly $800...
This was one of Nikon's "unimprovement" moves (going to the f3.5), along
with replacing the truly astonishingly good 16mm f3.5 with the OK
f2.8 (excellent stopped down, but the f3.5 is excellent wide open - so,
which is "faster"...? ;-). For a rectilinear wide for available light
(color only - it is much less able with B&W), I would consider the
18mm f3.5 (or the AF f2.8???), though it is very noticeably less wide.
The 16 f3.5 is the best overall (but ya gotta like fisheyes...! ;-), and
the 15 f5.6 is a good overall compromise when you need max width, low
distortion, good "wide" aperture performance, and reasonable price...
The 15, BTW, is the one WA that really looks W I D E !!! (the perspective
of the 16 is much more mild...;-).