In article <5d82a3$5sq@mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net>, tschoolr@worldnet.att.net says...
[David Rosen says...]

>> I have had 3 of the 35-105:3.5-4.5, and every
>> one of them was stunning. Considering the
>> speed difference, this 3:1 zoom is actually a
>> more conservative design than a 2:1 35-70:2.8,
>> and the image quality bears this out.
>>
>> As far as "usually get what you pay for", you
>> must allow that with a 35-70:2.8, part of what
>> you pay for is speed.

> David, of all the reviews I've read on Nikkor lenses,
> I haven't seen *any* that maintain the 35-105 is
> sharper than the 35-70 2.8 lens. Besides, he
> specifically asked about the 35-70, not the 35-105.

Hmmm, I saw two (out of two tried) 35-70mm f2.8's that were good,
but not outstanding (not up to their reputation).... And I have
seen two wonderful (out of ten tried...!! These are VARIABLE in
sample quality!) 35-105mm MF's - maybe David is luckier in his lens
selection than I (or less picky about corner sharpness...;-). The
best of the 35-105 MF's that I tried were better than the two 35-70
f2.8's that I saw. I hear the 35-105 AF-D is very good, too...
Hope This Helps