In article <32263027.2EF1@uakron.edu>, birdsal@uakron.edu says...
>Bob Neuman wrote:

>> I have not jumped into this before, since from the beginning people have
>> been listing a lot of what I would consider pretty mediocre lenses, so
>> the context was not right. What.., have people just not used some great
>> lenses, or, if they have, did they just not realize it, or what, already???
>> ;-), ;-), :-) And, of course Nikon users don't use bad lenses, since
>> all Nikkors are truly wonderful....! --> *;-), ;-), :-)* <-- (Actually,
>> there are some notable klunkers in the line, but percentage-wise, their
>> numbers are relatively few - and there ARE a lot of great Nikkors....:-)
>> BTW, I have tried many Vivitar Series I's, and my opinion of them is not
>> high - except for the 90mm macro which is excellent in the macro range,
>> with unacceptable flare for normal use, and some samples of the 70-210
>> which were good, but not great. [.....]

>Bob Neuman and I tend to disagree about the Series 1s, which as group I like
>a lot. The 35-85/2.8 varifocal zoom is, like the 90/2.5 macro, superb. Now
>that I have moved to Nikon AF from my Olympus system, I am learning a great
>deal from him (and others, too) about Nikon gear. Here are my working
>hypotheses: (1) I may or may not like lenses that he doesn't like. (2)
>However, any lens he praises highly is probably a great lens.
>Thanks, BN/DR, for all your good information and advice.

Goersh, thenks! ;-) I try to be precise with what I say, but I often don't
succeed. On the Series I lenses, I should have added that there are many
that I have not tried, also (including the 35-85 you mentioned, but one of
these days.....;-). Even the 90mm Series I, which is definitely up to Nikon quality levels for specific uses, is a bit lower in contrast than the Nikon average, and does have that flare problem.... Some of the other Series I's, like the 28-90mm and 100-500mm left me with the very distinct impression
that high quality standards are not maintained in the Series I line..... (there can always be the exceptions, though, either way - maybe I have just tried the worst [and best] of the group, with Series I optical wonders yet before me to be experienced!). Manufacturing variations also contribute to differing opinions on some lenses. While Nikkors are generally remarkably consistent from sample to sample of the same lens, there are some particular lenses in the line that are notably variable (I am trying to pay more attention to sample variability in my "SUBJECTIVE Lens Evaluations [Mostly Nikkors]"). In the above quote, omitted was my list of great and poor
Nikkors. The "poor" list included the 28mm f2.8 E/AF. A recent acquisition
was a 28mm f2.8E that I checked just after making my usual nasty comments about it (based on experience with several others) - this one wasn't bad!
(At f11-16, it was very good.) It is so hard to make statements that are
absolutely true (and perfectly made!), but one must start somewhere.... ;-)
Thanks, again, for your comments.
Hope This Helps