In article <32C93901.333C@singnet.com.sg>, rlee7726@singnet.com.sg says...

>Alot of bad comments on "something to 300mm" lens when it is pulled over
>200mm or some even 150mm and turn soft. May I ask, is the "softness" that
>bad? If that's bad, then is it good to buy a something to 200mm lens
>rather to 300mm lens? What if 300mm is a must to my photography needs? Is
>it worth to get up to 300mm?

You may have misunderstood the comments above (applied to specific ranges,
maybe the 28-200/300?) to be general. While good zooms that include the
300mm FL do seem rare, the Nikkor 100-300mm and 75-300mm zooms are excellent,
and other good ones do exist. BTW, (for me, anyway...;-) it is never worth
using a lens of poor quality for convenience/price reasons - a soft lens
applies its unfortunate characteristics to ALL photos you take with it
(you will soon regret wasting film/photo-opportunities using a poor lens,
unless you just don't care about image quality, and 3.5x5" prints [ONLY!]
are fine for you....).
Hope This Helps