In article <4k1q37$ssf@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, user903809@aol.com says...

>I am in the market for a new lens(es) and would appreciate opinions on >the options I'm considering. I have an N90 with 20/2.8D, 35-70/2.8D, >60/2.8D Micro, and 300/4 EDIF, all Nikon lenses. I'm looking to fill >the hole between 70 and 300 mm. I shoot mostly B&W using APX25, TMX >and TMY and enlarge to mostly 8X10 with some 11X14 and a few 16X20.
>1. Nikon 105/2.8D Micro and 180/2.8D EDIF- This is the most expensive
>choice (~ $1400) and, I'm assuming, both are tack sharp with excellent
>build quality.
>2. Nikon 80-200/2.8D + Kirk Tripod Adaptor (~ $1100). Flexible, but >will I be satisfied with the sharpness? I'm assuming some drop off vs >the primes, especially wide open at the long end, but how bad could it >be (I'm happy with the 35-70 zoom)?
>3. Tokina 80-200/2.8 non-D (~$600). Lots cheaper and I don't need a
>cludgy tripod adapter, but, if I'm not happy with the quality, it's >not so cheap after all.

You have some nice lenses, but, as you say, there is a bit of a gap...
1. The 180mm is unequivocably superb, and the 105M is excellent, but
hard to use manually near infinity, and 2 of 3 that I have seen had slight optical alignment problems near infinity which would show
at wide apertures under some conditions if you are critical and discerning (I am always amazed by how bad an optical flaw can be
without most people noticing it...). BTW, the 60mm is none too good at
infinity at the edges/corners at wider apertures, though superb stopped
down at infinity (and at mid and short distances at wide apertures).
2. If you are satisfied with the 35-70mm, you will be ecstatic about
the 80-200mm performance - it is much better (at least the non-D
version) than the 35-70, and is excellent wide-open (and the non-D
is virtually indistinguishable from the best primes everywhere except
near minimum focus at the long end at the widest apertures).
BTW, I find that a Really Right Stuff plate on the body (won't rotate)
combined with a really sturdy ball head (Arca, others) works fine
for most purposes with the 80-200mm f2.8 (to avoid using clunky,
awkward brackets).
3. Uh, see below... The Tokina zooms I have tried tend to share this characteristic (this may be out of date): really excellent infinity performance, degrading as they are focused away from infinity, with
very poor performance at minimum focus.
---I have posted, and posted pointers to, "SUBJECTIVE Lens Evaluations
(Mostly Nikkors)" so often that I fear boring people, but you missed
them? If interested, the sites are at:
- http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~qtluong/photography/35mm/
nikon-neuman.html
- http://www.cs.hks.se/~nicke/private/photo/lenstest/david.html
- http://www.phys.rug.nl/mk/people/aue/nikon/david.html
Hope This Helps