Yaniv Sharon wrote in message <346B3F3E.2B20@radmail.rad.co.il>...

>I intend to buy a F90X.
>
>I want to buy two lenses for the range of 28-300, but I don't want to
>pay for Nikon lenses which are very expensive.
>
>My question is if there any major differences between the Nikon to the
>cheaper solutuions (e.g. Sigma, Tamaron...) in speed of AF, quality of
>lens and which is the best buy from the cheaper lenses.


Since you apparantly have not bought the F90X yet, I may still ask
why you would put the major part of the budget into the body and then
buy inferior lenses... Bodies go out of date relatively rapidly (at least the
newer AF/AE ones do...), but lenses don't (and Nikkor lenses hold their
resale value well [and often better than bodies...]). I think it would be better
to go with a used 8008/8008s or N70/6006 at much lower cost (or explore
the nice manual Nikons, if so inclined), and put the money saved into
Nikkor primes (there are MANY excellent ones available used and new),
especially if you are going with Nikon for the image quality (a lot of that
will be thrown away with the choice of zooms over primes...). There are
exceptions to the above, but in general, I think it is true...
Hope This Helps
David Ruether - http://www.fcinet.com/ruether