On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:42:30 -0600, esox
>I have a Nikon n8008 and several prime (non AF) lenses plus the
>ubiquitous 35-70 f3,3 to 4.5 lens that came with it. I'm looking to
>consolidate my lenses into a single zoom plus maybe one prime lens in
>the interest of simplicity. I would like to have a range from 24mm to
>105mm at f2,8. I'm concerned that a single zoom that covers this
>entire range would have to give up too much in quality. I'm thinking
>that a 24mm prime plus a 28-105 might be just the thing. I would
>consider a 28-70 if the quality were that much better than the longer
>range lens. I would also consider a 24-70 zoom as long as I can keep
>the f2,8 speed.
>
>I will be doing mostly travel-style photography with a lot of
>landscapes. Can you give me a recommendation for a good quality zoom
>lens in this range? Price is definitely an issue and I would need to
>spend under $400 US for the zoom if possible. Also, is there a good
>web site that shows comparisons and has decent reviews of lenses? I'm
>having a tough time finding such a site.
Try the Nikkor list (with evaluations of many) at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/slemn.html. There are some
individual lenses and lens comparisons at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/articles.html. As with others,
I prefer 2-3 good, fast, small, light non-zooms to
most zooms, though I do like the Nikkor MF 35-105
f3.5-4.5 (SELECTED SAMPLE!!!), 28-70 f3.5-4.5 AF, and
the 24-120 f3.5-5.6 among the mid-range zooms...
For travel, I like among Nikkors: 16mm-fisheye or 20mm
f2.8, 35mm f2.8 PC, 85mm f2, and a TC14A (works fairly
well on most of these lenses). And, remember: it is not
the marked speed of the lens that is important, but the
first GOOD stop on the lens! For the lenses mentioned
in the various posts answering you, it is 16mm f3.5
(f3.5), 20 and 24mm f2.8 (f5.6), 28mm f2.8 AIS (f2.8),
35mm f2 (f2), 35mm f2.8 PC (f2.8), 50mm f1.8/2 (f1.8/2),
85mm f1.8/2 (f1.8/2), 24-120mm (f5.6), 28-70mm (f5.6
to f4.5 at S->L), 35-105mm (f3.5 to 4.5 at S->L),
28-105mm (it has potential, but I have not seen a good
sample yet...).