Hi--

>As a sharpness expert, what are your recommendations for midrange Nikon AF zooms? I've
>tried and traded the Nikon AF 28-80mm f3.5-5.6D (plastic), Nikon AF 35-105 nonD and the
>Nikon 28-70mm f3.5-4.5D lenses. It's a no brainer that the primes are sharpest.
>Personal question, what bodies and lenses do you take on a family vacation?
>
>Thanks from a Pittsburgh fan.
>
>Chuck Ward

I have not tried the AF-D 35-105, but it has a good reputation. The
non-D can be wonderful, but seems to be quite sample-variable. The
35-70 f2.8 is OK, but expensive, bulky, and too short in range. The
sharpness of the 28-70 was even, but unimpressive. I don't like
the 35-135. The 28-85 in a good sample can be quite nice. I don't
like AF, and I am beginning to realize that I see more poor samples
of zooms in AF mounts than poor ones in MF. The 24-120 was fine short
of the far edges by f5.6, excellent everywhere but the far corners
at f11. I sold mine, since I prefer better corner sharpness. On a
trip, I take a 16mm f3.5 fisheye or a 20mm f2.8 for the short end,
a really sharp (selected) 35-105 MF, and a 1.4X (for the fisheye).
Or, a 20mm, 35PC, and an 85mm f2 (and maybe a 1.4X). Bodies:
one F3, or two FA's. I like to keep things small, light, and
dependable (and sharp!) - the above (plus a few rolls of film,
Kodak lens tissue, and an air bulb) fit into a tiny bag that goes
with me everywhere (extra film is kept elsewhere). UV's stay on
the lenses for protection - other filters are not used. I don't
pack a tripod or flash, just a few rolls of fast film for use
when necessary (the short lenses can be hand-held at VERY slow
speeds). Dunno if this will help....;-)
David Ruether