In article
>For what it's worth Canon's 35-350 seems to be almost standard issue to
>the UK press (or at least those I saw on my part-time snapping job the
>other day), so suggesting that a range that large is not for the
>professional market might be pushing it a bit.
>
>Having said that, I haven't a clue what the results look like, and of
>course the Canon is a UKP2,000 lens.
>
>I felt like an utter fossil with Nikon F2 & 3s and fixed focal length
>lenses :-)
The 35-350 Canon might be suitable for press use, but from what few
photos I have seen shot with it, your lighter and more compact prime
Nikkor set probably runs rings around the big zoom in image quality,
and provides better low-light shooting ability to boot. So far, the
only wide-range zoom that I have seen that is worth beans is the
Tamron SP 28-135mm f4-4.5 (if you can put up with the linear
distortion [especially near the long end], and the necessary
large lens shade), though I have not tried the Nikkor 50-300mm ED
or the new 24-120mm (I don't have high hopes for that one, though...).
Hope This Helps