Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfclp!fritz
From: fritz@hpfclp.UUCP (fritz)
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: superzoom query
Message-ID: <14200002@hpfclp.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-Jan-85 20:55:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hpfclp.14200002
Posted: Thu Jan 10 20:55:00 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 14-Jan-85 03:46:58 EST
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #N:hpfclp:14200002:000:1122
Nf-From: hpfclp!fritz    Jan 10 17:55:00 1985

This has probably already been hashed over on the net, but our incoming
news has been dead lately.  Sorry if you've already seen it.  (I'm not 
sure about outgoing news -- I hope this makes it out!)

Has anyone seen any reviews of, or bought/used, any of the new "superzooms"?
I'm referring to the zooms that go from 30-200mm or thereabouts, with
~f3.5 aperatures.  This seems too good to be true, so it probably is.

Since TANSTAAFL, what do you give up for these lenses?  Image sharpness,
contrast, weight/bulk?  Or has some radical optical advance been made
which allows them to accomplish this feat with no losses in quality?

The reason I'm asking:  I want to pick up some zooms for my Nikon FG,
and want the best sharpness/brightness/lightness possible in a reasonable
price range.  I had been considering something along the lines of Vivitar
28-90 & 70-210, but if one lens will cover both ranges with as-good quality,
I'd definitely go for it.  Or maybe just get something with a wider range
than 28-90, e.g. 28-150 or so.

Thanks for any help.  PLEASE respond BY MAIL to:  {hplabs,ihnp4}!hpfcla!fritz

Gary Fritz