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