One of my coworkers has a D700. He and I spend a lot of time talking about photography. This morning he mentioned that he'd made a wishlist of lenses he wants. Pretty close to the top of the list is a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 macro.
I was frustrated at the DFA 100/2.8 macro running about $500 bucks, but the Nikon seems to go for about $950. I often envy the low light sensitivity of his camera, but I certainly don't envy what he has to pay for glass. Granted, this lens has VR and an internal motor, both of which would drive up the cost. I'm sure Dave could also enlighten us on other benefits of Nikkor glass. This is by no means a "slam Nikon" post, if I had the money, I'd have a D700 in my kit too. Until I *need* the extra performance, I'll certainly enjoy the performance per dollar of Pentax gear. In other news, it looks like my camera and lens ship from Pentax today. The UPS tracking page says that they have the paperwork. A friend wants to do a portrait shoot on Saturday, and unfortunately it probably won't be back until next week. -- The fastest way to get your question answered on the net is to post the wrong answer. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
