You did not mention it, but you may also want to consider the
new Nikkor 28-105 F3.5-4.5. It's quite 20-30% less expensive
than the 24-120. (62mm filter instead of 72 mm too.) It's
pretty new and I don't have one, but the reviews have been
pretty positive and it looks like a nice hiking/travel lens. It
also has macro capabilities (up to 1:2). I couldn't find it in
the B+H catalog, maybe it's not updated yet.
It may be that you already considered this lens and/or it may
still be out of your price range, but just in case.
But first --- it seems to me --- you need to decide if you want
wide range only or also 100+.
---
Ken Aoki mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PM> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 23:12:24 -0300
PM> From: "Patricio Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PM> Subject: Sigma 28-105 f/2.8 or Tokina 19-35 f/3.5-4.5 non-D or maybe Tamron 28-105
f/4-5.6IF or... [v04.n265/1]
PM> Message: 1
PM> Hello everybody!
....
PM> 1- Sigma 28-105 f/2.8 D - Aspherical. It covers a nice distance, is
...
PM> 2- Tokina 19-35 f/3.5-4.5 . I would get really wide, which I'd love and
...
PM> 3- Tamron 28-105 f/4.0-5.6 IF - It covers some more ground than the Sigma,
...
PM> 4- Vivitar Series 1 19-35 f/3.5-4.5 Ultra Wide Macro Focus, the cheapest of
...
