Darn, as soon as I made that comment I realised I was starting to sound like one of the local "overwealthy" Nikon geeks! :-(
Let me elaborate; NO I won't stop using the 70-210 because it's ugly, even though my specimen is *very* beat up. (Even I think it's ugly.) However, as I mentioned in a few posts a while back I am trying to pick up some work for my gear to try to get it to at least partially pay for itself. *Now* unfortunately, it's also about my "image" as well as about my "images"! Sadly the un-informed will take a look at a photopraphers gear and judge *his* worth by how impressive *his stuff* looks. And now I AM competing against the above mentioned overwealthy folks. Even though the 28-200 Tamron isn't as good a lens as the F 70-210 it sure looks more impressive! Believe me, if it was *me* that was concerned about looks I have a lot of favorite lenses that would never be mounted on the D, they look worse than ugly, they look "stoopid" hanging off the front of a brand new DSLR! Don (Not vain, just trying to be "image conscious".) Oh God! Aren't they the same thing? HELLLLP MEEEE!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph Tainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:32 PM > To: pdml > Subject: RE: Tamron 28-75/2.8 arrived! WooHoo!! > > > 'I have the F 70-210/4-5.6 and though it's a very good lens I am looking > for something a bit more "modern" to use. Getting rather tired of the > "boy that's an ugly one!" comments. ;-)' > > You would discontinue using it because it's ugly? It is one of Pentax's > best zoom ever. > > Hey, Don, that's the ugliest lens I've ever seen. Can I have it? > > Anyway, the 70-210 is part of my *ist D kit until Pentax comes out with > a DA 50-150 f4 or Sigma comes out with a 50-150 f2.8. > > Joe >
