Lenses for F5 and D3

[AlecM]

Have not got the 200-400, but do have the 80-400 [1P change from £1200 ]

A very good lens (I used to own one, but paid nearer £900 for mine) which deserved AF-S, rather than the somewhat agricultural mechanics it does have. If they did an AF-S (and VRII) version, I'd buy it, for when I don't feel up to lugging the 300 plus TC.

[GlennM]

A long time ago I sang the praises of the Nikon 18-200. Unfortunately I share a weakness with Ken R. We both seem to be impressed by things new. I now know better. wide ratio zooms for anything other than cine/video cameras are at best optimistic but normally sadly lacking in image quality. The latest DSLRS from any manufacturer are very demanding on the capabilities of their lenses and owners.
The holy trinity are another matter altogether. Actually they are part of a quartet, but the cost of the final member 200-400 is a bit much unless you are a real addict.

For wide angle work, are there any primes would you recommend or avoid over the remaining Nikkors?

Yes I see your point on the 200-400mm, a beautiful looking optic, but I think outside of my range for the time being........maybe it is time to buy a lottery ticket......just maybe.....

Thanks

GlennM

[GlennM]

A very good lens (I used to own one, but paid nearer £900 for mine) which deserved AF-S, rather than the somewhat agricultural mechanics it does have. If they did an AF-S (and VRII) version, I'd buy it, for when I don't feel up to lugging the 300 plus TC.

I assume that the close up wildlife shots on your Flickr page have been taken using the 300mm.......they clearly shot the excellent qualities of the 300mm.

Regards

GlennM