Long time lurker, new poster. Been researching Nikon camera body’s and lenses diligently for 6 months; I’m interested in getting the D700. I’m also ready to drop 1500 on a pro lens. Yesterday I stopped by Mikes Camera and asked if I could handle the D700 and feel how a few lenses felt on the camera. I new they wouldn’t have one but I still asked if they had a 17-35 and the guy asked me why in the world would I want to put a film lens on a digital body. I was surprised by his gusto. He basically made me feel like a caveman living in the dark ages. After more ranting, he said something about losing at least 20% image quality when you use a film lens opposed to a digitally calibrated lens. He said the only digitally calibrated fx lens are the 12-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8, 70-300, and the new 50mm 1.4. I tried to challenge him by asking why photozone reviews all lenses with a D200. He blew me off. He spoke at length about how light travels through a digitally calibrated lens to the sensor opposed to a film lens to film. He also spoke about losing dynamic range. He whipped out a book and showed me pictures of light moving through the lens. All this seemed to make sense. Lastly, he said that Nikon likes the lack of information on this topic because people keep buying the film lenses for their digital cameras. Is this true? Is there such a huge difference in image quality? Are these the only digitally calibrated lenses? Other threads out there that speak to this topic?