18-70 vs 16-85VR - Is VR really necessary at this length?

[ShunCheung]

<p>I see lots of gaps in Clive's lens collection:</p>

<ul>

<li>There is no 70-200mm/f2.8</li>

<li>There is no 300mm/f2.8</li>

<li>There is no 200-400mm/f4</li>

<li>There is no 600mm/f4</li>

</ul>

<p>and it goes on and on.</p>

[woolly1]

<p>Hi Shun,<br />I did say I don't often shoot long ..... or I thought I did. I have the 2 ring 80-200mm/2.8 afd but use it only occasionally since prising it from the packing. Haven't found the need to use a '300mm' lens, but if you don't have it you won't find that out. Perhaps because there's no surfers here :)</p>

<p>Seriously, the only reason is that it's a bit of a lump to drag around, and in the street I might as well be carrying a megafone for staying under the radar. Or not!<br />There can't be many teles as smooth looking in the image and tack sharp (there<em> </em>I go again - Somebody Stop Me!!) - a true classic.<br /><em></em></p>

<p>If charged with NAS then I plead guilty M'lud! Doesn't make me a bad person though .... Some people collect stamps, at least I can use my collection ... They can't send letters. heh heh heh. :)</p>

<p>Now if I could just find a nice affordable 24mm shift lens for all these skyscrapers .....</p>

<p>Did I mention the Schneider Kreutznach and two EL Nikkor enlarger lenses for the bellows? HELP!</p>

<p>To Kay ...<br>

There is no 'need' in my lens requirement, nobody needs that lot. The word is FUN :) Have it!</p>

[kayuh_laju]

<p>I love my 18-70mm.</p>