<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.12-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Anthony The Star of His School Play</title>
	<link>http://regex.info/blog/2006-12-16/310</link>
	<description>Not a photo blog, but sometimes I play one on TV</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:38:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.12-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Ask Bjørn Hansen</title>
		<link>http://regex.info/blog/2006-12-16/310#comment-2898</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Dec 2006 14:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://regex.info/blog/2006-12-16/310#comment-2898</guid>
					<description>Until the last paragraph I thought you meant the 300mm 2.8 which is "only" ~$4-5000.

Here's another page about the &lt;a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/telephotos/300mmedif20/index.htm" rel="nofollow"&gt;300mm/2.0&lt;/a&gt;.  Woah.  That's really crazy.   I wonder if the case came with wheels ...   Bjørn Rørslett has it on &lt;a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_tele.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;his telephoto lenses&lt;/a&gt; list, too.

Nikon's &lt;a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/AFS70-200VR_rev00.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;70-200mm/2.8&lt;/a&gt; is relatively more affordable and quite a splendid lens, too.   I have one that I use on average once a year – while not 7kg it's still a pain to bring anywhere.



 - ask</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Until the last paragraph I thought you meant the 300mm 2.8 which is &#8220;only&#8221; ~$4-5000.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s another page about the <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/telephotos/300mmedif20/index.htm" rel="nofollow">300mm/2.0</a>.  Woah.  That&#8217;s really crazy.   I wonder if the case came with wheels &#8230;   Bjørn Rørslett has it on <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_tele.html" rel="nofollow">his telephoto lenses</a> list, too.</p>
<p>Nikon&#8217;s <a href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/AFS70-200VR_rev00.html" rel="nofollow">70-200mm/2.8</a> is relatively more affordable and quite a splendid lens, too.   I have one that I use on average once a year – while not 7kg it&#8217;s still a pain to bring anywhere.</p>
<p> - ask
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
