I know received wisdom says that a lens with an enormous zoom range is often not optically marvellous, but what are you basing this assertion on, John?

I can see them in the F8 ones.

Strangely, I'm also seeing some very similar but not quite vertical stripes in the 18-200 shot.

I have no explanation for these.

It does sound weird. Other than in poor light, I find the AF on the '10 pretty good. For instance, from my office I can point the camera through a window with leaded lights, at a tree, behind which is a telephone wire, behind which is an aerial on a roof.

With camera set to spot focusing (I rarely change it from that setting), slight movements of the camera and a half press result in the focus shifting quickly and precisely from the leaded light, to a leaf, to the wire, to the aerial - all through the glass of the window.

This is with the FA 28-200. The 75-300 FAJ is a bit slower, and a bit whirrier, but it's still pretty good.

It's not until the light gets rubbish that I find I can focus quicker and more accurately myself.

Can't really comment on your results. The softness at F2.8 does seem disappointing.

But I never believe my own tests until I've done them several times and thought carefully about what I might be buggering up myself. So I'll take some convincing that it's as bad as the impression you give. No disrespect, it's just hard to judge someone else's experimental technique.

Well it's not at all surprising, given how much darker #3 is than the others.

As I said, tweak the levels and it's not at all bad. I've tweaked the levels on the Sigma shot, too, and it's not at all obvious to me that either is sharper - once you get them looking about the same in terms of saturation and contrast, there's not much between them.

Looking closely, it appears to me that the Sigma is sharper at the very top, but the 18-55 is sharper at the top of the paw just below the bow, so they can't be both focused on exactly the same spot.

If you're going to re-run the test, I'd suggest you look at why one of them was so much darker than the others, and also be exceptionally careful to focus on the same point each time.

Well the 4th one is the sharpest, so it should be between the 50 and the 50-135. I'll guess that it's the 50-135, but only because I want it to be - I don't have any idea whether it would be better than a prime with such a reputation as the 50.

I'd guess that the 3rd one is the Sigma, since it appears so much darker than the others. Interestingly when I tweaked the levels so that I could see it, it didn't seem too bad at all.

So on sharpness alone, assuming there are no experimental errors in the focusing, that should make #2 the 50 and #1 the 18-55.

I don't know, I have no idea really.

You're such a wag, Brian.

I expect Jacobs bought all their 49.99 stock from Currys.

I agree with Don - I don't think there is a problem.

And I also think you're putting yourself down needlessly.

I'd be surprised if there's a single person contributing to this forum that is so arrogant as to have no interest in the views of someone - no matter how inexperienced - that is capable of producing work good enough to win the previous week.

Don't worry. If you win, that entitles you to your opportunity to judge - in the view, I would guess, of virtually all the entrants.

In any case, having different winners gives us the chance of hearing the preferences of different judges. I think that's a good thing. Who knows - someone's inexperienced eye might be just the thing to give a new slant on things for those with much more experience.

Firefox seems fine for me.

The only thing I've noticed occasionally is an issue with PhotoBucket - if I reload a page showing a picture hosted there more than a few times, the picture won't display any more, although it will display if I switch straight to IE.

I've noticed this on a number of occasions now, but I have no explanation for it, and I haven't reloaded the page enough times in IE to tell whether it's a Firefox-only issue.

Make sure you ask the right Chris.

I'll do you a special price on it, but I fear you wouldn't see the profit I'd make as quite what you had in mind.

They're up front about it. Just put one in the basket, go to the checkout and calculate Shipping and Handling.

It comes to £458.12.