I wish!!

But I think you're nuts getting rid of the AF360.

Have you ordered one yet?

Mine's on order from Amazon, estimated delivery 20th August, but who knows.

Well done, George!!

I dithered a fraction too long!!

I know. That's twice now.

Damn and blast.

Seems to have gone up to £99.99 now

Sure, point taken.

Is it worth 10 times the price of the 18-55, given how often you might use it at F2.8?

Please elaborate

Quantify 'huge'.

What can you show me, that makes the difference obvious. Don't forget, they have to sell a lot of them, presumably even to peasants like me, to break even...

Out of curiosity, is there anything at all about one of these lenses that you could post on the web*, that would convincingly show the benefit of having a 16-50 DA* as opposed to a 16-45, as opposed to a peasant's kit 18-55?

What's the actual difference between these lenses, in reality? How good do you have to be, to tell the difference?

Weather sealing, weather shmealing. That's not what I'm asking. Nor about focus in half the time, nor with half the noise.

__________
* without incurring a GL accusation of pixel-peeping, of course.

Would you lot start posting some rubbish photos, please?

You're making my job damn difficult !!!!!!!

I'm sure there is. Noise is detail. The wrong sort, of course, like dandelions in the lawn.

Incidentally, they must be being very conservative in their "average size of a JPEG" estimate.

If they estimate the shots available on a 2Gb card at 400-odd, that's about 5Mb per file.

I don't think I've had any that big out of the camera - mostly they're between 2 and 3 Mb.

That's 800 on a card - so variations from 750 to 900 doesn't surprise me at all.