Hello, my friends. The IRS was obliging enough to let me know that I get some of my own money back. Rather than doing the intelligent thing and putting it in savings or making an early payment to my mortgage, I've decided to buy new toys instead. I've read old threads about these lens comparisons until I couldn't go any further back, but now I need to have some interactive Q&A time. Like everyone else, I want it all. Fast, sharp and colorful. Having read threads here and elsewhere, and also having spent time reviewing images on Flickr & Pixel-Peeper.com, I think I know what I want. However, there's nothing like experience and I may have some incorrect notions about these lenses. Here's what's on the list. First, I figure the 70-200mm VR is on the definite buy list. The images look sharp and the colors pop. It's expensive, but so am I. The place where I'm still struggling is between the 17-55mm DX, the 28-70mm, or the Tamron 17-50mm. When I look at sample photos of these three lenses on pixel-peeper.com, I have to say that the 17-55mm seems the most bland. The colors on the Tamron really seem to pop, and so do some of the 28-70mm. Would anyone care to contradict that? I originally thought I wanted the 17-55mm DX, but I'm not as sure now. I already have a Tokina 12-24 for the wide shots, and of course my 18-200mm VR is a great walk around lens during the day. I'm looking for something that's faster for low-light photography, and I'm wondering if I can get much sharper shots on my tripod with long exposures (15-30 sec). As an aside, I have to say that the 85mm 1.4 really impresses me for portrait photos. There's a chance I could also swing that one, but I honestly don't do any portrait photos. Is the bokeh on the 70-200 VR (or any of the other lenses) even close to what I'm seeing with that 85mm 1.4? Thanks in advance. I appreciate the information I've found on this forum and look forward to your comments.