>In your second post you mentioned the 70-300 VR. I think this >is one of Nikon's most under appreciated lens'. It is light, >has a very useful focal length, takes 67mm filters and the two >I have owned were extremely sharp. Since weight is important >I would seriously recommend this lens. The only issue may be >the variable aperture vs the 70-200. However again, the >weight difference between those two lens' is significant. If >you decide on the 70-300 I think you will be very happy.
Thom Hogan has mentioned a few times (here's just one mention: http://www.bythom.com/choice.htm ) that the 70-300 VR, when stopped down to f/6.3-f/8 performs the same as the 70-200 f/2.8 over their shared range. So if you don't need the fast aperture, you won't miss much if anything by picking up the 70-300 VR, and as a bonus you get a usable (although not as good) 200-300 mm range.