Gene,
If you're carrying it a lot, the difference between the 200 and 300 is quite
substantial. I'd also consider a good zoom. For example, the Tamron 60-300
is excellent and covers everything!
Tom
> I'm thinking of expanding my Zuiko kit a bit on the tele side. My longest
> lens is a Zuiko 100mm f2.8. If you were to pick a 200 or 300, and only
one,
> which would you pick?
>
> I shoot around waters' edges (lakes, rivers) and subjects are often a bit
> out of reach of the 100mm. The 200 looks like very portable, carryable
> lens. The 300 is larger and has a tripod collar. Can anyone comment on the
> weight of the 300? Still carryable?
>
> I have a Vivitar 2x teleconverter in my kit and could turn a 200 into a
> 400 on occasion as needed. Is that recommended or is there too much loss
> in quality?
>
> Gene
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|