More opinions and options:
The 200/5 ($75-100) is great if you don't use it much, as it's so light you can
carry it often. It's really not much good with a 2x, given the resulting
slowness of ~f/11. If you think you'll only need 200, use the 2x with the
100/2.8. The 200/4 is plentiful too, but I don't think it's quality is all
that great (ditto the 300/4.5), IME middle-of-the-pack performance (which isn't
saying that it's bad, just not exceptional.
I wouldn't buy the 180/2.8, personally, with it's chromatic aberration. I
prefer the internal focusing Tamron SP ED 180/2.5, which can be fit with a very
nice, inexpensive ($60) 1.4x or a 2x (only get the BBAR SP versions that fit
between the adaptall mount and the lens).
You could also try a Sigma 400/5.6 Apo, which when supported right, is a nice
lens for $125-200. That would give you a LOT of reach, and it's about the same
size/weight as the Zuiko 300 for less money.
Any use of a converter will degrade the lens quality, with the exception that
the very best 1.4x converters introduce minimal degredation when used with
matched lenses.
Skip
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com]
Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost
----------------------------------------------------------------->
>Subject: [OM] 200 or 300mm Zuiko prime?
> From: gwilburn@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 21:25:31 -0400
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>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
>
>
>--
>Gene Wilburn, gene@xxxxxxxxxx
>Northern Journey Online, http://www.NorthernJourney.com/
>
>
>
>< 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 >
< 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 >
|