300/4.5 = 1100g
135/2.8 = 360g + 2X-a = 215g = 575g
Yes, it's a huge difference. The 300/4.5 is a big beast.
Tom
> > I think you will be pleased with both the 200/4 and 300/4.5 lenses.
I've
> > hand held the 200/4; it's light and small enough, but it's also at the
> > limit of what I can hold steady in a well braced stance. The 300
> > is tripod
> > only, and I'd try to use the 2X-A with 135/2.8 if I needed something
> > approaching that length without tripod (in spite of Gary Reese's test
> > results on the combo).
>
>
> John, I'm puzzled by this. What make a 135/2.8 + 2X-A more 'handholdable'
> than the 300/4.5? Is the 300 really heavy enough to be tiring in use? I
can
> see the logic if you are just trying to lighten your kit some. If you
are
> talking sharpness of pictures, I would think that the greater mass of the
> 300 would reduce the speed of image shake, compared to the lighter 135 +
> 2X-A, and give a better picture..
>
> Chip Stratton
> cstrat@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
> < 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 >
|