Thanks to Jim, Scott, Piers, Ton, Wiliam and Jim T. for helpful
replies. The consensus seems to be that the 70-300 is a worthy
performer, so if I go for a zoom, that will be the one.
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
On Jul 19, 2008, at 5:11 PM, Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>
> I am thinking about getting a longer lens for my E3, taking advantage
> of the fact that my uncle from Florida is coming over in August and
> can "smuggle" a lens bought with US rubles at B&H.
>
> I have looked at the following 3 lenses:
>
> - the 50-200mm has the best specs but also the highest price and I am
> not thrilled by the 1 kg weight
> - the 40-150mm is light but its range overlaps with the 12-60mm I
> already have; but it is the cheapest of these 3
> - the 70-300mm appears the most useful, as its range dovetails nicely
> with the 12-60. It is also light for this focal length, and
> inexpensive.
>
> What is the opinion of this esteemed group of the relative merits of
> these last two lenses?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|