Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

12-100 or 12-200?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

    I was thinking about adding a converter too, but then I would be in the same situation swapping out lenses in the field... but the quality of images look fab, so maybe I can crop an image...

    Oh I am so confused lol
    Tracey Jones

    Its a shame that humans dont come with autofocus, like cameras do!

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

      The converter only fits 2 lenses and those 2 are not them!
      Stuff from Cuba
      More stuff from Cuba
      It all started here

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 12-100 or 12-200?

        Originally posted by RobEW View Post
        Depends on budget a lot, and also what you want the long end for, and expected light levels. A possible versatile combination when travelling is 12-100 Pro for most purposes, and a 75-300 II for outdoor widlife in good light. The latter is quite good for a consumer grade lens, and very carryable. If you don't like changing lenses then maybe a second body (e.g. a used E-M5 ii is affordable and compact) for the 75-300. And maybe a prime or two for low light; e.g. Pan 20 1.7 - affordable, compact and quality.
        Budget for lens isnt too much of an issue... I would rather spend once on quality than buy and sell until I get something i like. A second body... oh my that would be great but flights now have a weight limit for hand luggage which is why my Nikon no longer flies with me and am looking for a quality travel lens. The 12-100 will cover 2 of the Nikon lenses I take when holidaying in the UK, and at a fraction of the size and weight, and in the UK I have never really wanted the reach of a 400mm equivalent so maybe its just wanting that extra 100mm because its there!
        Tracey Jones

        Its a shame that humans dont come with autofocus, like cameras do!

        Comment

        Working...
        X