Has anyone here any experience with both of these lenses please? How do they compare to one another, (apart from the extra zoom on the 300mm)?
I’ve decided to save up for a telephoto lens but I’m not sure which I should go for. The 45-200mm has its appeal due to cost, as there are some pretty good second-hand deals to be found. The 100-300mm has its appeal due to the extra 100mm, but it costs quite a lot more.
I want to be able to take pictures of the birds in our garden and elsewhere when we’re out and about, and of course other wildlife when the moment crops up. I’ll also be using it at the beach for taking photos of fellow kitesurfers and surfers.
From what I’ve researched for sports photography a telephoto with a very low aperture is the ultimate solution, but I shall keep dreaming…
I have to be realistic with myself as budget is a major consideration. Also, with my micro 4/3 camera I’m limited to what’s available.
So what would be the best lens, bearing in mind that they will give me the 35mm equivalent of up to 400mm or 600mm with my GX1? Would it be worth me waiting that bit longer to save for the 100-300mm or would the 45-200mm be adequate?
As ever, any advice and/or suggestions are much appreciated.