Panasonic 100-300 or ......?

Started 3 months ago | Discussion thread
Kim Letkeman
Forum ProPosts: 30,137
Like?
Re: Panasonic 100-300 or ......?
In reply to papillon_65, 3 months ago

papillon_65 wrote:

paulieRD wrote:

I'm heading on safari in June and think it wise to get a suitable lens. I have a GF3 at the moment so it makes sense to get the Panasonic 100-300.

The question is can I justify the cost versus the Panasonic 45-175 or 45-200?

Can I also justify the investment in such a low spec. body? Bearing in mind that the next body I buy will be a DSLR, but I won't be buying a DSLR and long lens for this trip.

Another vote for a bridge camera. I can recommend the Fuji X-S1 which is superb. It has a bigger sensor than the FZ200 and also much better dynamic range which will matter in the bright light on a safari. It has a great lens and evf and is just like shooting a DSLR, with lots of external buttons. I got the X-S1 to replace my 100-300mm (which I wasn't overly impressed with to be honest) and I'm very glad I did. I've got the range but with a lot more versatility built in and if I don't want to bother swapping lenses I just shoot with the X-S1 - job done. I can imagine going from 24mm to 624mm in an instant would be very useful on safari. The X-S1 also has a manual zoom so it's a lot quicker and easier to change focal lengths than using a power zoom.

Hmmm ... the two body solution certainly works well. And the X-S1 is a fine camera. But it has rotten RAW support, so you need to really nail exposures. It also has a small 2/3" sensor so subject isolation is more f a challenge. And it has very weak AF when compared with m4/3 ...

--

http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow