After a year with the E-PL2, I've become fascinated with the idea of legacy telephotos. The idea that I can get a lens with the reach and speed of a full-frame 400 f2.8 or 600 f4 for less than 2% of the price is irresistible. (I recognize they are not comparable in other respects.) So I've decided to get one of these two lenses, which can be had for similar prices. I don't have any specific use in mind, except perhaps some high school lacrosse. I like the 200 f2.8 because it is smaller (5.5 vs 8 inches) and lighter (1.5 vs 2 lbs) and has a larger maximum aperture. I tend to think the somewhat shorter focal length will be more versatile, but I'm not sure. The main advantage of the 300 f4 in my mind is the tripod collar. I expect that lenses of this length will have to be on tripod or monopod quite often, and I'm not sure that the E-PL2 will do well mounted on a tripod with the 200 f2.8 plus adapter hanging off it. Anyone have any experience with these lenses or advice about choosing between them?