What is the real dif between the E200 and E300? Can I save the $ and buy two E200s? Or should I go w/E300? 11 y/o (95lbs) and a 14 y/o (125lbs)
1717393
The E300 is gastar and bigger it goes 15mph. U can buy the E200 but It's not as fast as the E300.
1717394
Definitely go with the 300. Our 11y/o has been using it for one year. Our 9 y/o is no longer happy with the 200 and wants the 300, he says he can't keep up with his brother..
1717395
The E200 is faster. I don't think your 14 year old would be happy with the E200. I bought my 9 year old girl the E200 and my 11 year old boy the E300.
1717396
Go with the 300! I believe it goes faster than the 200. I bought mine for my 8y/o and 11y/o boys. Glad I got the faster ones! I use them too - super fun!!
1347848
Our apologies for the missing information. We have updated our product information. To answer your question the recommended weight limit is 145 pounds. The maximum weight limit is 154 pounds. This information is only for the model listed, Razor E200. Thank you for your inquiry.
70680
I'm also 5-10.5 & 33. I'm ordering the 58. My old, heavy Schwinn Continental is a 58, and it's perfect for me. If I were any shorter, the 58 would probably be too big for me. But I like as large a frame as I can handle.
2029245
Hi Pablo, I have a similar camera (and lens set). I have the GF5 with the X series (compact) 14mm-42mm and I recently got the x series 45mm-175mm. After a ton of reading all the reviews and comments and factoring price and everything (for me) I decided this was the best 2nd lens for me. That said, it is no good UNLESS one is 20+ feet away from what you basically want to shoot. When I take a group shot I have to switch back. I will say the 45x175 is a superb lens, but if you were going to mount one and leave the other home, you would really want the 14-140 (IMO). When I chose the 45-175 I figured why get a lens that was already a range of one I had but in practical use I now see the 14mm-140mm There were a few other factors, one was the price was significantly higher (I got my 45-175 for one hundred ninety two using "like new" on warehouse deals) the other was I really wanted a "X" series lens and the 14-140 is a "G" series only. Two other factors were the 14-140 was almost 8 years older and twice as heavy. I have a GF5 and LOVE how with the 45-175 mounted I can hold it like a soda can in one hand when not using it. I am sure the 14-140 is a great lens, and with the GH2 being a much bigger and heavier camera, I am not sure the increase weight would be an issue. Next time I get another lens my quandary may be similar to your, but it would be the 100-300 vs the very useable 14-140. I already get "Wow" comments with the 45-175 mounted on my tiny red GF5 camera. I can only imagine the comments the humongous 100-300 (zoomed out) would get. I do like how the 45-175 it totally internal and am a tad fearful of the 'zooming/slide' tube feature of the 100-300. I know they have to do it, but it's a tad scary. Overall I really think if you are going to REPLACE (meaning sell or no longer have access the 14-42mm lens) you should opt for the 14-140. That way you ONLY change if you want CRAZY zoom potential! Take care!
506468
In same boat, Bob. I'm buying the D80. Cheaper, and less weight/bulk. I test drove a 30D and did not like the ergonomics. Have been waiting for a D70s replacement, and it's here!
369092
Well, I think it would be safe to get the youth one, however if you believe he is going to quickly pass the 110 lbs mark you could get these and wait a bit. To be honest though, I am 110 lbs and being the bare minimum doesn't add much spring to my step. To get the best out of this size, the best weight for it would be somewhere in the middle to end of the range.
2096573
I have the 18-200 and have enjoyed it. If you are absolutely sure you will never go FX, the 18-200 is a good choice. For less money, I would prefer the 28-300 instead of 18-300, if you ever want to move to FX.
468418
Do you have olympus lenses or will this be your first slr? If it's your first I would say go with the 520 if you have the extra cash. I have the e 510 and use it for everything. I just used it for a wedding and the pictures were amazing! I would put the e-510 up against any other camera on the market in the under $1000 class. The 520 has some features that are tying to attract more point-n-shooters, like face detection with the live view. It also has upgrades that ofcourse we haven't seen so we won't know if they make a big enough difference. If you can wait get the 520, if not the e-510 with the 14-54 lens is a great combo, you can't go wrong with either one. Do you have olympus lenses or will this be your first slr? If it's your first I would say go with the 520 if you have the extra cash. I have the e 510 and use it for everything. I just used it for a wedding and the pictures were amazing! I would put the e-510 up against any other camera on the market in the under $1000 class. The 520 has some features that are tying to attract more point-n-shooters, like face detection with the live view. It also has upgrades that ofcourse we haven't seen so we won't know if they make a big enough difference. If you can wait get the 520, if not the e-510... » Read More Do you have olympus lenses or will this be your first slr? If it's your first I would say go with the 520 if you have the extra cash. I have the e 510 and use it for everything. I just used it for a wedding and the pictures were amazing! I would put the e-510 up against any other camera on the market in the under $1000 class. The 520 has some features that are tying to attract more point-n-shooters, like face detection with the live view. It also has upgrades that ofcourse we haven't seen so we won't know if they make a big enough difference. If you can wait get the 520, if not the e-510 with the 14-54 lens is a great combo, you can't go wrong with either one. « Show Less
1020787
This question is directed to Charles LeRoyer. I was thinking of getting either the 230 or the 240 and i was pretty set on the 230 because the graphics arent really a big deal for me, but i was wondering what the difference is in terms of the seat. I plan on using my bike 3-4 times a week or more for an hour or more at a time, so the seat is very important to me. If you could add any insight to this, i would be very appreciative. Thanks.
1651113
Unless you're really going to watch a lot of video, the screen size shouldn't matter too much?.I have an e250 that survived 6months in Afghanistan (being banged around in my pocket) and an e260, (so I could give the e250 to the wife and 'upgrade' my own). Love them both.
855326
i got to try both of them out in a store they both feel really smooth but i went with the Nautilus e514 it just felt a bit more sturdy and has a nicer display the schwinn 420 display was kinda hard to read as the Nautilus was light up bright with big nurbers and imo is the better buy ...... i had my Nautilus e514 for 4 months now and i use every day and its still like the 1st day i brought it .... and im only 5"4 so we are pretty much the same hight ' good luck on your work outs and hope my review helps
971245
I had a Total Gym 1000 a few years ago. It folded up but it was a bit of a job (I'm 6', 205 & fairly strong.) This product seems slightly heavier than the current Total Gyms in this price range, but is half the cost. If you can afford the price difference maybe you should go with what you know. When you get used to either and in decent shape I bet either will be a snap. I think I'm going to try the Weider.
1178421
I am leaning towards the 230 mainly because of price. I compared the 230 and 240 in a side by side list and other than a difference in programs (240 has more) and warranty (230 is better) I don't see the advantage in paying $50 more.
1178422
The fly wheel weight on the 240 is 20 lbs. I'm not sure what the weight on the 230 is. The 220 has a weight of 13.1 lbs. I'm not sure what that means or if it makes a difference. I was also wondering why the 230 has a better warranty? Could it mean that the construction is better?
73532
I don't have the SR100 or SR200, for outdoors, the SR300 gets an 8 (it really is good outdoors), indoors I give it a 6. It's a bit unfair to include an HD unit in the scale, so 8 might be a bit much, but I'm going to say it's fair.
552192
I have had the YSP2200 for over a year and half now. No complaints. Awesome sound. I have never heard the 1100 or the 3000 so I can't compare. But speaking only for the 2200. It is well worth the money. The sound blows away any brand that are priced within $300.00 to $600.00. I always find that the 2200 has a cleaner sound then any other... great base sound (not muddy) and very clear. I would recommend the 2200.
859071
On the brochure, it says it recommends the tr3000i for up to 20 hours of weekly use. The person who delivered and put it together said he only had a couple of people complain about their 1200i, and it was because they were using it heavily so should have gotten the 3000i. I can't find any information about what the recommended weekly usage for the tr2000i is. When the store sold me the unit, they also said that tr3000i and tr4000i is basically the same except the motor. The frame and console is the same, so I felt that it was worth the $300 for a better frame, better motor, and 5 years for parts. I hope this helps! On the brochure, it says it recommends the tr3000i for up to 20 hours of weekly use. The person who delivered and put it together said he only had a couple of people complain about their 1200i, and it was because they were using it heavily so should have gotten the 3000i. I can't find any information about what the recommended weekly usage for the tr2000i is. When the store sold me the unit, they also said that tr3000i and tr4000i is basically the same except the motor. The frame and console is the same, so I felt that it was worth the $300 for a better frame, better motor, and 5 years for... » Read More On the brochure, it says it recommends the tr3000i for up to 20 hours of weekly use. The person who delivered and put it together said he only had a couple of people complain about their 1200i, and it was because they were using it heavily so should have gotten the 3000i. I can't find any information about what the recommended weekly usage for the tr2000i is. When the store sold me the unit, they also said that tr3000i and tr4000i is basically the same except the motor. The frame and console is the same, so I felt that it was worth the $300 for a better frame, better motor, and 5 years for parts. I hope this helps! « Show Less