Mirrorless- Continuing to Under Perform

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
EinsteinsGhost
EinsteinsGhost Forum Pro • Posts: 11,977
Re: Why should MFT lenses be cheaper than FF lenses? Smaller, yes...

Mike CH wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

Which is well and good but the Olympus 300mm f/2.8 is $7k! Hardly seems viable if the argument is 'hell of a lot less expensive'.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

But, it is a 600mm equivalent lens on MFT, with a f/2.8 aperture for speed.

At two thirds the price of the Canon 500/4 - not bad at all.

One sixth more expensive than the Canon 300/2.8.

So building the same FL/aperture lens in MFT is actually more expensive (might also be due to the scale of economies), but then the crop factor kicks in and gives you something which looks very attractive, numbers wise at least.

Ultimately, the cost, size and weight savings are primarily from needing smaller focal lengths to match the field of view.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
(unknown member)
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
(unknown member)
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
Biggs23 MOD
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow