Long Lens --- How much would you pay?

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
Treeshade
New MemberPosts: 22
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 10 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

Yes, there are those that believe having a fast telephoto is playing to (Micro) Four Thirds strengths, namely the smaller, "cropped" sensor when compared to DSLRs means you can get the narrow angle of view of huge DSLR telephoto lenses at much shorter focal lengths.

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light. So I really don't see any manufacturer making a fast super telephoto prime with an m43 mount.

If you are going to have a big lens, a lens you mount directly onto a tripod and then mount the camera onto, and let's face it the lens being debated would be like this, the size of the camera would be, within reason, immaterial. It you really want to do birding, an APS-C DSLR is already a very good tool for the job.

A 300mm f/4 or 400mm f/5.6 m4/3 telephoto lens should be light enough for handheld.
The Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 weights 1570g and is still considered a handheld lens (not for long with 2kg total, but manageable). The lens is 120-600mm on APS-C.

The Pany 100-300mm f/4-5.6 is 520g. I guess Panasonic could make a 300 f/4 prime with OIS at less than 1kg, which produces a less-than-1.5kg package with GH3. If the quality is good enough for a 1.4x TC, it would be a 840mm f/5.6 handheld setup. While the FZ200 is lighter and cheaper, I am sure the m4/3 setup would have better image even chopped to 1200mm.

I hope Pany/Oly could strike a balance between bridge and APS-C for price/quality/weight at above 600mm. For me, the upper reach/aperture limit is handheld weight limit.

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