TomFid

They'd be fools to blow them out far below what's likely to soon be the prevailing price. Of course, Panasonic pricing policy has frequently seemed foolish in the past. Still, my guess is you'll...

That's the best representation I've seen of what's going on.

I've had the same problem with HP Prem Gloss on an R2400. It must be a dye-specific paper or something like that. The ink just beads up on the surface. Sometimes the effect is cool, but mostly it's...

I do have kids, and I let them use my m4/3 stuff, but still I think this advice is well taken. I'd look seriously at something like a Canon G-15 or LX-7 or something like that. High end P&S cameras...

... to be able to operate touch screen controls inside an EVF. :-)

It's not clear what you mean by handheld, but the existing xx-300mm options are very handholdable and useful. Still longer lenses will have a narrower market, but they're still not useless, because...

Nope. The distance to the sensor is the same as the distance to the original format's film plane, and the focal length doesn't change. So, the FF-equivalent focal length, based on angle of view, is...

I think your attitude's healthy, but it's interesting that none of the players has picked up on the fact that there's a big appetite for a decent tele prime. Seems like first one out with a sharp,...

I have the Panasonic 100-300, a big MF lens (400mm f/4), and a small scope (Meade ETX).The ETX loses, because the MF mechanism just isn't quick enough for terrestrial use, and it's slow (f11). The...

I'm not so sure about that.You may be correct that few people would pay much to avoid holding the camera vertically. But a little more broadly, there's clearly an audience for multi-aspect sensors...

My fear is that they'll eventually do this, but they'll do something stupid, like make a 300mm f/2.8 for speed bragging rights, that will be huge and expensive and totally squander the portability...

I know ... I know ... I have a Tamron 400mm f/4 that's twice that size.But I don't think it has to be that way. First of all, back off to f/5.6. Then make it collapsible (should be doable - the...

Not necessarily ... a 300/5.6 prime should be cheaper to make than the 100-300, which is much less than $1000. (Of course, you'd like it to be better too, which would offset the gain somewhat. Then...

Bob Meyer wrote:This would be quite useful. There might even be times when the OOF/vignetted area outside the nominal image circle would be usable, because it was outside the plane of focus for...

Any easy feature requested by 80-90% of users should be non-negotiable! I've worked with lots of companies where the engineers regarded the marketers as idiots, but maybe at Panasonic it's the...

Even with a focus on advanced amateurs, something like a 300mm f/4 or f5.6 could be reasonably compact, better-performing than the 100-300 (which I have and like), without breaking the bank.Getting...

Certainly over its range the 40-150 is mostly sharper - I'm not saying there aren't tradeoffs - I was just pointing out that the original comment about the 14-140 being compromised at the long end...

If you look at the slrgear.com tests, the 14-140 is nearly as good as the Oly 40-150 & Panny 45-200 in the 140-150mm range, so this isn't necessarily the case.

If you only shoot wide-to-short-tele, the advantage isn't that great. But at the long end it matters. This is what caused me to switch: http://camerasize.com/compact/#381.35,380.310,wa,t

I've had the same experience with the GH2 - the distance scale just doesn't seem that accurate.However, I've noticed that if it fails to achieve auto focus, it defaults back to infinity reliably...