I think you're right, that a fixed-lens compact around $900 would be exciting –– something to bring new buyers into M43. Fuji and Ricoh are killing it with fixed-lens compacts that cost way more. But, this has been going on for years and OM has done nothing to compete. Skeptical but hopeful.
Then why did Fuji, who already owns that market, bother create the X-E5?
Technology and manufacturing techniques improve year-over-year. The limitations of the past does not dictate future products, hence the term ‘innovation’. It is not unreasonable to create such a sensor today.
I actually find the 75-300mm to be fairly usable.
Finding the 12-100 f/4 to be too large and too heavy as a small travel lens for my OM-5 and also it having too short of reach, I sold it in favor of a 12-45 f/4 (small and light) and a 40-150 f/4 (longer reach and still lightweight). I have not missed the sync IS of the 12-100.
I’m an enthusiastic user of a TG6 for sea kayaking, when I’m sometimes upside down in my kayak. I’m very aware of the TG series’ strengths, and the limitations of the very small sensor. I would love a TG with a one inch sensor. However I fear that the engineering challenges of accommodating a matching zoom lens with worthwhile range and aperture fully within a waterproof shell would result in a much larger camera. The competing one inch sensor zoom compacts all have extending lenses.
The 100-400mm II does not carry the "PRO" nomenclature. The 40-150/2.8 was released in 2014 at $1500, which is equivalent to $2047 today exclusive of the Big Beautiful Tax. Given the huge reduction in the MILC market over the past decade and OM System's recent pricing history, I'd expect a 75-250/4 PRO to come in close to $3000 USD.
Indeed skip FF. It would be great if OM System want to go that way it could join Fuji or Hasselblad.
A 1" TG would be a great camera, but I'd hate to give up the non-extending 25-100 and all the cool computational and multi shot stuff in my TG 7. As it is my TG7 is already bigger than my friends Sony RX100vii, and not much smaller than my OM-5 II.
Sounds unrealistic honestly. No manufacturer has ever made a 100-400 f4 and I imagine it would be very expensive. The nikon 180-400 f4 had an MSRP of $12k, and that's a significantly shorter zoom range. The Oly 150-400 f4.5 already seems like a bargain by comparison. While there is some ease in designing for a smaller sensor, I don't think it makes that much difference for these focal lengths. I don't think asking for a larger zoom range, wider aperture and reduced cost makes any sense. Saving the TC helps a little, but I don't think it's a huge cost driver here. It would be great if the 150-400 were cheaper, that's for sure.
