Androole

@Tazz93 - You really think it's "all for the sake of dropping .8 of an inch?"

Given the precaution of including a hard mechanical stop, it seems much more likely that the optical arrangement...

2.5x the price for each added stop.

These lenses look awfully plasticky to me. Like budget EF lenses from 1991.

Ooof, really?

That's way heavier than I would have expected.

Hahaha, well said.

I wonder how the optical quality compares to something like the Panasonic 100-300 or Oly 75-300mm.

If it's f/7.1 at 500mm, it's almost definitely f/6.3 at 400mm.

My guess:
100mm = f/4.5
200mm = f/5.0
300mm = f/5.6
400mm = f/6.3
500mm = f/7.1

Works perfectly.

I expect that the number of people that want a 140-700mm/f6.3-10 full time is probably relatively low.

It is inconvenient, but the 100-500mm range is already so incredibly versatile that they...

RTFA, it's literally the next sentence.

"A physical hard stop prevents the user from accidentally zooming out past 300mm with these teleconverters."

Voigtlander makes some fine and affordable M-mount lenses.

My thought process on the pricing was that they stripped away almost every expensive component and process. I thought that was elegant, a way to deliver a pure photography experience, like film, at...

When I saw the write-up and the specs, I was thinking - wow, this would be a sweet little ultra-minimalist unit, how much are they selling it for, $399? $499?

Hrmm.

@r1975 - I know it's not really at all what you're asking for, but to a limited extent that's what you get from some fisheye zooms, like Pentax's 10-17mm/f3.5-4.5. (Not to confused with Canon's...

@MightyMike - I actually find that fish-eye photography gives a far more naturalistic appearance to the hyperwide perspective than rectilinear lenses do, but I understand that might be a...

I have to respect the technical innovation here, but this is just getting a bit absurd.

Making compelling compositions that feel natural that are wider than ~20mm is often a challenge.

9mm is...

Sure. For all intents and purposes though, the E-PL9 is an E-M10 II without the EVF. They're identical in size. So it's the size of the body that's in question, not specifically the...

Ah, but the E-PM2 is only 2-axis IBIS. It's really in an entirely different league altogether from anything made since the E-M5. Even the GX7, Panasonic's first attempt at IBIS, has much better...

Perhaps the best thing coming out of this camera is that it signals that there's a couple of new high-quality, low-budget EVF and rear LCD parts that can go into the GX10.

Hopefully when they get...

My interpretation of this camera is that it is a way to essentially use the GX850's parts bin while adding a few additional features to try and squeeze out a tiny bit more margin, at least...

No, it is slightly smaller than the E-M10.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#844,720

Still, it would have been a better trade-off to be slightly larger and include mechanical IBIS.

There are many M4/3 cameras that have 1/8000s mechanical shutters (including my 7-year old GX7). But this particular camera has a very small electromagnetic shutter designed to be both very...