wdross wrote:
But the Olympus angle of view is 300-800 f4.5 and 375-1000 f5.6 (with the 1.25X internal teleconverter on) in 35mm terms. It then becomes 420-1120 f6.5 and 525-1400 f8 (with internal teleconverter on) and the external X1.4 teleconverter. With the X2 external teleconverter, the lens becomes 600-1600 f9 and 750-2000 f11 (with internal teleconverter on). All of this is is handholdable. How many handholdable full frame zoom lenses are there that are capable of covering 300mm to 2000mm, at under 12.5" in length (under 14" with teleconverter) and 4 pounds, for $7500? And all the above at 1 pound less, no tripod needed, for only $2100 more than the most expensive closest system to that zoom range. Don't get me wrong; I would love to have a Sony full frame system to complement my Olympus system. I just do not have enough money to match my Olympus system in coverage. Just trying to match my 300 f4 lens to the Canon and Nikon 600 f4 would cost me either $9500 or $12K. And it still would not travel like my Olympus system. My ideal Olympus system would be 14mm to 2000mm in angle of view, flashes, batteries, filters, viewsight EE-1, and other accessories, packed in about a 8x15x20 backpack, and under 20 pounds total. I know of no other system that can do that. This is why the serious consideration for such a lens for my retirement and travels.
But the Olympus angle of view is 300-800 f4.5 and ... (
show quote)
How about using an adapted lens. I use a Nikkor 200mm F4 lens on my micro fourr third cameras.