Arguments for a 400mm f4 for m4/3

Status
Not open for further replies.

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
I hope Olympus makes your lens, I really do. I was merely stating why I think it is impractical for them to do so.
One person's rotten milk is another's cheese. It's not impractical to make and you'd be surprised how many bird photographers and the like are about, and they are all wishing for more reach. While not all would get rid of their Canon/Nikon gear, some could well consider an E-M1 and 400mm f4 to supplement what they enjoy doing. You know, these are sort the people who own m4/3 gear for one thing and FF for another; it's not unheard of under any circumstances.
 

faithblinded

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 25, 2014
Messages
947
Location
Cleveland, OH
Real Name
Ken
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #163
In your terms, wouldn't the upcoming 300f4 be a light pickup? :p

If Subaru made an el camino style AWD, I would dig it! My current 4x4 is a 1969 chevy suburban. Admittedly I'm an odd duck, but variety is the spice of life!

Let's not forget I only started this thread after a rumor on m4/3 and elsewhere about Olympus building a fast super telephoto, not just because it would be tremendously useful to me personally. I've never thought a 400mm would be likely(would love one though!), but I fail to see what other super tele focal length they could make that wouldn't compete with the existing and planned lenses already on the roadmap. Going longer would only mean bigger still, and anything shorter would compete with the 40-150 and 300.
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,612
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
This doesn't compute. Lens diameter should also be tied into sensor size, not just focal length. If what you say is true, then I don't understand how compact cameras can exist. Please elaborate. Also, there definitely are lenses that are shorter in physical length than their actual focal lenght, so...?
If you look closely at compacts, they have "equivalent" focal lengths and small sensors. The Panasonic FZ200 for example, has a 25-600mm f2.8 equivalent zoom, but a 5x+ crop factor. The actual lens is a 4-108mm f2.8 and it's a pretty big lens:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200/images/inhand1.jpg

At full extension, very similar to a 35-100mm f2.8 on m4/3. Of course the field of view is different..
 

OzRay

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
4,991
Location
South Gippsland, Australia
Real Name
Ray, not Oz
Some people are not worried about the size of the lens; just as some aren't worried that an F150 is bigger than a Yaris, as it's what they need.
 

faithblinded

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 25, 2014
Messages
947
Location
Cleveland, OH
Real Name
Ken
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #166
I get that, I didn't do the math right away and see he was quoting minimum sizes. I thought he was saying there was a given size the front element has to be for each focal length. I misunderstood the point being made initially. I do understand the constraints of focal length and max aperture.
 

jeffryscott

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
518
Location
Arizona
If Subaru made an el camino style AWD, I would dig it! My current 4x4 is a 1969 chevy suburban. Admittedly I'm an odd duck, but variety is the spice of life!
Subaru made the Baja! Indeed an odd duck, but for some perfect. The mythical 400 would be less of an oddity and probably more practical, to at least some folks.

Smaller, lighter and weather sealed is a great advantage for m43 over its FF brethren and I hope Olympus keeps taking us there with these high quality lenses they've been making.
 

T N Args

Agent Photocateur
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
3,515
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Real Name
call me Arg
The price of a 400/4 would kill it for so many m43 users that it would be a shame.

I was always appreciative that Canon supplemented their super-high-priced models with some under-2k primes like 200/2.8, 300/4, and 400/5.6. The optics in theses lenses are/were exemplary. They brought that excellence to a vastly bigger and very grateful audience.

That's what I would like to see from Oly, not just for me, but for most of us.
Well, Canon make a 400mm f5.6 tele lens and it costs less than $1600. There are compromises that can be made, including anything between f4 and f5.6 in order to reduce size and cost, if desired.
As you can see I agreed with you much earlier. The lens that I don't think is fair to ask for is the long fast lens, due to it not having an economic market of buyers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom