>>4369801And? Every company is having problems like this. Sony and canon have real problems aside from these and imho canons are the least bad unless you demand slightly more compact kit.
And Nikon isn't even an option.
>>4369802f9 at 800mm, yes. 2kg, oh no, weight, work out.
Vs what on mft? The 150-400 (300-900) for olympus is an EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLAR LENS that is a constant f9 equivalent, for cameras that do not have access to ISO settings with better DR than ISO 800 equivalent. It is also 2kg.
The panasonic 100-400 is a $1600 lens that is lighter and cheaper, and equivalent to a 200-800 f8-12.6. At 800mm it is an f12.6 lens. If you spend $2k on a g9ii you can get access to ISO 100 (400 equivalent) with APS-C like shadow DR.
The RF 200-800 f6.3-9 is a significantly faster lens even equivalently, faster than the $8k olympus, only $200ish more than the panasonic, and slightly heavier. It goes on aps-c bodies to make an mft beating 300-1200, and on ff bodies to make an equivalence smashing setup especially if you buy an R5 (mk1, mk2 is a buggy video cam lol)
