Olympus 300mm f4.0. One of the sharpest lenses I've ever seen

[RichA]

Not many lenses can produce images you can just keep enlarging until the pixels give out. Granted m4/3rd hasn't seen fit to go past 20mp, but the pixel density of the sensor is akin to an 80mp FF so there is no resolution loss centrally and it exceeds the top FF camera with 61mp. I think that if m4/3rds would go to 30mp it would not be lost on that lens.

[Alfred Molon]

Am 18.03.2023 um 05:28 schrieb RichA:
> Not many lenses can produce images you can just keep enlarging until the pixels give out. Granted m4/3rd hasn't seen fit to go past 20mp, but the pixel density of the sensor is akin to an 80mp FF so there is no resolution loss centrally and it exceeds the top FF camera with 61mp. I think that if m4/3rds would go to 30mp it would not be lost on that lens.

Did you buy this lens?
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

[RichA]

Deciding. With the Can. dollar value in the toilet, it's nearly $4k with tax.

[Alfred Molon]

For sure it's a good lens, just very specialised. Probably if you get it
you may also want to have the 1.4x and/or 2.0x teleconverter.

[geoff]

On 18/03/2023 5:28 pm, RichA wrote:
> Not many lenses can produce images you can just keep enlarging until the pixels give out. Granted m4/3rd hasn't seen fit to go past 20mp, but the pixel density of the sensor is akin to an 80mp FF so there is no resolution loss centrally and it exceeds the top FF camera with 61mp. I think that if m4/3rds would go to 30mp it would not be lost on that lens.

Is the range of sharp lenses you are comparing to restricted to those
fitting Olympus, else what larger pool ?

geoff

[RichA]

No, most long telephoto lenses these days (fixed ones) are very good. But theoretically, an f/4.0 lens is considerably easier to make diffraction-limited or better than really fast lenses like f/2.8.