"Alan Browne" wrote ...

I recall that now. I was very surprised that the 4/3 Oly 300 was so large
v. the 35mm framed cameras considering that it should aim for a smaller
target. One of the claims of Oly is a 'smaller lighter system' after all.

It should have a very fat sweet spot and be exceedingly crisp across the
sensor.

I can understand the Oly marketing on this: "Give them equivalent to 35mm
full frame 600mm magnification. Give them more aperture. Give them a fat
sweet spot in the lens".

So, indeed it would be worth it for pro nature and sports shooters.

They could have leaned it down optimally for the sensor at the same
aperture (f/2.8) and made it less expensive, but they chose the "ultimate"
route. It will be interesting to see how many show up on the sidelines.

--------------------------

I shoot sports, and have just recently started showing up on the sidelines
with my new Olympus equipment. It has, naturally, attracted quite a bit of
notice, as my colleagues were very accustomed to seeing my ubiquitous white
Canon lenses. I don't have an Olympus 300/2.8 (I'm holding out for the
90-250/2.8), but I'm sure it would only further add to the shocked reactions
"I didn't know Olympus made digital SLRs!" : )

Rob