Any info about these two mid-range OM System zooms that are in the roadmap?

Thanks.

One of them will just be a re-issued version of the 40-150/2.8 PRO, with better coatings, better weather-sealing, and possibly OIS. The other would be a 70-250/3.5 PRO with SyncIS, that also accepts tele-converters (OMDS has patented this lens).

In addition, we are hoping to see new f/1.4 primes at 10, 14, 28, or 40mm, to match the recently-issued 20/1.4, as Sigma has patented all of these lenses.

Thanks! I am a little disappointed, I was hoping for something like a 50-200/4.0. A pity too that, despite having so many lenses, the MFT system doesn't offer a 100/2.0, 135/2.0, 180/2.8, 200/2.8, 400/4.0..... And the Olympus 300/4.0 could be lighter.

HAND.

If I may chime in - Do (or would) you use the pana 50-200mm with the camera mounted on a tripod? I'm afraid it's a bit unstable given the weight and the length of the lens, and there's no tripod collar available. TIA

I shudder at the potential cost of the 70-250mm f/3.5 pro.

• I love my Panasonic 30/2.8 Macro, incredibly sharp

If you have an Arca-swiss base-plate on your camera body, you can use a nodal-slide to balance your camera on a tripod. It won't be as rock-stable as a tripod-collar, but it will balance easily. I currently do this with the 12-100/4, for example.

Aside from the current Panasonic 200/2.8 (already mentioned), there is also an old Olympus Four-Thirds 300/2.8, which becomes a 400/4 with the Four-Thirds 1.4x tele-converter (and a FT-MFT adapter). Similarly, there is also an Olympus Four-Thirds 150/2, which can become a 210/2.8. Finally, I can take an FF lens, like a 135/2.0, and attach a 0.71x Focal Reducer to get a 96/1.4, which is better than your desired 100/2.

If it shares the same 72mm filters the 70-250mm F3.5 would complement the 12-100mm F4 very well. Not too much overlap in focal length, same zoom direction, same function button, full Sync IS.

I was hoping for something like a 50-200/4.0.

I forgot to mention the 40-150/2.8 PRO with the MC-14 TC becomes a 56-210/4, which again is what you wanted.

HAND.

HAND.

HAND.

Thanks Finnan. I did use the Rösch collar for the 100-300mm in the past, didn't know they also had one for the 50-200mm. But then, it doesn't appear on their website, does that mean they didn't go ahead making it?

Those old 4/3 lenses are basically unobtainable. I tried to find a 150/2 occationally for years. If available at all it is extremely expensive.
I owned the 35-100mm/2 once. It is extremely sharp, even sharper than the 40-150mm, but also much larger and heavier. And that is why I sold it.

HAND.

Uh, no, the 70-250 f/3.5 will NOT take a 72mm filter. The absolute minimum clear aperture for the front element will be 72mm just for f/3.5 axial illumination at 250mm. To get good illumination off-axis, the front element clear aperture MUST be larger than 72mm. I suspect that even an 82mm filter size might be too small. Yes, that translates into a pricey optic.