[Brightcolours]

....

It is equivalent to an FF f8 lens, Wim.

That may be true when it comes to DoF, aperture wise, but it still is an F/4 lens. As mentioned before, the difference is the image circle size. It still is F/4.

However, I'd like you to stop dissing lenses because of this.  It still is as complex to design and manufacture as a FF lens, and requires even higher precision to get the most out of it.

You could actually tackle this from a more positive way than you normally do, just list pros and cons.

The main thing is that because of the smaller sensor and therefore limited image circle you will have more noise, as total light collected cirstumcances being the same is less, and therefore there is a limit to what iso you can use to get similar noise levels.

However, any crop type camera shooter accepts this, along with the increase in DoF.

MTF isn't actually any worse, because F/4 is F/4 with any lens, as mentioned before. Optical diffraction is limited by absolute aperture, not by equivalent aperture. Therefore, a 12-100 F/4 MFT lens is not the same as a 24-200 F/8 FF lens. All you can say is that it behaves from an FL and DoF POV as a 24-200 F/8 lens. However, light gathering is the same as any F/4 lens, just over a smaller image circle.

Kind regards, Wim

I did not "diss that lens" (nice rapper lingo there, dude), I just placed it in the correct perspective.