100-400 in spring?

I'm saying its pointless, at this stage there are more obvious gaps to fill then offering 4 25mm lenses for the same format, and about the same for 45mm lenses.

There still isn't a decent option for a native 50-58mm sort of lens, there still isn't a native prime wider than 12mm with auto focus, there isn't a tilt shift lens, there isn't a medium length zoom other than the 12-50 which is decidedly dated, where the 24 to 100 sort of range is extremely popular for non-lens splitters with other systems. We're still waiting for fast lenses beyond 300mm equivalency. You say to be happy with a 12-40 and a 40-150 even if you don't want the extra 40mm or the separate lens.

What am I saying? I'm saying Olympus and Panasonic have lost the plot with Micro Four Thirds lenses. That is an objective reality. I was really excited about Micro Four Thirds when Panasonic and Olympus were working together on releasing lenses, and now both companies seem to be more interested in just outdoing each other.

There is no partnership anymore. Just crap after crap in the last 3 releases of 45, 25, and 25mm lenses that were painfully unnecessary. We can add another slow variable aperture lens to the list of things not to be excited by from either Panasonic or Olympus. If the 8mm fisheye wasn't useless enough particularly with its fast aperture.

The state of Micro Four Thirds is really starting to bother me, if I wasn't so bogged down I'd probably be looking at a company with a decent road map such as Fuji, or even Samsung. There's no justification for the state of Micro Four Thirds lenses when there is still so many other viable lenses they could be making money out of if they just stopped releasing the same lenses everyone else already has with an Olympus stamp rather than a Panasonic one or vice versa.