Could I? Should I? Advice

So I travel across the state with my job. This gives me an amazing opportunity to photograph lots of wildlife and landscape. I carry my camera around with me and take pics in the afternoon after work. My main emphasis is wildlife and a lot of birds. I know that this is one of the downfalls of the 4/3s...apparently. However, I am about to buy 2 new lenses for landscape and travel which will end up costing me $1800. After researching these cameras I am wondering if I should use that money towards a new system. I carry a backpack that is extremely heavy! I always have my Sigma 150-500 lens with me. Its a MONSTER to lug around.

So you can see I am constantly bringing my gear in and out of the car to hotel and lugging it around the woods. I started looking at what I was about to spend and I could really get a small package with several lenses including the 75-300ii Zoom to replace my 150-500.

Besides the AF how would the 75-300 4.8/6.7 compare to a 150-500 5/6.3 for wildlife?

Any thoughts?

I travel for a living as well. I spend months at a time away from home. I love my canon outfit, but for travel and keeping something with me in my backpack every day. I love my OMD EM5. I have 3 good primes 17 45 and 75 f1.8 and they work very well for landscape and the opportunistic wildlife .... And with a very cheap adapter you can shoot all most any glass from anyone else, in Aperture priority

Why the 75-300 and not the Panasonic 100-300? It's faster and the images look pretty good to me. Plus, it's stabilized, so you can use any m43 body with it and still have stabilization.

Don't get the 75-300, the 70-300 is a better choice if you want those focal lengths. I personally find the 70-300 a useful lens in many different situations (just wish I had the L version).

The OP is asking about m43 lens options.

That should teach me to pay attention to what I'm responding to.

I myself have been very plesently surprised by the 75-3ß00 II.

Nightdiver13 wrote in post #17397075
Why the 75-300 and not the Panasonic 100-300? It's faster and the images look pretty good to me. Plus, it's stabilized, so you can use any m43 body with it and still have stabilization.

Some reports have said that although the Panasonic has a faster aperture the af motor is slower the aquire focus.

I've had both and although the 75-300 is lighter and smaller I simply preferred the results from the 100-300 - that said I don't use the IS as the Oly bodies have IBIS.

AF wise I wouldn't say there was much if anything in it, but I never tried them side by side.