We will close the prime lens poll on late Monday. After that we want to launch a MicroFourThirds zoom lens poll. Please suggest some zoom lenses by writing a comment to this post. And invite everyone you know to partecipate. More we are and more Olympus and Panasonic will listen to us!
38 Responses
How about a rangefinder MFT? Could it be done???
Yes! Maybe by Leica??? 🙂
Personally I would like to see a 15-45 (30-90) F2-2.8 and then a 45-135 (90-270) F2-2.8 . . . are they going to be too huge? I don’t know much about lens design, but the 7.1-21.3 (35-105) F1.8-2.6 on my C5050 is great. I figure by keeping the range in the 3X area it would be easier than trying to get something like the existing 18-180.
They would also need something to round out the 14-42, so a 42-126 F4-5.6 maybe for the standard lenses, that way they have a good set of 2 of standard line, and then a set of 2 for the high speed line. Combine this with a few good primes and you have yourself a whole set.
I’m not really a photographer though, so maybe these two ranges make no sense to anyone else.
ultra wide 2x zoom
10-20mm/3.5-4
3x wide zoom
12-36mm/2.8-3.5
pro standard zoom (like FT lens, but smaller)
14-54mm/2.8-4
midrange 5x zoom
18-90mm/3.5-4
standard telezoom (similar to panasonic, smaller, no O.I.S)
42-160mm/4-5.6
pro-level telezoom
42-135mm/3.5-4
12-40 2.8
40-100 2.8
15-35 3.5-4 (tiny)
25-75 4-5.6 (tiny
70-300 F 4.5-5.6
10-20mm f/4.0
40-100mm f/2.8
For a poll on a choose 3 basis like I normally run…
8-20 F3.2
9-18 F4-5.6
10-30 F2.8-F3.5
12-30 F2.0-F2.8 (LX3)
14-70 F2.5-F3.5 (C8080)
14-100 F3.5-F5.0
12-120 F4.0-F5.6
12-160 F4.0-F5.6
14-210 F4.0-F5.6
25-100 F2.0-2.8
35-140 F2.8-F4.0
40-150 F3.5-F5.0
35-70 F1.8
50-200 F3.5-F4.5
70-200 F4.0-F5.0
3.5-4.5/7-14
2.5-3.5/14-50
3.5-4.5/50-200
12-35 F2.0-2.5
14-45 F2.8-3.5
8-18 F2.8
10-20 F2.8
10-20 F4
12-45 at least 2.8 please!
Zooms for mFT
12-40mm f2.8 constant aperture
25-75mm f2.8 constant aperture with macro capability
25-100mm f2.8-3.5
9-18mm f3.5-4.5 compact
Zoom ranges don’t have to start a a focal length that another
left off. Overlap is good as you don’t have to change lenses
so often and sometimes you can get away with just one zoom
plus a prime.
Well, considering we already have four standard zooms (14-45,45-200,14-140,14-42) and one ultra wide (7-14) available for MFT, it’d be nice to get a super-tele (e.g. 70-300mm). After that some faster zooms would indeed be great too, though probably way to expensive for me.
9-18/4
12-35/2.8
35-100/2.8
12-60/4-5.6 (small)
6-12/2.8
12-60/2.8-4.0
70-300/2.8-4.0
I’d like to see approximately a 12-35/4 – not fast, but quality, so it’s good wide open, and of course as small as possible.
Let me come back and share a basic thought on the size factor:
Since we cannot imagine a pocket that is big enough to host an MFT camera armed with a zoom, then we can deliberate our vision for the size of a zoom for such a camera.
Let it be a little bigger; it is always a question of quality after all! Let it have some more glass and in turn some more light through it. The ones of us that are seeking for the absolute portability can have a pancake on our camera.
I repeat after that, (a dream of mine of course), the specifications of a “do it all” zoom, starting from a true wide 12mm to a short tele 45mm (24-90 in 35mm), which should be sufficient for almost everything when walkabouting out there with a camera. And with a nice f2.8 wide open please!
I’d like to see a lens inspired by the LX3’s lens: it’s much brighter than lenses of typical compact cameras, but has a much less ambitious zoom range in order to keep the lens relatively compact. Adapting this philosophy for the mFT format, we might end up with a 12-30 f/2.8 – 4.0 lens which isn’t so large that it undermines the basic premise of a smaller and lighter system. I find the somewhat wider 24 – 60mm equivalent zoom range of the LX3 quite versatile. Combine that with a longer prime and I would have most situations covered.
I definitely think Olympus needs to run 2 lines of lenses like they did back in the OM days: a tiny line and a line of bigger, faster lenses. Please use DSA elements, retractable barrels, and other space-saving technologies like in the 9-18, the two pancakes, and the new 14-42 wherever possible. And please, don’t do the “no overlap” thing. Photographers need flexibility in zoom ranges; we don’t need zoom ranges dictated by some arbitrary numerical pattern.
Wide zoom
9-20/4-5.6 (tiny – basically, the 9-18 for m4/3 with a bit more reach)
10-22/2.8-3.5 (pro quality – basically, the 11-22 for m4/3 but able to go a bit wider)
Standard zoom
12-40/3.5-4.5 (tiny)
12-36/2.8 (pro quality classic 24-70 equivalent)
14-45/2.8 (cross between the 14-35/2 and the 14-54/2.8-3.5)
Extended zoom
12-60/3.5-4.5 (compact version of the 12-60 for m4/3)
12-100/4-5.6 (compact 8x superzoom)
Telephoto zoom
25-75/2.8 (pro wedding / PJ zoom)
40-150/4-5.6 (compact travel telephoto)
50-150/2.8 (pro telephoto)
50-200/3.5-4.5 (a more compact version of the 50-200/2.8-3.5 for m4/3)
I only want these two:
– 14-25/2.8-3.5 (tiny)
– 40-65/2.0-2.8 (really small)
Both zoom lenses have less than X2 zoom ratio. Personally, I don’t think such a ratio is an essential minimum for a zoom lens. I’d rather trade the range/ratio and get (1) better portability, (2) less optical compromises, (3) better maximum apertures for the price, and (4) higher flexibility than a prime lens.
28-50 (equiv) is perfect for street photography, and 80-130 (equiv) is perfect for portraits.
As for weight, the current ZD 50/2.0 Macro weighs 300 gram so a 40-65/2.0-2.8 non-Macro should weigh about the same or even less. The current ZD 25/2.8 weighs 95 gram so a 14-25/2.8-3.5 shouldn’t weigh much more than 150 gram.
Prog.
2.4 – 4 / 12 – 60 (24 – 120) HD
2.0 / 14 – 90 (28 – 180) HD
1.7 – 2.8 / 14 – 40 (28 – 80) HD or 2.0 / 14 – 40 HD … should be not too heavy
HD = AF for video
HD Adapter for 2.0 / 14 – 35 & 35 – 100
For myself, ideal lenses (zooms) would be a 12-42 F2.8 and a 25-100 F2.8. Two relatively compact, high quality zoom lenses, for a ‘High Grade’ set.
Alternatively a single 14-70 or 14-85 F2.8 would be interesting. Depends on how far an HG extended zoom can be pushed these days and maintain quality.
I can also see value in / a market for F4-F5.6 versions of a super zoom, a wide angle zoom and a tele zoom to match the 14-42.
All I need is a wide prime (12mm) and a telephoto portrait prime (40mm). 2.8 is fine for both, I’d rather spend less and have a lighter setup. Wide for landscape (do a lot of hiking and mountain biking) and misc travel photography. 40mm for portraits and maybe some light sports photography (pre-focus!).
Let me be more specific. It seems that Leica’s M8 series Rangefinder is some sort of mechanical linkage between the rangefinder and lens focus apparatus.
I am sure that the linkage could be electronic, with no mechanical linkage at all. That way different lenses can be accommodated without any of those Leica ‘band-aids’.
The viewfinder could be an EVF, or OVF; or both!
That would be one helluva concept!
9-18mm f/4.
20-40mm f/2.8
i wish you had combined the polls into one. personally, i would prefer that they make no more zooms, and without a poll incorporating zooms *and* primes you would never tease that out.
Hi Paul! Olympus already announced that they want to release two zooms first. I bet they will work on primes after their release and may our prime lens poll will have his little influence…
Well you can always take the top 3 requested primes and the top 3 requested zooms from both polls once they are done, throw them into a single poll, and see what happens!
The two zooms I’d possibly want are already released by Panasonic. The 7-14 where being able to zoom helps since it’s so wide, and a telephoto, where again foot power may not get you to where you need to be.
I’d rather see primes for the rest.
If the m4/3 standard could allow a wide to standard zoom to be made lighter than the 4/3s lenses it might be tempting. Say the 11-22, or the 14-35 with a 30-40% weight savings.
A 50-200 lens would have to be at least 2/3s of a stop faster, probably a full stop to make it different enough from Panasonic’s lens. 3.2-4.5 at least. Maybe a 35-100mmish lens would be a better compromise for the smaller cameras.
25-80mm F2.4-2.8 for wedding!
5-15mm F8 (very small)
and
15-300mm F5.6-11 😀 for use like compact cam’s in sunny day’s
For nature shooting in MFT, missing long prime and zoom with OIS and macro.
70-300mm F4
80-400mm F4-5.6
400mm F4 or F5.6
500mm F5.6
Macro 100mm or 150mm F2.8
There is little doubt that majority of the market would prefer an convenient all-around lens rather then prime lens (as much as i’d like them, there is no doubt that we want smaller and better, and hauling around with 3 lens defeats the idea)
Hence i strongly recommend the following lens:
Walkaround/everyday/one lens solution:
12-100/4-5.6 or
12-85/4-5.6 (if it will be smaller)
as would be “best seller” lens, in fact this range would be unique to Olympus if they could pull this off
Lens for future MFT
50-150 f/2.8-f/4 macro
Since the keyword in “micro 4/3” is “micro”, I would appreciate a small and compact lens that combined with E-P1 will make it the best all around camera to carry around. The current 14-140 is very good but it is also quite expensive and lot very lighweight. A lighter version of that would be my perfect choice.
this seems to become a very interesting list of zooms, please admin, you should group together some of the very similar wishs at the end of the poll, don’t mind if some mm of focal range differences get lost. i find it to be much more important, to get a good list with unique “models” for different fotographic behavior, than to make the list even longer and more specific, cause it get’s harder to decide over the 3 favorites when there are 40-50 great lenses…
the zoom groups might look like this:
super wide zooms (8 -10 … 20-24)
wide-to-tele zooms (12-14…42…60)
normal-to-tele zooms (20-25….60-100)
tele zooms (42-70….120-200)
travel zooms (14-18….100-180)
not more than 2-3 representative lenses in every group, if needed, further sorted in standard and pro lens (compact and slow against bigger and faster)
oh yeah, and there’s also the choice of an internal stabilization, but olympus will not be interested in OIS suggestions, they solved the issue long ago…
thomas
Of course I will group the results! Thanks for your suggestions. May tomorrow I will find the time to start the poll! Bye
I liked these suggestions most:
8-20 F3.2
9-18 F4-5.6
12-30 F2.0-F2.8 (LX3)
12-120 F4.0-F5.6
12-160 F4.0-F5.6
25-100 F2.0-2.8
40-150 F3.5-F5.0
50-200 F3.5-F4.5
For me is better two luminous zoom as
12-50mm F 1.or 1.8
and 50-150 mm F 1.8
With the little sensor is more easy to have a lot of light with a large lens , also for video is better !
I would like to have the next MicroFourThirds zoom lens poll with a built-in stabilization.