[shoplink 23681 ebay]
[/shoplink]The [shoplink 23681 ebay]Olympus Zuiko 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0 FT lens[/shoplink].
As you know rumors are circulating around a possible 40-150mm f/2.8 lens (P.S:: not confirmed by any of my trusted sources). But many of you said that a fast zoom in many ways similar to the [shoplink 23681 ebay]Olympus Zuiko 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0 FT lens[/shoplink] would also be welcome. I haven’t heard anything form my trusted sources yet some forum user at Fredmiranda wrote that:
“A little birdy told me that, in addition to the 40-150 f/2.8, there will also be a ~14-40ish f/2.8 coming next year, as well as a 300 f/4. The birdy said that the 300 will be about as long as the 75-300, but larger in diameter – no idea how it can be that tiny, but that’s what I was told.”
Can’t guarantee on the reliability…but I hope that bird is a real source 🙂
—
P.S.: The 12-60mm FT lens on [shoplink 23681 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink].
—
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
123 Responses
this is the best news(if it’s true)
300 f/4 YES!!!
300mm F/4 could be great…but only if it comes in silver with a “custom” black model to follow a year later at a $400 premium!…(hood $200 :-))
Bob B.
Nice one! 🙂
Don’t get me wrong…I love Oly products…and own MANY (some with way overpriced hoods…but when I bought my 75mm f/1.8 I was able to buy the Rainbow Imaging hood and not give Oly a ridiculuous sum for theirs), but I feel the more I put the indignity out there …perhaps that policy will change???? Anybody listening? LOL!
I have to say, it is fun to see myself quoted in a 43rumors post 🙂
As I said in the original post on FM, it was from a source who would know – that’s all I can say.
On the 300 f/4, I was surprised that it is said to be as long as the 75-300 at 75mm – I know it’s possible, but take a look at what Canon had to do to create their (too expensive and unloved-by-many) 400 f/4 DO lens for an example of what can happen. Hopefully the Oly won’t be that exotic, with a price within reach of mere mortals!
A 14-40 f/2.8 would not be as versatile as the Panasonic 12-35 f/2.8
A 40-150 f/2.8 would be more versatile than the Pana 35-100 f/2.8
A 300mm f/4 would be great, but IMO 150mm @ f/2.8 and 200mm @ f/2.8 would be as important, as well as EC-20 and EC-14 teleconverters.
+1 I prefer the 12-35 mm range too better for landscape/travelling
+1, 12mm on the wide end is nicer and more versatile than 14mm, so the 14-40/2.8 would not add anything to what we already have, unless it will be much cheaper, but then what about the quality…
could also be smaller/lighter, since it won’t need internal IS
I agree. I really hope Olympus can make 12-35mm f2 instead. Sure, it will be more expensive, but it’s better than duplicating what Pana has done.
Olympus already did that for 4/3s, and while the results where spectacular the sales were not.
Every review site praised their amazing optics (all the SHG zooms) and the the fact they where f2 zooms, but bashed them on how big and expensive they were, and how they negated the 4/3 advantage of more compact lenses. Had Olympus made the SHG lenses f2.8, smaller, and more affordable with the same amazing optical qualities, 4/3 may have had a much greater following.
There’s always a vocal minority who want fast expensive glass, but a silent majority that vote with their wallets.
The Panasonic 12-35 f2.8 is over $1000. If this lens is real and say 14-40 or 14-50 f2.8 or even 2.8-3.5, then it can be more affordable and reach more consumers.
200/2.8 would be just amazing. I would definitely buy a 300/4, though.
This rumor makes sense in regards to others. Still a story from a little bird 😉
300F4 sounds great and would be even better with a min focussing distance of a meter or less 😉
Well, we’ll get what they are ready to give us, not really much we can do to influence things!
Personally, I’ll most like only buy a super long telephoto lens for m43 if they manage to integrate PDAF into a m43 body. A CDAF optimised lens, with corresponding motors, likely won’t be optimal for a future PDAF/CDAF hybrid system. Which is where they’ll have to go, eventually.
14 – 40ish, sounds good to me presuming they will price it correctly, it will have to come out cheaper than the Panny X lenses if only for the lack of OIS. The 40 – 150 & 300 lenses will add some quality glass to Olympus’s growing catalogue of quality optics. The 14 – 40, why not 14 – 45 to provide a small but valuable overlap for the zoom user.
Indeed, but why don’t you get yourself a nick. Most anonymous don’t make sense at all, and I tend to skip them.
A 14-40/2.8-? would be perfect to avoid me buying the X-E1 combo, if about the same price and discounted in kit. One of the most sensible lenses.
Amalrick, If your inferred suggestion of “why don’t you get yourself a nick”, is why don’t I buy a Nikon is correct, that is the last thing I would do.
I did once try such a beast, which proved to be the most unreliable tool I have ever used, it had issues with metering from new, which resulted in a return to Nikon where they examined and tested it and returning it saying we can find nothing wrong. On return it was used and still had the same issue’s where meter readings were often incorrect, this was confirmed by a pro’ friend who tried it in his studio where metering was inconsistent, again returned to Nikon with same response. A Nikon, no thank you even as a gift.
haha, well, I think Almaric is actually referring to not posting anonymously here…
But he is wrong, reactions from people who do use a ‘nick’ are as much of a mixed bag. Shall we say OneQuarterSensor? Adriaantje? or.. our princely ruler of trolls himself?
ok.. I can’t type.. almaric should of course be amalric.
Almarick said “Most anonymous don’t make sense at all, and I tend to skip them”. So be warned. If you don’t get a nick, Almarick will skip you. That’ll teach you a lesson! Keep it up and Almarick will come to your house and pee on your front door too.
You sweat it too much white boy! That Amalick writing many many checks his backside can’t cash! He no get no loving long time. He suppose show us his backside. Meh! Amalick just self appointed militiary junta without an army. In Vietnam we say “You barking dog up wrong tree, you end up in my pot for supper”.
Say, is it only me or does amalrick look like those dudes at ZZ Top. Erm… I rephrase, ZZ Top without the Top. Short of a few whiskas too!
Am I hearing you right dude, you people really eat dogs?
Is figere of speak you silly white boy. I no eat dog. But my neibour he from Thailand and he eat cat!
Yes, Amalprick… Asshat of Idiocy, Blowhard of Buffoons, Loudmouth of Lunacy. Ignoramus of Inconsistency…
Let me give this to you straight. Nikon metering is the most advanced in the world. It sees color where others only see black and white. Nikon Matrix metering comprises of thousands of pixels instead of your stupid 35 or less segments. It even knows your subject distance and whether it’s a human subject or not. Nikon compares it’s metered values against a database of thousands of photographs to give you perfect metering everytime. On paper, Nikon matrix metering is the most advanced in the world.
In practice Nikon matrix is the stupidest metering in the world. It underexposes when you don’t expect it to and overexposes when you expect it to underexpose. People wearing black clothes and white clothes such as in weddings fool it all the time. It’s hopeless!
In comparison, the humble ESP metering by Olympus lays no claim to being superior in any way but it just works! So far the Olympus ESP is the most reliable evaluative metering yet. I’m relatively new to Olympus and so far I have not been disappointed in any way.
@Makato Kimuro
I’ve known that for a long time , my second shooters who use Nikon and Canon are forever over or under exposing shoots because of their unreliable metering.
Me, even if the camera gets it slightly wrong I can adjust the exposure before I press the shutter instead of chimping (missing the shot) or trying to rescue it on the computer….
If “number of metering sensors” and whether they see color or not is a yardstick, then the E-M5’s metering beats it handily: it uses a 16-million-element metering sensor with RGB sensitivity to do metering. And AF. And take the picture at the end. 😛
The 14-40 would not be as good as Panasonic’s lens but I bet it would be cheaper (no IS, and only 14mm), probably like $800-900. Personally I wouldn’t get it because of the focal lengths, I would definitely consider a 12-60 f/2.8-4 though.
800 – 900$? To much if you take a look at the price of the 14-54 for FT. Especially because I expect that a lot more of software correction will be needed the for the good FT lenses.
A 2.0-2.8 Around 12-40/60 lens would distinguish more to the Pana 12-35. We have the smaller sensor (compared to FF or APS-C) so we need smaller glas for the same aperture. For FT Oly has this great fast lenses, which are still not that big. We have the small and compact Pana now, so give a big and fast high quality lenses. (Kit lens – Pana lens – Oly high quality lens) And everybody can buy what he can afford and is willing to carry around…
I’d like to see a 40/50-200 2.8-3.5ish lens.
+1 for 12-40 F2.0-2.8
The 12-35 was already on sale for $999. I doubt the 14-40 will have any price advantage when it comes out.
Cheaper? Yeah right. This would just be another way of over charging you Olympus Fanboys. It will in many colors (SILVER) and sans Hood.
I really think Olympus looks at what Panasonic does, then overlaps them, fill in a gap and overprice us. At the quality of the 45mm, I think $399 is too much, it should be around $250. The Panasonic 20mm has a better build.
I started with a GF2 and the 20mm, I brought the 45mm around 4 months ago. It’s dented up and missing the outer ring already. -Speaking of which, where can I buy a replacement ring?
Instead of full fill each other this Olympus do the opposite (if this rumor is true)
I definately would welcome a weathersealed 14-45 2,8
It sholud be rather compact and cost less than 1000 euros!
I don’t think birds are good with photo rumors :). Last time a bird told admin something http://www.43rumors.com/a-bird-told-me-you-should-look-at-those-pictures-olympus-modular-camera/ , nothing came out of it…
A constant aperture ~14-40ish F2.8 would make little sense with Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 being a pretty good lens, albeit a bit expensive… To differentiate, Olympus should make a variable aperture zoom, either a bigger one starting from F2 or a compact collapsible one, starting from F2.8. That’s what’s missing from the system.
Olympus has indicated they are planning on an OM-D ‘pro’.
Such a camera would come with a matching ‘kit lens’, and neither the current 12-50 (due to optical quality) nor the Lumix 12-35 (wrong brand and not upto Olympus standards of weather-sealing) would be an option for that.
Hence, a 14-40/2.8 or something along those lines makes a lot of sense actually.
I agree, but I hope they’ll make it different enough from Panasonic. There’s no sense in duplicating lenses.
It would be nice if it would differentiate itself more, but..
Pretty much all the standard kit lenses overlap, because this 14mm wide-end and approx 40mm long end both correspond closely to 2 very usable and traditionally used fields of view. 12mm on the other hand corresponds to a field of view that has always been very desirable, but also outside the ‘normal’ range.
On the wide end that has a lot to do with 28mm (or 14mm for 4/3″) being pretty easy to handle, whereas 24mm requires a lot more care to not cause visually disturbing perspectives. On the long end… 80mm is a bit short but will work for portraits, 70mm is a bit too short for that really.
So, from a purely practical point of view, this often used range simply makes a lot more sense then the slightly wider and shorter range of the Lumix lens.
That I personally have a desire for 12mm.. yes, but my personal wishes are not what such things are made for 🙂
The 12mm ‘wide end’ on the 12-50 was a nice surprise, and the old 12-60 is quite popular partially because of its ‘wide’ end being at 12mm, but 35 at the long end would really be a bit too short for many consumers especially. I’d actually think that if they can extend it to 50mm on the long end, that should take priority over 12mm at the short end.
Not to mention… making it 14-40 instead of 12-40 leaves more room for a wide-angle zoom of similar quality, say a 9-18mm, without having the ranges mostly overlap.
14-40? … I wish they would stretch it down to 12mm.
Been working with 14-45, 14-54, 14/2.5 for some time, and there are a lot of lenses starting at 14mm…, but I REALLY enjoy the Kit-lens offering me 12mm in the wide-end. It really adds value to the kit-lens.
300/4 would probably be sweet for some, but a 40-150/2.8 + a new teleconverter for mFT would do the trick, – and be more versatile. However, I bet a 300mm prime would be some REALLY sweet piece of Zuiko-glass. 🙂
+10
Although, I’d rather see a M4/3 version of the excellent Olympus 12-60mm. The extra reach over 35mm or 40mm would be welcome. I’d ditch my 14-140mm for a 12-60mm in a heartbeat!
I would be very interested in a zoom that starts at 12mm (and is a step up in quality to the existing lenses). 14mm? Sorry, I’ll pass.
While I’m at it, I would prefer a compact 12-something f/4 over a bigger f/2.8.
They will not stretch it down to 12 mm just to protect sales for the 12mm f2.0
Ok, white boy! Olympus don’t stretch it down 12mm then you stretch your consumer rights. You no buy their 14-something. Very simple.
I tell you what, you sound like nice anonymus white boy, I give you some good asian sensibililies.
You go market, you see good Salmon and you see not so good salmon, what do you buy? I tell you what you buy:
1. Panasonic 12-35 or Olympus 14-40?
The fool buy Olympus 14-40. You buy the 12-35.
2. Panasonic 35-100 or Olympus 40-150?
You buy Olympus 40-150, let the Alamric buy Panasonic 35-100.
You take good advise and we have world peace! We loving it long time!!
oh yellow boy.. bringing pepper to discussion.. no good
better be sweeter.. ^ _ ^
Yeah, with a zoom starting at 12, I can do without a 9-18, in a pinch, but with it starting at 14, I always have this nagging feeling that I need something a bit wider. However, as smart as Olympus is, I bet they make one starting at 14, with a 89 dollar chrome hood to match.
14-40/2.8? Bring it on oly! Weathersealing, same or better quality as pana 12-35 and around CHF 1200.- I’d preorder straight away =) But I guess it’s wishfull thinking again 🙁
14-42 f/2.8, well maybe. I still love the FT 14-56mm f/2.5-3.5. I use it on the EM-5 and while it focuses sl-o-o-wly, it’s weather-resistant, sharp, and wider than the kit zoom.
Tell Olympus the ideal would be to produce an mFT 14-48mm f/2.8-3.0, weather-resistant zoom; I’d vastly prefer it over 12-60mm. Not ony would a 14-48mm be smaller, lighter, cheaper, but also possess the great merit of less light fall-off at the long end and better IQ too.
Now that would be a lens that SELLS, having appeal to a lot of mFT owners, and fit like a glove with mFT’s reasons for being.
JRA
Exactly so. It seems that because of distortion and other short register problems, designesr cannot achieve the same focal lengths they did with 4/3 proper.
So if you want a faster lens, you’ll have a shorter focal range. Fuji BTW did the same and their 18-55/2.8-4 is a well received lens with excellent performance.
As some remarked it would do an excellent kit lens for a higher tier camera.
4/3 proper? So that makes m4/3 what? Man are you for real? Or a figment of Kockwell’s imagination?
Now Amalrick and I may not have gotten off on the right foot but I think he makes some pretty good sense sometimes. And I can assure you we’re not the same person.
Barrel distortion is signature of retrofocus design.
And shorter flange back distance allows shorter focal lengths without it or with less strong retrofocus design. Retrofocus design even has some aberrations changing basing to focus distance so mirrorless mount would allow easier optical design.
These m4/3 lenses have lots of distortion simply because they’re optically underdesigned and undersized.
I am not sure this is relevant anymore, Esa. All one does is looks at the resolution figures, and see if they are better or worse than the past.
In fact some m4/3 lenses are already beginning to outmatch 4/3 lenses, according to Lenstip. So it’s doable.
Am I to assume you are really refering to the Zuiko ED 14-54mm lens???
I’m interested in that long focal length lenses but I doubt it to produce decent pictures with F4 300 mm . M4/3 sensors is not APS CMOS unless a 4rd generation is coming . That is what I’m thinking . The Pana’s 150mm F2.8 looks better even in a low night condition .
@Yun
” I’m interested in that long focal length lenses but I doubt it to produce decent pictures with F4 300 mm. M4/3 sensors is not APS CMOS unless a 4rd generation is coming ”
Huh? Tell me what do APS-C sensors have over the E-M5 or GH3?
You are generally speaking so I do not follow your thought pattern.
The E-M5 and GH3 are up there with the best APS-C sensors!
300/4 bought in a heartbeat.
PLEASE not another lens starting from 14mm…a little wider would be more versatile
I don’t really understand why it’s taking so long. Olympus have been selling the higher end PEN’s as a premium product for a few years now, but all with the same crappy kit lens. Seems like really missing a trick.
I don’t understand why Tamron or Sigma haven’t made a downsized version of of their 17-50mm 2.8’s
A 14-40 wouldn’t be interesting to me. For a standard zoom, I would need a larger zoom range.
I don’t believe anything about new lenses from Olympus before they are in shops available.
A 300mm f/4, if it was good, would be exactly what was needed to make MFT an option for the more-than-casual telephoto shooter, for whom no suitable mirrorless system exists so far.
Actually it would be something which continues to be lacking in the FT portfolio until today, although it was widely requested for many years, just like a 400mm f/5.6.
Nevertheless, and even though it would be slightly faster (as in aperture), it still wouldn’t be enough to equal the versatility of a Four Thirds DSLR with 50-200/2.8-3.5, EC-14 and EC-20. So, even more than hoping for a 300/4 MFT lens, I’m still hoping for an up-to-date and affordable new Olympus DSLR.
300 f/4 would be better with OIS. The sorts of people who are pro enough for a nice telephoto like that would be more in the GH3 crowd than the little tiny cameras Olympus is making. Not to mention the better balance on a larger camera…
Maybe Olympus will finally make a larger body to compete with Panasonic on the small dslr style cameras? Then it would make sense.
Why would Oly want to make a LARGER camera? Small is fantastic – small camera + compact tele = perfect for action. Shove it in a small camera bag and you’re good to go, without a broken back or tired arm.
For increasing market share.
Japan is already saturated with girl cameras (no mirrorless market share increase vs DSLRs since last year) so only way for Olympus to increase system camera market share is to attack Canon and Nikon whose DSLRs dominate system cameras.
With more diverse mirrorless 4/3 body line up from compact to full controls and ergonomical grip higher end body there’s chance of some DSLR users looking for addiotional more compact body completely changing to single overall smaller system if it has both pocket body and then high end body.
But if all Olympus has is small point&shoot system while for example Canon keeps extending EOS-M as part of their complete system Olympus has to struggle hard just to keep current market share when those masses of only body+lens kit users (majority of market) look for their next mirrorless camera.
Jan-Sep deliveries are globally 12210k for reflex vs 2500k for non-reflex.
That makes mirrorless share lowly ~17%.
Olympus, Panasonic and Sony are apparently fighting quite evenly and some of that piece of pie goes also to EOS-M, Fuji, Nikon 1 and Pentax Q.
So global total market share probably isn’t really higher than it was for 4/3 DSLRs before Olympus started killing them as I remember small ~5% share quoted for them few times.
Any excuses why opinion of your butt is more important than cold numbers telling Olympus is still only small camera maker struggling to keep its camera division alive?
Unlike system camera markets controlling Canon and Nikon selling four DSLRs per every single mirrorless of all makers…
For increasing market share.
Japan is already saturated with girl cameras (no mirrorless market share increase vs DSLRs since last year) so only way for Olympus to increase system camera market share is to attack Canon and Nikon whose DSLRs dominate system cameras.
With more diverse mirrorless 4/3 body line up from compact to full controls and ergonomical grip higher end body there’s chance of some DSLR users looking for addiotional more compact body completely changing to single overall smaller system if it has both pocket body and then high end body.
But if all Olympus has is small point&shoot system while for example Canon keeps extending EOS-M as part of their complete system Olympus has to struggle hard just to keep current market share when those masses of only body+lens kit users (majority of market) look for their next mirrorless camera.
Jan-Sep deliveries are globally 12210k for reflex vs 2500k for non-reflex.
That makes mirrorless share lowly ~17%.
Olympus, Panasonic and Sony are apparently fighting quite evenly and some of that piece of pie goes also to EOS-M, Fuji, Nikon 1 and Pentax Q.
So global total market share probably isn’t really higher than it was for 4/3 DSLRs before Olympus started killing them as I remember small ~5% share quoted for them few times.
Any excuses why opinion of your butt is more important than cold numbers telling Olympus is still only small camera maker struggling to keep its camera division alive?
Unlike system camera markets controlling Canon and Nikon selling four DSLRs per every single mirrorless of all makers…
The answer will always be the same. If you want a birder outfit get a C or a N. Or even a superzoom small sensor.
Oly hit that niche by accident but it didn’t guarantee survival. That’s not where market is at.
But for most m4/3 is. Aren’t you ashamed of the constant whining?
300/f4 would be sweet dream for bird or wildlife shooters. Just Wowwww
or 400mm/4,5 like my manual focus Canon FD400/4,5 S.S.C. 😀
Hello OLYMPUS:
I need a S M A L L zoom lens like the Sony 16-50mm.
Why?
-> because it makes the m43 cam to a pocket cam.
I like to transport it in my jacket ! No additional bag for lenses & flashes.
Only when I am in holiday, than I will add some other lenes & flashes etc.
Thanks already:
The power zoom from panasonic is a possibility…
I would rather you bought the panasonic and Olympus work on something decent.
These pancake zooms are very limited. Both in maximum aperture and image quality. The new Sony 16-50mm looks very mediocre.
the panasonic has dropped to a reasonable price point without buying as part of a kit now.
PLEEEEEEASEEEE no half baked, boring and ancient 14mm (28mm) FOV on the wide end. Make it 12mm PLEEEASEEEE!
Why you sweat it white boy? You excersise you consumer right and boykott this lens. Say no to evil military junta. Be a man! Do the right thing!!
This limited range is a good example of the problems faced when designing compact lenses for this system and why I am still reluctant to move to m43. You will always have to sacrifice speed or range unless size is to approach the 43 lenses. The 12-60 will be v difficult to replace.
“The 12-60 will be v difficult to replace.”
Which is why I don’t see myself buying into m4/3 at all. Terada said E-620 users should move to m4/3. Well, I have been waiting for years and m 4/3 still doesn’t offfer comparable features and quality.
I understand and am willing to accept a shorter focal range zoom for m4/3. However a 12 mm to ca 40 mm is indeed superfluous. I’d be interested in a 10-40 or 11-50 mm. Anything longer than 12 mm at the wide end or shorter than 40 mm at the long end is not interesting to me.
I too am a E-620 user and I am still waiting.
How do I replace the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5?
How do I replace the 11-22mm f/2.8-3.5?
Or the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro?
Even the 70-300 replacement is crappy (shorter range, no macro, twice the price!).
My wait will stop when either my 12-60 bites the dust (I had to replace my 40-150 last month, because the optics went out of alignment due to wear and tear), or when both my E-620 bodies die. The current offerings on Oly marketing hijinks will not make me buy into m4/3.
This is one of the best news from Olympus so far, according to me.
A 300mm f/4.0 sound quite good. Will be even great, if they can come up a similar 400mm lens as well..
Ram
exactly … but it’s still just a rumor. I hope the 300/4 will be:
a) waterresistant super IQ, build … <$ 1500
b) "only" super IQ <$ 1000
I want 12-60, not 14-40. That is all.
You want it relatively light and compact too? And cheap? Ok, you may have it at f4-6.3
Who mentioned weight and size? Compactness has nothing to do with size per se. Not all of us regard small size as the ne plus ultra plus.
Skip that second “plus.”
Nice to see the elusive FT2 rumor making a return to the site. Although I appreciate all Admin’s efforts to verify rumors and only give us reliable speculation, sometimes it is good just to let us see what is doing the rounds.
Oh and for me, the 300 F4 is definitely the most interesting of the bunch.
it makes sense that 14-40mm/f2.8 will be the kit lens for the coming semi-pro m43 camera
+1
It’s true that it doesn’t make sense to make a very similar lens… But if Pany has a nice semi-pro kit lens (12-35), why shouldn’t oly? They need to put something better then their current offering on the new cam.
we got rumors on 14-40mm/f2.8 and 40-150mm/f2.8,
the next will be 8-14mm/f2.8
Still waiting on a weather sealed 9-18mm f/4. Preferably collapsible. Do that, and I’m all your Olympus.
I would be skeptical about this whole post. It is a repost of a FORUM POSTER from another site quoting an unnamed source. I’d also like to think trusted sources would know what they’re talking about- “The birdy said that the 300 will be about as long as the 75-300, but larger in diameter – no idea how it can be that tiny, but that’s what I was told.” Why would he be amazed that a 300mm prime could be the same length as a 300mm zoom?
To achieve 300mm, the zoom almost doubles in length. I’m assuming from the rumor that the poster was surprised that the 300mm prime could be the same length as the un-zoomed 75-300mm.
If true, that is quite an accomplishment. And I don’t know enough about optics to say if that is even possible.
Long focal length lens can be made little or lot shorter than its focal length.
That’s the function of telephoto design.
There’s probably just point where additional physical length shortening starts causing very deep rise in cost: Front group needs to be more strongly positive and more perfect (aberrations corrected more accurately) while rear group becomes more strongly negative to magnify image (+imperfections in it) projected by front group more… also itself needing to not add aberrations.
But size of front element needs to be the size required by f-ratio so widest lens diameter can’t be decreased.
The 300mm F4 for Pany bodies will not have Image Stabilization which would make hand held shooting limited. If this lens will be a reality, only the Oly EM5 and future Oly bodies would be ideal for it I think.
I prefer a fast telefoto zoom that reaches 300mm.
A revised 100-300mm from Pany with F2.8-4 (Weather sealed)?
Something which would easily be addressed by Panasonic adding IBIS to its cameras… 🙂
For me a pro version of the Panasonic 100-300mm sounds very good.
The 100-300mm is very good between 100-200mm, but not very good at 200mm-300mm.
I’ll pay €1500 for this:
– Panasonic 100-300mm F4 (or 200-400mm f4-5.6)
– at 300mm f4 as sharp as the current Panasonic 100-300mm at 100mm f5.6
– faster AF
The 300mm f4 will be a godsend for many, but the 14-40, not so much… 43rds users are used to the 12-60 and the 14-54… But I guess new m43rds users will appreciate it.
Like a couple of other posters here, just gimme an E-7 🙂
When the 40-150/f2.8 became a rumor is begged for a wider companion lens. I was expecting a 12-40/f2.8. Getting to 12mm is important for landscape photography. If the 14-40/2.8 is going to be that lens it now beggs for a new ultra wide lens. Maybe a 8-14/f4.0 Anyhow, all just rumors.
I don’t get this. The 14-54 and 12-60 with f3.5 or 4 at the long end were hugely popular for Olympus on regular 4/3. The FF equivalent 24-105 f4 is said to be Canon’s second most popular L lens. We are 4 years into m4/3 and we still don’t have an up-to-date option in this very popular range.
You are supposed to buy every pinch hitter lens that comes out while you wait endlessly for the lens you need to be released on Never-Never-Day. Well, maybe, maybe not.
its just an FT2 rumor, pretty sure Olympus has plans for more lenses but they can be anything at this point
Seriously. a 14-40 F2.8.. Pointless. Strange Focal lengths for a small small and not even a quickish lens.
I’m confused as to why Olympus and Panasonic have gotten away from making PANCAKE primes. Pana nailed the 20.. I don’t get why no one has put effort into 2 or 3 killer must have pancakes. Especially Olympus who make the Mini – there isn’t a single interesting pancake to pair up with the mini other then their competitors 20mm!
For the 300.. I think it should a F of between 2.8 to 3.5. 4 is a bit slow IMO.
We have plenty of decent lens on the long zooms, it`s time for a fast prime tele over 200.. Anyone who`d be interested in a 300mm prime would be willing to pay for the extra speed .. it`s a niche product buyer and as such, someone who would be willing to pay for a fast long prime.
I`m starting to question some of the decisions as of late from both Olympus and Panasonic regarding their lens roadmaps.
A 300/2.8 requires a front element of more then 107mm. That alone makes such a lens instanely expensive, big and heavy. How big do you think the market will be for a prime costing in the order of $4000-8000?
On the other hand, a 300/4 can be made for a somewhat reasonable price and still be extremely good.
I suggest you take a look at the Zuiko digital 300/2.8 for price, size and weight, and keep in mind that unlike the 14-35 and 35-100, this lens isn’t needlessly big for its focal length and aperture.
A m4/3 lens that is f/2.8 @ 300mm would not be much different from the current 4/3 300mm f/2.8, you can see how big that is and what’s the price.
300 f4! Great news, I hope they make the 1.4x converter also!
+1
You’d almost think the f4 max aperture was partially chosen to support a 1.4x tc without immediately running into diffraction issues.
300mm f4… WOW! My dream lens!
But please from Panasonic with IOS.
I like the Panasonic G5 body more then Olympus PEN or OMD design.
That’s my dream lens too — I’d buy an E-M5 tomorrow if I knew this lens (with Zuiko quality) and a 1.4x TC were available.
300 f4 with good close up distance (<=1m) would be my dream.
I don’t understand people whining about the lack of IOS on a long Olympus prime. Have you ever been able to shoot handheld at 600mm equivalent? My 75-300 certainly doesn’t work great like that, even with IBIS. These are lenses that sort of demand a tripod, monopod, or something to lean on regardless of image stabilization IMO.
My Zuiko 75-300 works ok on the E-M5 handheld — even at 300mm. The main problem is that it struggles terribly with AF at 300/6.3 — even on a sunny day and aiming at something in the shadow. A 300/4 would solve this problem — probably even when used with a 1.4xTC. I’m unsure as to how it would work with a 2xTC, though.
Handheld at 800mm equivalent (Olympus 50-200 f/2.8-3.5 with 2x teleconverter):
http://bohr.physics.arizona.edu/~wfreeman/gila1.jpg
“(FT2) 14-40mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/4.0”
Very unlikely.
12- 50 meaning 24 to 100 eq. 2.8 all the way please ! no ? 2.8 till 4.0 then ?
Give me the 300 mm now 🙂
That’s what she said. 🙂
how it is in OMD with the stabilization ….does you see stabilized picture in live view ??
300 mm -> 600mm after crop …that is very good for window to window snapshots …so looks that paparazis will go to Oly too 🙂
pricey
I would prefer 14-70 even if it’s f2.8-f4. Would be nice to have a solid performer 5x standard zoom. 35-40 at the long end is a bit short for most purposes. 70 is great for medium telephoto and portraits.
I’d prefer a 7-700/2.8…. ok… I’d accept f4 at the long end…
14 is not wide enough!
70? I need extreme telefoto range!!!!
Hey.. reasonable doesn’t count now does it?
A MZD 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 about the same size & price as Fuji XF 18-55mm f2.8-4 would be ideal.
And hopefully it can still have f2.8 at 25mm…
54/3.5 > 55/4
Considering that the fuji is already rather compact, the lens you ask for will be physically bigger due to the laws of physics.