The current “official” Olympus roamdap doens’t include a wide prime lens info…yet.
An anonymous (yet not trusted) source sent me the info about a possible new MFT lens:
Olympus.9mm F2.8.
8 elements in 7 groups.
Plastic and metal.
Distance markers.
No snapshot manual focus control.
No focus-by-wire.
Compact for competition.
¥91,000
Announcement forthcoming.
Would be great if true!!!
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
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
120 Responses
“No focus by wire”? Huh?
Include a lens hood and consider it sold!
An real manual focus ring? yeahhhh ! and perfect focal lenght!
Hope it’s smaller like an 12/2 then can fit perfectly with my GM1.
where is the 25mm?
In the stores dude. 🙂 I think this is a “what we want to hear” news. Nothing real yet.
Indeed it is. But its not on the olympus roadmap graphic of this post. Probably admin used an older roadmap graphic.
Wow a 18mm F5.6. Can it be……
LOL, but do you even know what is the purpose of a UWA lens ? For sure shallow DOF is the last thing you care about ! and you usually prefer to have more DOF with such a lens while shooting landscapes, architecture, indoors, etc…What you care about is exposition and for that f2.8 is f2.8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/
No, even a UWA should offer variations on DOF, let’s say a wild flower in the foreground and lots of landscape in the back – that can be even be better if the background is slightly blurred. And for that, a wide open UWA is very welcome.
LOL, but do you even know about photography?
Clicking the flickr link might answer your question.
But I agree, a bit of bokeh on a UWA is nice, just not the weight that would probably be included.
Yeah I agree there are some few cases where you would need a shallow DOF with a 18 mm equivalent lens. I’ve made my own statistic on flickriver: I’ve counted the number of shots with shallow DOF over 64 shots made with a 14 mm f2.8 lens (http://www.flickriver.com/photos/tags/14mm+f2.8/interesting/) There are 12 shots with shallow DOF (including some with tilt and shift) which represent 19% of the shots. So we can say that 80% of time you don’t need shallow DOF with a UWA. So would I carry 2 kg and 5000$ for 20% of the shots: NO. And don’t make me say what I didn’t say: this is a totally different question with a portrait lens and more generally a telephoto where you probably need a shallow DOF 80% of time…
You are a geek, photography is not for you. Or, you are a very bad marketing man desperately trying to sell crap. And a geek, of course.
Where are your pictures?
What do his pictures have to see with the argument here?
Don’t challenge, learn.
Most people here are illiterate, but think they know a lot because they read a lot of forums.This 80% “logic” is a prime example – this is probably a computer geek, wasting money on a toy he does not understand.
It is so wrong it’s funny, and I am loving it that so many other geeks actually don’t get it.
Geeks think they are smart because they don’t get laid. Surprise: they are still losers. LOL
You are so funny man, loosing time on a forum about gear you don’t like just to claim to people there gear is crap. Seriously ? who’s the looser ? I may be illitrate but you are a very norrow minded man who doesn’t understand that people may have different needs than you from gear. I know very well – and I really don’t need your “knowledge” – that full frame is far superior in quality than m43 but I will never carry 2kg just for a camera and a lens while hiking, climbing and backpacking so m34 is the right gear for me, maybe not for you, that’s fine. Maybe photography for you is just going from home to city with just camera stuff or taking car and walking 5 minutes ? but do you even take photos ? When I go hiking, I have a tent, a sleeping bag, food, water, etc.. and I don’t want a full frame camera, simple…and sorry I’m not rich enough to have both systems.
We all know who’s the looser LOL
“You are a geek, photography is not for you”
Lol, this is what we call a sophism. A lot of photographers are geeks and I must confess I’m a geek. I would probably be a very bad marketing man but fortunately I’m not !
You are a troll, photography is not for you. Your life is so empty that you spend time on a rumor site of gear you don’t care about, just to claim to people there gear is shit. This is so miserable… I don’t even know why you are doing that ! Go on websites about gear you like and stop being so boring: that would be better us and for you
It’s interesting (not really) how it is yet again only about shallow DOF. What about light? Also, what 2kg are you talking about? That is precisely why you are buying a smaller sensor here; look at the size of the 14mm you are mentioning.
You have no clue, it’s ok, just don’t try and teach us.
It’s funny that “scientists” like you use the very same argument for long lenses. Basically, short lenses don’t need DOF, long lenses welcome it… M43 really is the con of the century.
I guess it depends – a Canon 14mm f/2.8 (seems to be the only <= 18mm) is over 600g and costs shy of £2000; and the Nikon equivalent is still over £1200 at a similar weight. If Olympus comes up with something that is lighter and cheaper than that, then yes, wow.
There’s also a Samyang 14mm that costs 400$; Voigtlanders 12 and 15mm, which weigh nothing and cost 750 and 600 respectively; in APS-C there are many low-weight UWA zooms, most of them significantly less than 1000$. Heck, the Zeiss Touit, the closest thing in specs is 260 grams, costs 1000$ and is rather good. Not much of a ‘wow’, although a very welcome lens for sure.
Like a 7 mm F 1.4?
No, it’s a 9mm f2.8.
you might need this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwEUFTiJX80
This is FT2, so almost every information of this rumor can be false.
Information of lens construction is very interesting – that figures are not commonly argued in rumor stage. And I really doubt about (distance marker + no snapshot focus ring + no focus-by-wire) formular – every MFT af glasses are Focus-By-Wire and there’s no reason to abandon it for new lenses. Snapshot focus ring is just right for those distance scale fans. Yeah. It’s FT2, so forget about every details.
I really hope it has a filter thread ! No thread, no buy…I would have prefered f2 but maybe it is difficult for such a focal length ? I hope it’s really sharp, if it is, say buy buy to the 9-18 mm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/
Almost of today’s wideangle zooms and primes that equivalent to 18mm of 135 film have filter thread. So you don’t have to worry about that.
9mm/2? did you see the 9mm/2.8 price? already 91000yens. An 9mm/2 could be more expensive. It will be not an premium lens i think because plastique and metal build. Olympus lens premium are full metal.
That’s almost $900, a rather premium price…
Olympus is greedy as always, no problem Samyang will sell more 10mm f/2,8 lenses. At that focal length the AF is not needed if the lens has a good focus scale.
We don’t know anything for sure yet. Will this 9mm really be produced? Is 899 the introduction price? How compact would it be? I know the samyang is far less compact, I’d pay some extra for compactness, but how much exactly…?
And how will it perform?
Agree, my comment was referring to the rumored Olympus 9mm f/2,8 lens at that price point.
This lens may be very useful with GH4 in 4K mode if the price is decent, but if the rumored price is correct than I cold definitely skip this one.
Well, at least there may be competition for the upcoming kowa 8.5mm, which should force both to keep the price down. A bit… hopefully…
Really? Are you familiar with “those focal lengths”? Do you know what a focal length is, at all?
LOL. Take it easy kid, there is no need to show you intelligence here.
The 12-40PRO has a metal shell with plastic internals surrounding the elements.
Wouldn’t think the M.Zuiko PRO and Premium lenses to be full metal, simply to account the the expansion and contraction of materials in varying temperatures.
That said, not seen cutaways of the 12/2, 17/1.8 or 75//1.8.
About time, if this becomes reality.
I wonder how MF will work:
-Distance markers.
-No snapshot manual focus control.
-No focus-by-wire.
?
Sounds iffy, at best.
sounds like the vast majority of lens made in the last 100 years… what is iffy about it? Focus by wire is a relatively new normal.
These are the 9mm f/8 specs… ; )
This would be great if true. I hope it’s not the same source as the ‘E-M1 4K firmware update’ rumor.
FT2? We are less than two months from Photokina now and all we have in the rumors front is that? Where are the trusted sources?
Where is the long-promised “any day now” E-PL7 announcement? 😉
Oh, to see a native MFT tilt-shift or a replacement for the FT fish.
Would be a good focal length for either.
I’d love a tilt shift too but Lightroom does a great job fixing those distortions
Would love to see this as a tilt-shift. This has been missing from the system and would attract a whole new type of shooter. Plus the rest of us who know how to use a wide TS to great effect.
Weather sealed and in black, please.
And make it sensibly priced relative to the excellent Panasonic ultra wide zoom.
The rumored price is 899$. Man must be very desperate for 3mm wider to get this lens at this price.
For landscape work, 9mm vs. 12mm (i.e. 18mm vs. 24mm full-frame) is a WORLD of difference in perspective. I’ll take that 9mm prime any day.
For that price I will definitely chose the Samyang 10mm f/2,8 or just make a panorama. 900$ is way to much for such a lens, especially a 2,8 one.
1mm as percentage of 10mm is 10%. It is not like 50 mm where 1mm only means 2% difference.
Yes but for almost double the price? What is wrong with you guys, are you willing to spent 900$ on such a lens? I’m definitely not!
You should spend your money on books or a beginner’s photo course. It surely beats writing junk in forums.
I havent said anything about buying it yet. I just want to point out the fact that its a huge relative difference. The 10 2.8 is not optimized for M43, if the 9 2.8 is optically outstanding, has good af and good features, the premium is worth it imho.
Most landscape work though you can get away with stitching together some shots. Now your 12mm lens is a 6mm lens.
THIS WOULD BE AWESOME. Would love a 9mm wide-angle prime. Hopefully with much better bokeh areas than the 9-18mm. The 9-18mm is convenient and small, but I didn’t like it all too much for landscape work. The corners and OOF areas look hideous.
If the price is correct (899$ equivalent) then it is very uninteresting. For 400$ maybe…
IF, and that’s a mighty if, they make this lens with exactly these specs… does anyone really think it would actually cost $900 at retail? The 12/2 is $800 and the 12-40 2.8 can be had brand new from Olympus for $900. No, this lens if it will exist will be $400 at most.
At this price I would expect an awful distortion and middle to low IQ..
Do you really need this lens if the new Oly 7-14 f2.8 is coming out?
depends on whether you “need” two grand or not . . .
7-14 f2.8 looks too big and heavy to me. If I am hiking in mountains then every bit of weight savings helps. Carrying a 9mm and a 20mm would make a nice light combo.
I would really like a pro quality 9-18 that is super sharp and light. F4 is fine. I have never used an ultrawide at wide apertures; f2.8 is too little DOF at 9mm. I would probably never use a 9mm any wider than f5.6 for landscapes. I might use wider aperture for indoor architecture but I don’t care much about lens weight for architecture shots.
Does it make sense if the new Oly 7-14mm f2.8 is coming out?
Don’t know what type of lens it’s going to be.
Could (hoping it will) be a specialised prime, rather than just a plain wide angle.
Well it could make sense since the Zoom is going to be huge and heavy like the 12-40 I guess.
Yes it does make sense. The 7-14/2.8 is large, expensive and doesn’t take filters. The 9/2.8 will be small, less expensive and will take filters. It will be a perfect companion lens to the 12-40/2.8 for wide angle landscapes. The 9/2.8 should be able to easily fit in the corner of the camera bag and can be used when the 12mm is just not wide enough. The $900 will be significantly less expensive than the Pro 7-14/2.8. A 9mm/f2.8 will fit perfectly into the current prime lens line of Olympus lenses.
I did not see. Altho likely, where does it states that this rumored prime would take filters?
Keep in mind. ft2…
for me not….i would take 7 mm over 9 mm on m43 anyday every mm counts in wideangle section and gives a huge difference in the perspective….despite higher price, weight etc….i think the 9 2.8 will be an oly fisheye….dont have one so far but panasonic….
To composition. You dont get different perspective with focal length change, only by moving the camera. Focal length gives you different angle of view and that way different composition. 🙂
9mm .95 please…..
Why? This is an UWA lens, aiming for urban, architecture and landscapes when you can’t carry a heavier/ larger UWA zoom lens. You don’t need less DoF, you need more in these shots. At 9mm it will be easy to hold it handheld.
I’m joking. I own the 9-18 although I’m an avid fan of overpriced high end primes. I could care less about speed at the wider end of things.
So, you care then.
Well, I do but not for me. I mean, I’m not much of a UWA guy so I use a zoom lens for most of that work. I don’t think a fixed 9mm would get much use from me. I’m more concerned with distortion and corner sharpness though- the 9-18mm definetly lacks in that department.
Only the very best of pros get perfectly sharp corners, and corners are the first place in a photo sensible people look at.
I would burn all those horrid pictures with unsharp corners.
Meh…
Narrower dof would be needed for close range shots in landscape…. But people should stop thinking aperture as dof controller and focus to it be a time factor. How long sgutter speeds you can get. The f/0.95 would be dream for landscape photographers. It is UWA objective so it has enough depth of field but it would allow to shoot indoors and at night or stars!!
Sure f/64 group members would reject it as no less than f/22 in m4/3 is enough to them….
FINALLY
Does that mean 9mm. In 35mm terms or 18mm which is not so wide. Then the 7-14 is still a better option but not cheap at $1000
I grew up with 35mm film. 18mm has a 100º field of view – which is damn wide. Anything wider is essentially fisheye.
14mm equivalent is about 114 degree of FOV – this is too wide for many situations. That’s why ordinary lens group has 14-20-24-28-35 as wide primes. 9mm prime of M4/3 will similar to 20mm primes of ordinary system. (Horizontal FOV is narrower in M4/3 at same equivalent focal length because it’s ratio is 4:3) Doesn’t matter.
Updates of the 12 f2 and 17 1.8 lens (24 and 35 ff equiv.) would be nice as well as an update of the consumer 9-18 darkwideangle zoom….
In this section m43 is not as good optically and stellar as the fuji x series is…the 23 1.4 (and upcoming 16 1.4) and the 10-24 f4 ois are much much better with filter thread …
the new upcoming 7-14 2.8 pro lens is overpriced especially with the lack of filter usage…..
time to change the imperfections….
totally agree…..these lens updates would make much more sense and were useful than a 9 2.8 lens…if they want this lens then additionally maybe it is a fisheye…..would make more sense imo….my2cents….cheers
There’s already a sharp and cheap fisheye from samyang. Super light, too.
No doubt, that in the UWA / WA category Fuji x is better…
You dont really need filter thread for digital cameras if you know anything from post processing. All what is needed is that you own a polarization filter plate what you can but front of any lens.
Filter threads are fancy tool today what really isnt required (disclosure: i own 31 different kind filters).
This lens will be nice to lens to, as we have before.
Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?
Geeko is funny. But Geeko still no pull.
f2.8? Don’t bother. I’d like to see more Pro lenses rolled out, there are more than enough mid to low range lenses out there.
With a 9mm focal length you can easily handhold at 1/20 of a second. With IBIS, you could probably get a reasonable hit rate with a 1 second exposure. Sure, it won’t freeze motion, but f/2.8 will be quite reasonable for most people’s uses for an ultra-wide (like interior, architecture, and landscape).
Maximum aperture does not have anything to do with a lens being a pro lens or not.
Silly comment.
Hmmm an 8 or 7 mm would be preferred… I have the 9-18, an 8mm f4 would be more for me…
I’ve been rooting for a UWA prime for a long time. This finally looks promising. I will say, though, now that samyang has shown you can design a sharp lens with that same angle of view at f/2, I’m thinking f/2.8 is kinda slow… But WAY better than no UWA prime, which is where it’s at right now.
I have wondered why no one made 7mm f/1.8 with mechanical focus? Just give one ultra wide angle lens with digital information. So later they are easy to find from photo library. That is the reason why i dont like Samyang is they dont add even cheap digital chip to tell lens and focal length (like 7.5mm).
And having a ultra wide angle doesnt mean we all need something between 7-12…. So no need to zoom.
And f/1.8 would allow to make it small as it isnt hard to make for so small focal length. Give price tag 599€ and you sell it like no other.
The extra 1mm (8 vs 7) is important.
Electronic lens information is probably not hard to do, just a matter of cost.
F/1.8 for a 7 mm m43 lens, on the other hand, will not be possible within reasonable limits on cost and size, it’s just too fast. Or resolution will be bad.
Electronic data would be just a chip. There are chips to sold for m4/3 what requires little encarving of mount to get pins fit. Before mounting you program the pins with computer to present your wanted data to camera. Costs are for consumers around $30 IIRC.
The aperture would not be hard as it would not make objective larger. Aperture from 7mm f/2.8 to 7mm f1.8 only takes change from 2.5mm to 3.88mm
Sharpness woukd not suffer as it is easy to make smaller lens (even when some claim it is a myth and bigger are easier to make, they just have not been talking with thise who polish lenses). And most objective manufacturers use same glass for their lenses so getting high guality glass and make high quality lenses to get high quality objective is just about time to polish the lenses after designing.
And resolution would be awesomely sharp, same for contrast.
Just lets look Samyang 7.5mm fisheye f/3.5, it is dirty cheap manual focus lens and sharpnes and contrast is great. Now that is just for ~200€ and it is “must own” objective.
Now raise price, larger aperture, more time for lenses and corrected bending andnaddna chip and it would be there.
And have you seen the size of it? It is so small that you need to compare it to Olympus 17mm f/2.8 pancake or 45mm f/1.8.
It would not be impossible. And olympus has patent for 7mm f/1.0 objective designs…. So think about that beast!
Even that people pay a lot for objectives between 35-50mm angle of view range, they do not pay much to get 7-14 because zoom but to get the couple extra millimeters to wide angle to get more degrees available.
Then some wants the filter threads so they apply for widest one offering those.
Zoom would be just a benefit indoors like now with coming Olympus Pro line.
7-14mm
12-40mm
40-150mm
Three weather proof objectives, covering most used view angles. Then as addition for bird and sport people a 300mm prime f/4.
All very small size, amazingly sharp and very good low light capability.
To that group olympus would anymore need to add something like 600mm or 800mm f/6.3 and it would be complete.
Would love a compact ~20mm FX equivalent f/2.8 prime IF the center is sharp wide open and those corners are sharp by f/5.6 or f/8. Of course it would be great if it was sharp across the frame at f/2.8, but I suspect a lens like that would be large and heavy. High flare and ghost resistance in a WA is also a must for us landscape-type folks.
I like ~2x focal ratios (FOV actually) in my primes so this lens would go well with my 8/3.5FE, 20/1.7, 42.5/1.2, 75/1.8, etc.
Then Samyang 10mm f/2.8 is for you.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/samyang-10mm-f-2-8-ed-as-ncs-cs-lens-review-25473
Great to see more manual focus options. Good to see more manual options.
I can manually focus all my AF lenses as well.
I think if the 9mm cost $900.00, the Panasonic 7-14 would be a better buy. If it was 8mm it would be more attractive, but still expensive.
Don’t know, wider is not always better, the ultra wide distortion near the edges of the frame can make things (but especially people) look quite ugly sometimes.
In fact, I would be tempted to get the inexpensive 9mm lens cap fish eye and then defish.
Good idea. Quality will be good enough for a m43 shooter anyway.
The 9mm lens cap is a novelty lens, not a quality one. It might give some wide angle practice and fun. At 100 dollars or so, it could be a bit dear for that.
Say, were you being sarcastic? One wonders about comments that put (presumably other) formats down. Need more confidence in the one you shoot with? Building yourself up by being negative about others does not make you look good.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
This is priceless! Only in m4/3 land hahahahahahahahaha!!!! LOL!!!
Go away….
Sounds unlikely. A 7, 8, or 9mm f/2 with snapshot focus OR mechanically coupled focus ring would be welcome at around $500-900. And it had better be weather sealed if it clocks in near $900.
This could finally replace my 14mm/f2.8 + pana WA converter combo.
Fingers crossed it’ll be portable and maybe even allow for filters :).
I have the 4/3 9-18/4 lens which is sharp across all the frame but is big. To have a compact 9/2.8 would be an expensive dream, and a technological achievement, with same sharpness
Headless chickens can go on dreaming 🙂
I think 9/2.8 is well within the limits of current technology. Downscale the APSC Zeiss 12/12.8, and you’re almost there. And samyang has shown that a bit faster is also possible.
Small size, fast aperture, and high curvature problems don’t go well together. A choice must be made if one wants crisp edges.
Agreed. Theres a reason we don’t have one yet.
I’m just saying with current technology, the trade-off doesn’t look that bad. Reviews of both aforementioned lenses are quite good, and a m43 9/2.8 is pretty much the same lens. The flange register of m43 is, in relation to the sensor diagonal, somewhat larger than that of most APSC systems, so that makes it a bit harder. I’m hoping samyang will make such a lens, because for my occasional use of such an UWA their manual-focus inexpensive designs are just right.
This was first rumoured back in March, no?
http://www.43rumors.com/ft2-olympus-9mm-f2-8-to-come/
The “current” lens map does not include the 25mm either.
I’ll pass. Will get the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO instead. It goes wider.
Good to see more manual options.
http://radyabkhodro.net/
Something like a 7, 8, or 9 f/1.8 would be the ultimate night photography lens for star pics. 2.8 is really too slow for this system for star pics. I agree that 8 mm would be preferred, but 9 mm would be great, too.