A month ago Panasonic unveiled at Imaging Resource that they withdraw the plan to release a high end X zoom lens. Well, one of our anonymous sources told us that the planed lens specs were: 100-300mm f/4. So now I am curious to hear from you guys if you would have been interested to buy such a lens or not:
[poll id=”243″]
—
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
81 Responses
Guess that would have been a great lens. Small form factor and probably great performance. I would have bought it if the price would have been ok.
They are doing it backwards. A rare few will want the Panny 150mm f2.8 with the Oly 40-150 f2.8 coming out. Many would love an f4 long zoom.
That is what I wanted to write. But it also seems that we have some 300mm prime users here, I mean those who are interested. But for me the extra reach (2x!) would be also much more interesting!
Yes, the 100-300mm f4 would have been much more popular than the 150mm f2.8. Panasonic doesn’t seem to understand the crop advantage of m43 for wildlife shooting.
That would have been a great lens even at 2000-2500$. You have to consider that the next thing close to that is the Canon 200-400mm f4L IS 1.4x extender that’s almost 12.000$. As a Canon user myself I will never buy a lens that costs as much as a small car (in Europe the price is around 12.000 euros) but if I were a bird shooter I would have bought a GH4 with this rumored Panasonic lens.
http://photobyandrei.wordpress.com/
Not at all, the “next thing” would have been the Canon 100-400/5.6 or the respective lenses from other manufacturers. And the Panasonic lens would have needed to become similarly complex and ought to have been offered in a similar price range.
A 100-300mm on mft is equiv to a 200-600mm on ff and not with your example. Regarding dof f4 on mft is equiv to f8 on ff but in terms of light gathering f4 on mft = f4 on ff at considering the t is also 4 on both lenses.
I wasn’t talking about FF, but APS-C (for supertele applications, people will tend to choose APS-C over FF in most cases for its extended reach), and you’re wrong regarding “light gathering” (cf. http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640).
He means exposure time to get the same exposure. f4 on mft = f4 on APS-C and f4 on FF in terms of shutter speed (all ISOs set the same). Light gathering is another story… it is a nebulous metric at best and it trends this way: larger sensor more light gathering = better ISO performance most of the time.
Right, but it’s not nebulous at all – basically, it just simple geometry.
Maybe Pana is aware the incoming Oly pro zoom lens with constant f2.8 & they give up on it .
Thanks but F4 is not for me .
Nobody is intending to produce a 300mm f/2.8 lens for Micro FT, no zoom and no prime. What Olympus is about to introduce is a 300mm f/4 prime. And I would have clearly favored the Panasonic zoom because of more versatility, if image quality would have been good. (There is a 300mm f/2.8 for FT which weighs 3.2 kg and costs $6500, and a MFT version would have to be roughly the same size, weight and price, too.)
I really am. Well, unless they plan to release a 100-300mm f/2.8 😉
I use the current 100-300 Pana lens, on the GH4 & EM 1. I love the reach of the lens, but I wish the IQ was better. I have never tried the Oly equivalent (75-300) but all of the reviews I have read say that there is really no advantage, IQ wise. I would definitely trade up if Panasonic were to produce a better quality lens with OIS.
It will be very interesting if it will be 100-300 f2.8. Now I own the slower version (100-300mm 4-5.6). I want more light. (And more IQ.)
There won’t be a x-300 f/2.8 zoom in the foreseeable future, it would have to weigh about 3 kilos and cost $6000 or more, just like the 300mm f/2.8 prime and the 90-250mm f/2.8 zoom for FT. At 200mm or above, there is no more mirrorless advantage.
Well, there still IS an advantage even at f2.8 for a longer tele… its just that it wouldn’t matter because it would still be about 2lbs vs. a 3lbs-4lbs FF version. So… still way too big to just be lugging it around without a tripod.
There is only one option for fast teles, E-M1 + FT lenses. I think that there will be a long wait for native MFT f2.8 super teles.
I’ve been asking for this lens for a couple years now. I think Panny is too concerned with size. I bet the lens was larger and weighed more than their target but I have no problem with it being a little larger. It will still be a lot smaller than the FF equivalent. Or maybe they tried to make it all internal. I don’t care about that either, When you need a lens with that reach, you have to expect that it will be slightly cumbersome. Please make this lens Panasonic!!!!!!!
Even if it were the same size and weight as the Tokina or Sigma 100-300/4s, I’d still have considered it.
I would indeed have very much liked that option. With good enough image quality, it might well have become the successor to my 50-200 FT zoom, which I’m mostly using with the 1.4x converter, making it a 70-280/4-4.9. The announced Olympus 300mm f/4 cannot really replace the zoom.
Long zooms at decent size is one of the potential advantages of mft. It is to bad that they have not capitalized on that. Right now Nikon 1 with their new 70-300 mm (810 mm equivalent) kills mft in that department. There is definitely a market for a telezoom with good optical performance. Oly is doing a 300 f4 so I think the best move for Panasonic is to offer a good quality zoom that goes further and have OIS. For example 100-400 f4-f5.6 OIS. Nikon does a full frame 80-400 so it should be possible to do a 100-400 and then I can live with f5.6. Otherwise I can even go with a 200-400 if it increases significantly and/or makes it smaller and cheaper. Don’t give up this market!
150-450mm? That way it slots behind the 45-150
Sounds good to me!
…inqreases iq…
I wouldn’t have bought it, but I would have rented it for vacations.
no way.. I prefer some new prime in range 12 – 45mm 😉
XD
I see what you did there…..
I am happy with the FT 70-300 on E-520/E-600. Although its optical properties are not outstanding, in good light it delivers. And the results are fun. But the low ISO capacity sensor of E-520/E-600 lets it down. Interestingly, when used on the Sony sensor of e.g. the E-PM2, the focusing speed is acceptable (because FT 70-300 is CDAF-enabled). But the combination of a rather heavy and large lens and a very small camera with a miniature grip is a real nuisance.
So, a Pana 100-300, especially if it turns out to have a decent handling on a small Olympus in spite of its size and weight, would be a very attractive option IMO. Furthermore, such a Pana 100-300 would be expected to have an inbuilt stabilization – a clearly better option than the one in the camera.
Very interesting news! Let’s wait and see if price will be reasonable.
It is canceled… 🙁
Canceled? “A month ago Panasonic unveiled at Imaging Resource
that they withdraw the plan to release a high end X zoom lens. Well,
one of our anonymous sources told us that the planed lens specs were:
100-300mm f/4.” And the picture above shows a 150mm lens. I thought 150mm was canceled, while 100-300mm f/4 going forward. But, indeed, the 150mm is not a zoom. My mistake probably. Pity!
150 not cancelled. Never was. It was removed from the *2014* roadmap.
150 not cancelled? I have it, so to say 🙂 I have the four thirds Sigma 150mm f2.8, a good lens, macro. Bought it recently for €200 . And why would I – or anybody else – need a Pana 150mm f2.8 if one has a Sigma 150mm f2.8? But, first, Sigma do not make it any more, second, it does not autofocus well on mFT – just like 12-60 doesn’t, a terrific lens, and other FT lenses, too.
I am OK for the moment because I still have three FT E-series Oly bodies. But their life cycle is diminishing, apart from having sensors that practically work only in good light. And Olympus persist in not making a normal PDAF-enabled body, one that is not overly expensive like the E-M1. Having good lenses and not being able to use them properly; constantly thinking of buying new ones, expensive but with the same parameters and quality, simply for their being mFT and not FT…. Stupid situation brought about by Olympus! Nothing like this has so far occurred with Canon, Nikon, Pentax or Sony! There you can always use discontinued lenses. Not with Olympus (practically).
Doesn’t the E-M10 have PDAF?
Yeah, the pic is there because nobody knew of the 100-300. 😉 And yes the 150mm is only postponed, but the 100-300 is rumored to be the one which was canceled… 🙁
The 100-300mm is my main nature lens. It’s actually quite good for the price, if you keep the aperture at f7.1. Mechanically, it’s pretty average and could certainly be improved.
A better, faster version would be great!
Hello Jeff – which tripod collar are using?
There’s only one that I know of, the Roesch Feinmechanik collar from Germany.
http://www.roesch-feinmechanik.de/29701.html
That’s pretty much the only lens I want.
This had the potential to be the greatest m43 lens ever and, if the IQ was there, it’d be a definite buy for my bag. It’s a shame it has been deleted. Hopefully, it will resurrect one day.
Man, this would’ve been a perfect birding & nature lens… very sad if true!
It would probably be at least heavy/big as the old 50-200/f2.8-3.5. My 100-300mm is already very front heavy for my tiny E-M5, I’m considering getting the grip and a tripod collar for it.
Yes, it would probably have to be at least nearly as large and heavy. Nonetheless it would be the first real MFT alternative for the FT lens, which is only fully usable on the E-M1. If you need a lens like that, it needs to be that large. It’s no reason not to offer such a lens. If mirrorless systems don’t offer such lenses, people simply will continue buying DLSRs until they do.
Dumb move by Panasonic, as the lack of a high quality long zoom is by far the biggest hole in the MFT lens lineup. I would have bought one in a heart beat. Already have the 100-300 but that lens is just mediocre and its AF speed is sad: much too slow to take advantage of the improved C-AF from DFD.
Desperately waiting for a long time for this lens. Very sad it’s canceled.
42.5 1.2….very nice. Hope the price is reasonable and I’m sold.
I’m guessing around $1,600
Wait a minute….is that the already out 42.5 Leica. I’m confused….
That image is from a very long time ago. They announced them at the same time but then later scrapped/delayed the 150.
Thanks, pic looked different than the Leica…threw me off. Guess I better open up my wallet.
You are slow ain’t you?
Would rather see an X edition of the existing 100-300 f/4-5.6 OIS. Sort of like Canon did with the 70-300 when they made an L edition. The Canon cost $1500 and I would also be willing to pay over $1000 for the X.
I would prefer that, too, though I would buy either assuming that IQ and AF were improved. I guess it’ll have to be the Olympus 300mm f/4 prime. Maybe they’ll even put in-lens IS on it to attract more Panasonic shooters.
This is a shame. A higher quality long-zoom is really what a lot of people have been asking for.
Very surprising that the 150/2.8 with niche appeal stayed while a 100-300/4 was dropped.
I never understood the decision for move forward with the 150mm f2.8 while the real need was a faster wildlife lens. A dumb move by Panasonic.
If at least they’d make the 150mm f/2.8 a macro lens…
Even on 35mm, a 300mm f/2.8 is just too short for many things. Very disappointed that Panasonic didn’t drop the 150/2.8 instead.
Panasonic please reconsider! This is exactly the kind of lens the system needs – DSlrs couldn’t come close to these specs. It would be a classic.
Yeah… they cancel the 100-300mm which would have been a much nicer lens to have than the Oly 300mm, yet they keep the 150mm F/2.8 which will have to compete against a 40-150mm which will cover the same focal length and aperture pretty well :/ Oh well, in typical fashion for Panasonic, they make amazing things you don’t expect at all but then they get all conservative and take two steps back.
Hell yeah I’d buy that lens! As long as the price:quality ratio was realistic. I wouldn’t expect this lens to be cheap, but as long as it’s not ridiculously expensive and obviously better than the current 100-300m f4-5.6 I’d buy it. If Panasonic did release this it would give a clearer choice for users between having the 35-100mm f2.8 and the 100-300mm f4, or the Oly 40-150mm f2.8 and 300mm f4 combination. It would also remove one of the obstacles for a lot of potential DSLR switchers. Of course, Panasonic may have something else up their sleeve that would make this decision seem more logical.
I am still using my gh2 a lot and thought about a gh4 for some action sport photography. But I recently tried it with the current 100-300 and was quite disappointed with the af and continuous speeds! This is could have even the lens making me buy a Gh4. Very disappointing…
Very interesting interview, can’t wait for the part II and why they removed ibis video on GX7, maybe surprise?
I’m happy that the 150/2.8 isn’t canceled, Panasonic is focusing on GM lens. They are saying also there are working on news lens for GM serie after 15mm and 35-100m but they can’t say more. I can’t wait for the 35-100mm, they also say it’s small like an 14-42. Amazing. My GM1 is waiting for.
Assuming solid image quality, I would have bought it in a heartbeat.
Please reconsider. The MFT system lacks a high-end long zoom. Now that c-AF is useable a long lens for sports and wildlife would be great. Yes, Olympus sometime in 2015 is suppose to release a 300/f4.0 prime and I will be getting it, unless Panasonic is coming out with the 100-300/f4.0. Then if the quality is good enough I will go with the flexibility of a zoom for sports and wildlife.
This is really too bad. The Olympus 40-150 f2.8 is not a replacement for the Olympus 50-200. The announced Olympus 300 f4 and Panasonic 150 f2.8 are both going to be fairly large. Based on the current roadmap I purchased an Olympus 150f2 for a good price, with the two TCs (EC14 and EC20) this is a more flexible package than the 300 and 150 primes without TCs (equivalent 150f2, 210 f2.8 and 300 f4).
If the IQ was good I would have jumped to the 100-300f4 lens in a heartbeat, it would have covered my needs in one native package. I would have happily paid north of $2500.
f4 and weatherproof, higher quality, zippier AF – would be very happy (if under $1500…)
Wait, what? DELETED? Eff… Pano really needs a high-end tele prime or zoom…
A 100-300 would of been the killer app lens for M43! That lens alone could retire my need for a DSLR for telephoto shooting! What a shame they’re not releasing it.
Anything about the 42,5?
LOL
I don’t get Panasonic. This would have been the perfect match to the GH4. The current 100-300 has the range needed for sports, but the AF is far too slow. Stupid, stupid, stupid, Panasonic.
Such a dumb move. 150/2.8 would likely see significantly less volume than this 100-300/4 X. I suspect the real reason is the lens would not be small and light, and panasonic would struggle to make a lens at a good enough quality level while making a decent profit. it would be a US$1500-2000 lens as a decent 100-300/4.
I have the D810 and Nikon AF-S 80-400 VR which is the perfect birding combo at the moment.
That said the GH4 matched with 100-300/4 X would have been an option almost as nice with 1/3 the weight. The current 100-300 doesn’t quite cut it really.
sad, sad.
Boooooo… 100-300 at F4 would be amazing. m43’s has such a great advantage for longer tele lenses. Embrace that advantage Panasonic!
Just bought my 100-300mm current version a while back.
The isolation and rendering is truely awesome.
I even added the custom lens collar by r-roesch.de .
If you’re not convinced this lens is any good enough as it is, then you have to check the special with Bence Máté over at http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/dslm/gh4_special/ .
Of course! Why would anyone who is into the lightweight m43 cameras buy a relatively lightweight 100-300 f/4 lens, when they can instead pretend they are lugging around the weight of a 5D and buy a much heavier 2.8 instead?
That extra stop makes all the difference.
Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.
They should reconsider… It would be a fairly large lens but still it would be fantastic!
Indeeds, for birds and wildLife this 200-600 would be ideal, maybe added with a TC1,4. A dream! The Olympus 2.8/300 is a bit heavy, so a zoom like that would be great.
l like the present 100 300 lens and have lived with its limitations with out being too frustrated. If there is a delay I would hope it is because of the need to really broaden the range of lenses, I would rather have a 200 to 400 lens or 200 to 500 mm that was fast focus with hand image stabilization. (something a bit easier to do with in lens stabilization, playing to Panasonics strength. The Faster focus processing of the GH4 would add to the desirability of a lens that could respond to the information ) I would pay $2500 to $3000 for such a lens if it had a f of 5.6 or better at the long end.
If the originally upgraded 100 – 300 lens was available, I would of probably upgraded if the image quality justified it.
What a stupid move. Smaller and cheaper teles are one of the few reasons to buy a small sensor system…
“Interested”, but wouldn’t be able to afford it 🙂