Short update on the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 pricing rumor. I got the price in Canadian dollars too: $1899 CAD. Like I told you before I am not 100% sure but the US dollar price should be $1,799 like the Four Thirds (slower) version of the 7-14mm lens (here on Amazon).
Many Thanks to the source for sending me this!!!
—
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
194 Responses
No matter how excellent the lens might be, the price is too high.
there are much lenses out there which cost as much or more then this one. And if you have a good salary, you prob wont look at prices if you really want something. I see people collecting lenses like stamps and suddenly they dont want to waste much money on a single lens. Collecting lenses can be a waste too imo.
I think the price is relative to the person willing to make such a purchase. I mean I was just reading an article which mentioned two of the most profitable camera companies at present, this being Phase One and Leica. I guess the ole adage ‘You gets what you pays for’ is relevant in this case. The fact that one can have a selection of lenses to choose from can only be but a good thing.
9-18mm looking like a nice option!
All I want to know is the price of the 40-150mm f/2.8. Do you have some information about that admin?
He no longer reads the comment section, he doesn’t give a nut about this site only the traffic the trolls generate
At that price, and for my use of it, they can keep it in the store. I already own Pana 7-14mm and if I need more light I use MZuiko12mm. Not so wide but a great little lens anyway.
At this point I can’t even imagine the price of 40-150mm f2.8. (Over 1300 € and Oly can keep it as well!)
I guess Oly is testing waters with their pricing rumors. 1300 € is about the maximum I would spend too. On the other hand you could save money for bodies as they all have the same iq. Buy an Pen e-PM 2 and put the rest in these cracy lenses. Looks ridiculous, handles ridiculous but the output would be the same as with the EM-1.
I have an old Epl2 and its IQ is lower than my Em5 and Em1. That’s why I’m planning to turn it into an infrared camera. Actually I’m happy with what I have: I’m just curious to see Sigma dp Quattro performance and what single lens cameras Oly, Sony and Fuji will soon release. In few words: I’m waiting for a GAS attack, but this lens, at that price, is not appealing at all.
Same here – satisfied with what I already have and nothing that would trigger a Pavlovian reaction 😉 (i thought e-pm2 has the EM-5 sensor?)
My Epl2 has 12.3 Megapickles, the sensor is still made by Panasonic, while Em5 has a 16 MP sensor made by Sony. Em1 has a sensor made by Panasonic again if I’m not wrong. (I see a little difference in the noise grain for example). Just for fun, I just mounted a Nocticron on Epl2 🙂
Yup but they are talking about E-PM2 not E-PL2 …
I know! 🙂 I was saying that I already own an older camera, Epl2, a no more new Em5 and an Em1: I don’t need a fourth camera right now.
Yes.. E-PM2 has E-M5 sensor.
You can also pick up an E-PL6 from Hong Kong on eBay for about $417 with kit lens.. Sell off the kit lens and you have a great little body and sensor for under $350. Put a VF4 on it and you have a lot of camera in a small package.
I got this as my backup body. REALLY nice to have something so compact. Slap the 14mm on there and take it anywhere. Doesn’t have all the bells and whistles of my E-P5… But it is Sweet! Way better and versatile than say a GM1. It’s still a robust camera with a lot of options.
$1000 for a Voigtländer is pushing my price envelope, but $1800 is just too damn much for a single lens, no natter how good it may or may not be.
When I’m doing serious shooting for my business, I generally use a tripod, so unless an interior space is so small that I have to push the camera against a wall to capture the entire space, f4 is perfectly fine.
Plus, with the improved high ISO performance with my GX7 (and current generation M4/3 bodies), I’m satisfied with my Panasonic 7-14mm f4.
I guess that regarding the price of the Pana 35-100 a price in that region should be expected. So, maybe should not think about the Oly anymore. 😉
But I am not liking what direction m43 is taking. And if I premium than I want more something like that Zeiss 16-70 F4… Just because of convenience and quality.
I can only scratch my bald head when seeing (and guessing) these prices..
But weren’t you very interested in the Pana 42.5mm? I guess this lens will play in a similar league, albeit with weather sealing.
Just saying that compared to that lens it is not that ridiculous anymore and I am personally more interested in the Oly than the Pana (because of the focal length).
I own a Nocticron and its price can be justified by the Leica brand, the “exotic” bunch of glass, building, image quality delivered and “Leica special rendering” (this was something said by a friend after he used his Fujinon 52mm f1.2). I don’t see this wide angle zoom so special, but I might be wrong..
I’d wait for in depth reviews, if not personal experience.
I hope you are wrong! 😉 That would justify the price and mean we get another supreme lens for the system. 😀
Still, I think the Noctrion might actually be the less challenging lens to build to a very high standard. And I don’t care about the brand if the product delivers and I guess you wouldn’t either. So let us way how the Oly performs. If it fails, count me in for “hating”. 😉
I assure you that Nocticron is really well made and looking at the specs, and comparing them to the Fuji equivalent lens, you’ll see that it’s differently built. I’m not saying it’s a must have lens though.
This wide and faster lens offers some more light gathering capability (and 2 euros rubber sealing) compared to the Panasonic f4 version. I’m sure it will perform better on Olympus bodies, perhaps correcting some CA, but to me this price can be applied to a very special lens and apart the above mentioned reason I can’t imagine what IQ it could deliver..
Perhaps Olympus is simply taking note of our reaction on forums, or perhaps they simply think people will buy this lens without thinking twice.
If it is just a one-stop faster, weather sealed Pana 7-14 than it would be a rip off (at least to me). But maybe (?) it will improve on that lens the same way the Noctron did on the 45mm?
For me, both lenses are too expenses and not worth (or I am not capable of?) when there is the Oly 45 or the Pana 7-14, both signifcantly cheaper than their respective counterparts.
Leica on that puny sensor? Democracy in Ucraina? Justice in the middle east? LOL
Marco I have the lenses you do and I agree with everything you are saying. This is quite ridiculous.
I have the 7-14mm and SLR Magic 12mm T1.6 for low light (much cheaper and brighter than the Oly 12mm).
These price points make no sense, unless Oly is fixed on doing a repeat of the 4/3 failure. Great, but insanely priced lenses for a system that gets next to ZERO marketing. I don’t think the matchup between Team Nikon/Canon and Team M4/3 is even enough in terms of marketing and sales clout, that it warrants Olympus’ assumption that the playing field is anywhere near level.
Do they seriously assume a different outcome?
Don’t make any conclusions from your country to others. In Germany Olympus marketing does quite well. Maybe the country, were everything needs to be big, is hopeless for mirrorless anyway?
Olympus cannot survive purely off of the German economy. Remember, California alone is the 8th largest economy in the World. So while it is good to hear mFT is doing well in parts of Europe, taken on a macro-level scale, they will likely need that type of success to be mapped across other economies as well.
yes but americans prefer american products i think.
That will be a problem with cameras lol , funnily enough Canon and Nikon do not seem to have any problems selling in the USA
yes thats because kodak was too expensive with its dcs line(though great stuff, i had the dcs760 for some time) which dropped in price alot when Nikon came up with the D1 and later Canon with their 1D series, which were much cheaper(imo the kodak sensors were way ahead in tonal rendering)..we all know the story. I am sure if suddenly a usa company would start builing made in usa slr’s, lots of people would prefer it above asian products, being it a logical choice or not. “made in usa” is a much used slogan for other products after all.
oh please Olympus marketing has been a disaster for years regardless where you live as can be clearly shown in their financial results they have been losing money on cameras and lenses hand over fist for year
I think marketing is not as much needed as in the past…just an announcement, then actual release, after that a few reviews by capable people….we live in internet age..we just lookup the segment we are interested in…yes the sheeps still need directions or brainwash…but that group is getting extict soon. The reason the Olympus is so expensive is another story. Could iit be that its worth the money maybe? I mean its not made by amateurs
The X-T1 is looking better every day.
It is looking better because there is a new lens for a different system announced? 🙂
Totally agree…..me too….Sony will eat you at the end of your day oly…..already strong corporation IS patent for sony sensors…..
Sony will enjoy some of your patents (5 axis IS,60s live bulb, live time, lime composite etc.)
you lost too much time and money with mismanagement, wrong decisions, fraud, corruption…..
1. problem of all camera companies the leaders and managers/management dont use their own products and cameras, no idea of customer wishes…..why? less time? should have time for playing with your own and products of your competitiors…you would learn a lot of deficiencies, lack of features ….
2. the decision makers/ leaders/ management in every company/ camera comapanies as well only focused on short term results/short cycle assessment and money not on long temr success, customer retention/satisfaction, long term positive image….you could save money and it could be a much more profit and benefit with more forcusing on long term success even if you gain less money on the short term but you could earn more on the long temr view through customer satisfication/retention, less advertisement marketing is needed (due to the well known brand and quality high products like porsche, leica etc.)
3. engineers/product developers (lenses, flashes, cameras etc.) have no or less power in the decision making process of releasing products or nobody of these people sittign in the leading (and finally decision-making) management…..
the head of the company and the decision makers are full of: marketing gurus, accounters, bankers, business administration, lawyers….etc.
sadly and wrongly no engineer, product devoloper etc….who could tell them in some cases please wait one month the product will be much better (less bugs etc.)…..
Sustainability/long term thinking/long time cycle assessment can be more worth than you might think…..even for your balance sheets………..
The (economy is the) world will probably never change,……
Sorry for typos….i apologize too fast too lazy to correct 😉
are you an analyst or a photographer.
THX!….an analytical photographer 😉
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………………..
There are other lens alternatives within MFT. No need to buy this.
Buy it, use it and be happy. It’s a good camera.
Well, you you prefer a camera with cumbersome handling, you might get the X-T1. I would not.
So because of a new lens you would not have to buy anyway, another camera is looking better every day? Please explain the logic behind that.
Apart from that there isn’t even a weather sealed wide angle lens for the Fuji system.
No saying that the Fuji system isn’t great, because I think it is. Both have there good and bad points.
It’s looking better because, while it was already clear that Fuji makes an extremely competitive product (arguably better than my OM-D in every respect save AF speed), it’s now also clear that they plan to price it more reasonably. They’ve yet to exceed $1,000 for any lens despite the fact the lenses are faster, cover a bigger sensor, and are optically superior.
Show us the data on the Fuji lenses that show that they are optically superior to an m43’s competing lens. I’ll wait.
Also, you must not shoot RAW with your Fuji and OM-D because, all I see with Fuji at higher ISO’s is a heavy handed smearing of details due to the demosaicing from their X-TRANS sensor. The 16MP m43’s sensors out-resolve the Fuji’s at higher ISOs. Check the RAW samples at dpreview. I actually like the Fuji system, I think they need to revisit their sensor tech though.
I would tend to agree with you concerning the rather problematic x-trans, but m43 prices are indeed high and getting higher. Here is one such comparison, but you can google many more by yourself:
http://admiringlight.com/blog/fuji-56mm-f1-2-vs-panasonic-leica-42-5mm-f1-2-nocticron/
In the end of the day, m43 is as expensive or more expensive than competitors, while providing less and less advantages over the years. Of course, it is still a great system and depending on what you need, it can be unbeatable, but it does look like that “premium mirrorless market” they will be focusing on will be mostly about price hikes.
I will buy it anyway.
And let the troll-fest begin….
Not to believe that this lens for 43 system is more expensive from the Zeiss 135 1.8 ZA masterpiece.
I have the 75 1.8 and the 25 1.4, the price is rational.
1700$ for m43 lens…
The 42 1.2 is very expensive too, but I can understand 1.2, Leica brand, OSS, etc.
But not this lens.
This is a weather-sealed zoom. Something completely different.
Yep,those $2 o-rings really adds to the production costs lol
There is “pro” written on the o-rings. LOL.
The price of 75 1.8 is not rational. Maybe if it was 1.4
You should use it for a while.. I can’t say it’s a lens for everyone because of its 150mm field of view though.
At this price I would buy Sony A6000 body and SEL10-15 F4 but with OSS cheaper, smaller and probably better in low light anyway.
Yep. APS-C needs to be considered if a m43 lens is fairly bulky.
Doubtful the Sony lens will be as good (looks pretty bad at 18mm on photozone), but it is a tempting option nonetheless as you could have another body AND a lens, and the Sony lens is actually pretty small.
When will you stop talking rubbish? Try getting yourself some training, a job, then some photography training….
Too expensive for me, I’m still waiting for a 8 or 9 mm sharp prime with filter thread (something Fuji has…)…and weathersealed would be nice too have !
Considering the tendency to charge us in the EU/UK a $1 = £1 or €1 premium they are joking with this price. The Nikon 14-24mm F2.8 an excellent lens designed for a sensor 4x larger costs £1299. We are increasingly being asked to pay very high prices for some of the better mFT kit .If you exclude size the only real advantage of mFT there are far better ways to spend your money assuming image quality is important.
I am a keen landscape photographer and own both the Panasonic 7-14 and the Nikon 14-24 when mounted on any of my FF bodies the Nikon wildly outperforms the Panasonic , better DR, higher resolution, better shadow noise, better colour depth etc. The Panasonic serves me well for a travel set up when I am hiking in the mountains and want a lighter load while it was not exactly cheap it was bearable. If this lens follows the usual Olympus EU/UK pricing it is a no go. The problem with Olympus and Panasonic ” concentrating on the high end ” is that the image quality to price ratio starts to suffer more and more.
I have no great interest in video and all my current gear delivers video more than good enough for me as a mainly still photographer I can see myself drifting away from mFT. The Sony FF mirrorless may be the way I will go . My E-M1 cost £1260 body only add this lens at what £1500 ? the old FT 7-14 F4 still retails for £1450 { £150 more than the FF 14-24 F2.8 !} gives a total of at least £2760 , you can get a D610 + 14-24 for just a little less.
Since the image quality of the new Olympus lens is not known yet, how can you make any statement about the IQ/price ratio? If the Olympus lens overcomes the problems of the Panasonic 7-14mm, purple fringing and flare and too heavy lens correction at the lower end (skewed pixels), the Olympus can be well worth the money. If you cannot afford it, is your problem, about which nobody else cares.
Switching to Sony A7? To that ill designed system with poor native lens selection? Come on, are you kidding? Except for the 1.8/55mm lens there are no excellent FE lenses right now, even the new size 4/24-70mm isn’t regarded as superb. The FE 4/70-200mm is huge and has this very conspicuous white color. F4 stop zooms means that you have just a meager one stop sensor character difference (I don’t say advantage). So far the IQ/price ratio is one of the worst on the market regarding the native lenses. The you have the notoric problem of the A7 system with wide angle legacy lenses, so I would not expect a FE equivalent better than the Olympus 7-14mm, even if it is f4 only.
You better safe some money to buy the Olympus, when it is out, instead of contemplating a system switch. It does not make sense at all.
The image quality of the lens will be restricted by the sensor. lens tests in isolation are irrelevant as obviously what matters is camera + lens output. Even the best lenses available for mFT can be easily outperformed when compared to even cheap lenses on FF or APS .Here is the £1200 Panasonic 42.5mm F1.2 compared to the £375 Nikon 85mm F1.8G which gives the same DOF control on APS and better DOF control on FF .
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Panasonic-Leica-DG-Nocticron-42-5mm-F12-ASPH-on-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D7100-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D610___1297_909_823_865_823_915
The D7100 + 85mm or the D610 + 85mm are both considerably cheaper than the E-M1 + 42.5mm . Heck at UK prices the D800 + 85mm is cheaper than the E-M1 + 42.5.
As for the A7r it is mirrorless and as such can accommodate just about any FF mount .The 14-24 works very well on the A7r { I have tested it out an my mates A7r } I seldom use AF for my landscape shooting so using adapted lenses is not a problem. The issue with wide-angle lenses was mostly with the RF designs for Leica
Cheap lenses are producing bad results on any sensor. Years ago, I made the mistake to buy additional cheap lenses to reduce weight for bicycle trips. Even on a 6Mpixel-Nikon D70 the result was flaw and it was easy to see the difference compared with the better lenses without zooming into the pixels.
Todays sensors are so much better, that the lens is the limit in most cases. Just using a larger sensor isn’t helping at all.
FF or larger sensors are making sense if you use high quality lenses and a tripod.
If you want to get the absolute best from any camera then you are of course correct use the best lenses you can afford on it with proper technique..However the fact remains that if you exclude size you can often buy cheaper lenses for use on FF cameras as it is sensor+ lens that makes the final image.
Some of the absolute cheapest FF lenses such as the 50mm F1.8g offer results on FF that cannot be matched with any lens on mFT no matter what you pay. every lens benefits from higher mp counts regardless how poor it may be.
Nosense. A bad lens is a bad lens no matter where you put it. And zuiko lenses are of the best lenses out there and of course they will produce better results than cheap kit FF lenses.
Dream on buddy…
You have no idea what you’re babbling about.
That usually happens, though, with someone in their first month of photography.
DxO? Really?
Pretty much says all that needs to be said about how you understand real world results.
lol yep here we go sure DXO a world leader in lens correction software with a huge database of detailed lens and camera tests knows less than you or other mFT fanboys . I have the E-M1 I have the Panasonic 7-14 I also have the D800e and 14-24mm. I am fully aware of the real life differences in output the FF combo is better in every single image quality test you can think of
All that matters is lens + camera = final output and no matter how much you pay for a mFT lens you are restricted by the smaller sensor and all that goes with it. The only advantage of mFT is its size, which for many is a very important deal breaker I am noit suggesting otherwise.
No one said that m(FT) has the best IQ. An d610 with the Nikon 14-24 will undoubtedly have the better IQ. But that’s 2kg’s of camera/lens you’re hauling with you. Been there done that. The better high iso performance of the Nikon will be necessary as it is not stabilized so no advantages there.
I agree with you that the price is high, but if it’s extremely good like the 12-40mm is, then it’s worth it. Not that although a smaller lens used less material, it’s may very well be more complicated(more precise) to manufacture. Glass and metal aren’t expensive materials.
good point regarding the high end.. ultimately all cameras represent a set of compromises and many people are willing to sacrifice a bit of image quality in favor of portability.. especially considering the fact the pictures will be likely viewed on tablets.. but if one has to pay prices that are in FF territory it feels like a rip-off.. not sustainable in my opinion
It depends on your needs. If you want a high quality lens for your hiking then you may decide to go for this rather than the Panasonic.
For me, the lighter weight makes it more valuable than FF and I would pay more for it because it meets my needs better.
Anyway, I’m sure if your reaction is typical the price will fall reasonably quickly to what people regard as acceptable.
Out of curiousity what was the release/list price of your Nilon 14-24 ?
I think the 14-24 was much the same price when launched as it is now I bought it as soon as it became available and I am sure I paid just under £1300 at the time. With the limitations of the mFT sensor + lens combination I am not sure that the extra stop of speed { which is not that important for my landscape shooting} and considering that the Panasonic is a decent performer .With the current limitations of the 16mp sensor there is simply not enough to be gained from even the most expensive lens options
What is the limitation problem with the 16mp sensor you are experiencing? High iso performance? Huge prints? Probably not the limited DOF, since it’s about using this wide angle?
I think it comes down to what you regards as acceptable IQ.
I think the latest m43 sensors have more than acceptable IQ and honestly do not need anymore for what I do.
I personally think that statement applies to 99% of photographers out there as well (not necessarily meaning you)
I think your point that the most expensive lenses don’t gain enough is really down to the law of diminishing returns and can equally apply to FF given that the larger sensor improves the IQ at a given display size of comparable lenses due to the smaller enlargement size.
In fact there is a strong argument for saying that m43 lenses need to be better (twice as good) to match the resolution of FF so if you are an m43 user only you should invest in higher quality lenses.
Personally I always think it is worth paying more for lenses as they will still be just as useful on your new 144mega pixel M43 sensored camera in ten years time
It’s often quite the opposite as smaller sensors with higher pixel density outresolve the lens. But the question one needs to ask is how do I “consume” images. If it’s on a TV or a computer screen, frankly, the downsampling filter might have even more impact on perceived sharpness than changing the lens.
He is right though that the same lens mounted on an m43 camera and a FF camera and the FF camera would have far higher resolution and better quality. I know you cannot mount the exact same lens so maybe I should say a clone which projects a FF size image against an m43 image.
If you were viewing the picture on the same size screen or photograph the FF would look significantly better than the m43 simply because the FF image would have been magnified less so any optical flaws in the lens will have been magnified less.
This means that m43 lens have to be better than larger formats to get the best out of the format.
And to get better lenses and still keep them small you need more exotic glass and better QC (there is less tolerance to flaws) and is probably one of the reasons why m43 lenses are so expensive.
It’s only when you get to very small lens sizes in point and shoots that the small size outweighs the extra cost as they can use different manufacturing techniques to create the lenses.
As a backpacker, i agree that small size and light weight is worth a premium in price. I have a complete m4/3 kit and love it, but have always wished for something a little better on the wide end because that’s what i primarily shoot with. The quandary i am having is that depending on on your lens preferences, some of the more recent m4/3 combinations are no longer lighter than other options which are much less expensive. Case in point…the EM1 and Fuji XT1 are nearly the same size and the Fuji is lighter. The new Fuji 10-24 is only 410 grams. Judging by the photos i’ve seen comparing the size of the Oly 7-14 to the Oly 12-40, i would guess this new lens will weigh in the neighborhood of 500-600 grams. That camera + lens combo is significantly heavier than the Fuji combo and would be $725 more expensive (at todays prices on amazon) if this lens price is correct! I am primarily a landscape photographer who shoots with a tripod. For me, f2.8 has no advantage over f4. I’ve used the Panasonic 7-14 and have had flare issues and the corners are not as sharp in the last 1mm of the frame as the Fuji 10-24 (I have tested both lenses side by side). The weather sealing is certainly a plus, but i tend not to shoot in the pouring rain and light precipitation has never been a problem with any of my non weather sealed lenses. The Oly zoom is slightly wider, but the Fuji also takes filters which is a huge advantage. If i add a short telephoto lens to the kit, say a Panasonic 42.5 or Fuji 56mm the result is the same…more weight and much higher price. I’ve read that the Panasonic might be slightly better than the Fuji, and the new Olympus lens’ IQ is unknown at this point. I expect it to be excellent, but the Fuji lens is also excellent and mounts on a camera with a larger sensor and as stated above, it’s the camera + lens combination that really matters. I could justify carrying a little extra weight if the lens is really good, but i’m not going to pay that much more money for it. I think that the issue Olympus needs to consider is for the format to continue to be successful, it needs to have the right price/size/weight/IQ balance and at $1800 that balance is way off.
I agree. I certainly don’t need wide apertures for hiking either.
The problem Olympus had was that if they had introduced a cheaper 7-14mm lens with an F4 aperture everybody would have complained that they were duplicating Panasonic lenses.
Perhaps this lens isn’t targeted at us and is aimed at the pro/semi-pro market. It’s price suggests that they don’t expect to sell that many but it is intended to help create a complete system which m43 will need if it is to compete with the more mature systems.
After all how many people buy Canikon because of the lens choice but only own two or three consumer level lenses.
What I do own for hiking is the Oly 9mm-18mm lens and there is nothing remotely near the small size of that lens in APSC or FF. And there never will be as nobody would buy an F8-F11 equivalent lens for FF.
It’s not a fantastic lens but it is decent and I doubt anybody would look at your photos and complain about the quality. The content, lighting and composition are far more important and we, as photographers, would really be better concentrating on that rather than pixel peeping.
I would not write it any better.
+1000
The Nikon 14-24 has actually gone up in value. I don’t know what the release price was, but it now sells for $400 more than what the going rate was when i bought mine about 8 years ago.
You can keep it Olympus, my next lens will be a Samyang 10mm F2.8 + focal reducer (7mm F2) for 500€.
After whoever is responsible within Olympus for this “presumed” and not “actual” pricing has had their day before or after the lens’ release, market forces will take hold and the price will settle at a level where buyers can be found. Speaking as one customer who would like to see the Olympus and Panasonic based micro 4/3 market continue to develop I hope reason takes hold sooner rather than later – like before introduction! One hopes it is not the overhang of Olympus 4/3 7-14mm lens inventory that will set pricing at product release. I am not whining about the price; I just don’t think it is warranted given alternative choices in the marketplace like the Panasonic 7-14mm. I am in Olympus’ market for this lens but not at this “presumed” price. I suspect that is the judgment of many here. Good luck, Olympus. Competition is good for the micro 4/3 marketplace.
People who question about its price have no knowledge how superbly Olympus makes optics. T This is super high grade lens and will blow away every ultra-wide on the planet Earth into dust. Even though is is very possible rumor, I believe the price does make sense.
Remember…this will be World’s best ultra-wide lens !!!
And so what ? It can be the best lens ever made but important thing is how many users will purchase it. If there are just 2 sold lenses after many weeks it just does not make any sense …
The number of users buying it is irrelevant. The most important thing is if Oly recoups the development/production costs with the ones they do sell. The profit margin are probably high with a lens like that, just like with the E-M1.
Conversely, the kit lenses and the E-PM2s are sold in larger quantities at cutthroat prices, it hardly makes Olympus any money. Hence why they and other manufacturers are moving to the high-end market.
“The number of users buying it is irrelevant”
My GOSH, man… ARE YOU THAT BLIND? The Most important thing is OLYMPUS MAKIN A PROFIT!! Who wants to just recoup development cost? That’s just Stupid!!
please tell me you were being Sarcastic… PLEASE.
NOBODY wants to be in business just to recoup development cost, because if that’s the case, you will be out of business, and that’s where Olympus is heading with these outrageous prices.
So that would really always be a stupid strategy for any single product or project?
High end means large sensors, it always will. Olympus wants high end margins with low end contents, and this is going to murder it. Panasonic, Fuji and Nikon 1 are in a similar spot. The price wars have begun but I fear it is too little, too late.
According to no one but the gear heads who care about numbers instead of taking great photos.
Do you take great photos? Allow me to doubt it…
If it’s true, then how come in equivalent focal lengths, Panasonic usually blows Olympus away? PL25 is better than O25, PL42.5 is WAAAAY better than O45. Olympus can make great optics for sure (12-40,75), but taken as a whole, Panasonic seems to be the standout lens maker for m43.
The Nikkor 14-24 will own it all…day…long. Best wide angle zoom lens in the history of the universe.
The end.
…and the other problem is that: no matter how good this Olympus 7-14 lens is, it comes with AN INFERIOR SENSOR MADE FOR GIRLS.
At this price I will invest in Fuji XF10-24 instead. Fuji is cheaper and gains lots of positive reviews.
You are aware that the Fuji lens you mention is constant f/4, right ?
Right. But the Fuji also has built-in optical image stabilization.
But the best part is that the Fuji comes with an extra bonus: A LARGER SENSOR FOR TAKING REAL IMAGES, NOT GIRLY PICS! 😉
If the price is true, than this lens is very expensive. It will be an epic fail, and sold at 999$ after a couple of years. 999$ is a good price for what it ofers, but no more, this lens is cheep to make, but Olimpu sis greedy as always. I hope Panasonic will react and launch a 2,8 wide alternative at this price point.
The word “then” used in the logical sense should read: “If the price is true THEN this lens is very expensive”.
The word “than” is used in a comparative sense such as: My camera is bigger THAN yours.
Not taking issue with your analysis, only the grammatical mixup. 😉
Wow we also get free English classes on this site! 🙂
Great Price¡¡¡¡
Off my head, I can probably get both the Olympus 9-18 and Panasonic 7-14 for the equivalent amount of money. Or even better: Panasonic 7-14, Olympus 12/1.8, and Samyang 12/T1.6.
I’d rather get the Kowa Prominar 8.5mm f2.8. But the price is unknown at this point.
I’m also waiting for more news about this one. If 1 inch compared to m43 = factor 1.35, then the price of this Kowa C-Mount 6mm f/1.8-16 1″ HC Series Fixed Lens ($599) equivalent for m43 would be $808.65. Which is probably wishful thinking.
The CCTV lens? Is it rectilinear?
Yes, rectilinear, not cctv. http://www.ephotozine.com/article/kowa-8-5mm–12mm-and-25mm-lenses-24082
This lens price spells DOOM & GLOOM for Olympus… Guess they like stockholding lenses..
Next year around this time… Olympus patents will be put on sale.
Loser.
As someone that works in a camera store here in Sydney, I am telling you guys, prices like these (which will be even more expensive for us in Australia) is the reason Micro-Four-Thirds will either fail, or never gain the market share its proponents wish it too. These prices are simply far too much. The proponents of Micro-Four-Thirds really need to re-think their strategy. Soon.
Were you under the impression that MFT owners are *required* to purchase this lens? It’s a pro-quality lens not intended for the average user. For the rest of us there is the perfectly good 9-18mm from Olympus, the excellent 7-14mm f4 from Panasonic, and the very good, very cheap Samyang 7.5mm fisheye.
Canon and Nikon must REALLY be doomed because they make $10,000+ lenses?
To be fair, Panasonic has some bargains. 4k video for 1700 US. Same focal length at a constant f4 (that renders great) for 950 US. Yes, the Nocticron is expensive, but 1600 US for what is called one of the best lenses in the world when compared to the best of any system, anywhere is not really unreasonable.
Olympus does tend to be overpriced though. A mediocre entry level EM10 costs more than the better featured, enthusiast level GX7, the mediocre 12mm is 900 US. It’s good for m43 to have two manufacturers, but Olympus is going to have trouble staying around at this rate.
What? At least in UK GX7 is 780 pounds and EM10 is 650 pounds.
I also check Hong Kong stores I often buy from and the price difference is also 130 pounds.
Wow, that is a lot of money… But as I dont have the 7-14 Panasonic and only the 9-18, I may well sell the 9-18 and pick this up. Simply put I will recoup the costs on one project, and if it is as good as the 12-40 then it will be a staple lens.
Premium lens sells for premium price. Penny-pinching m43 users oblivious that the lens is not for them and there are already cheaper options for the system. Whine, whine, whine.
The only bizarre thing is the price for the 7-14mm is known before the 40-150mm (supposedly closer to release), but no one (or hardly anyone) notices that.
First people complained about the 12mm being too much. Then it was the 75mm. Then it was 12-35mm being too much. Then it was the 35-100. Then it was the 12-40. Then it was the Nocticron. Yet, people still bought all of those lenses. I’m guessing quite a few people bought all of those too, otherwise you wouldn’t be seeing them on the used market. For all the naysayers, it’s a pro lens for people that need this spec. Olympus treat their lens lineup separately from Panasonic (and vice versa). They have the 9-18 variable aperture wide angle lens for the prosumers. This 7-14 f/2.8 is obviously for professional application for those those photographers than just want to own the best gear. I don’t see anything wrong with the price given that it’s the fastest AF utra wide zoom lens than anything that appeared on 4/3 and m4/3. And like someone mentioned, Canon/Nikon both sell cameras/lenses that are $8000+ yet they are still fine. Who are buying those lenses?? Oh yeah, people who specifically need those types of lenses as there ARE those types of people out there. And guess what, those are the same types of people who maybe have a secondary carry everywhere system. Maybe it’s even m4/3. If they are spending $8k on Canon/Nikon lenses, a $1700 m4/3 is a bargain for them.
Grammar error “This 7-14 f/2.8 is obviously for professional applications or for those photographers who just want to own the best gear.”
It’s not the grammar, it’s the logic: if one wants the best gear, one will steer clear of junk formats.
Yep.
If you going to invest so much on top lenses, better to have top format and not a girls sensor.
Have lugging that 10 kilo camera+lens combo.
You’ll look manly.
A7R is the same size, same weight, the lens are a big larger.
But you get the best quality a camera can deliver, set aside a Medium format.
Really ………then why do you feel so threatened about micro 4/3 if your gear is better? Remember, it’s not about the camera it’s about the person behind it. Even a cellphone camera when used properly would best the any format.
Why threatened? Its not may company.. I have GX7 + Gx1 with 5 lens. I love the GX7. And I have the pricey 75 1.8.
But I will not invest 1700$ in a zoom lens for my lower quality format.
Then don’t buy it….nobody if forcing you. It’s there for people who wants and needs it.
I will not, I am not using wide lenses at all.
but do you think its an appropriate price?
The price is not for everyone. It’s a premium lens for a premium price. It is expensive but it’s probably worth every penny just like the Oly 7-14 mm f4 version that I have which was as expensive as this lens when I bought it.
Does this mean based from your previous comment that you are in fact a girl since u own a GX series camera and lens from Panasonic.
Ok. what ever 🙂
Look at my other comment.
Its a strange fact that someone who thinks the lens is too expensive has to fight every time he mentions it. I didn’t tell you not to buy. are you?
99% of the people here in favor of this lens + price will not buy it.
Another statistics pulled out of nowhere…
Threatened? We are taking the pi_ss. Whoops!
So you’re buying Leica? Hasselblad? No? You’re talking about Canon/Nikon? Then you’re not talking about “top format”, are you?
I am talking top 35, which is the A7R for now. I have 2 systems, sony and panasonic, with few lens each. I don’t see why to put almost 2K$ on the every day family camera system.
What is “top 35”? A7 is not 35mm – that’s film. You can’t have a serious discussion about “top format” and say and A7 is the “top format”. Better look to 645Z or Hassy. Else you are just making arbitrary distinctions to support YOUR format choice. You want to say you use one of those, or a Mamiya, or a digital back, great. Otherwise you can’t claim your choices are top.
I shoot professional, published photos with my E-M1. It’s a fine choice for my purposes. I know several sports photogs who are shooting professionally with far from the latest gear. I (and they) don’t care that a new body specs out better on some review site. Who cares? Does the gear suit your purposes? If so, great. Full stop.
If M43, which is a junk format, is good enough for you, fine. But please don’t come and school us. We have better gear, which allows us to take better pics – at least, those of us who can. Everything else is marketing.
Sorry I forgot: we have better gear, which allows taking better pics, *at a lower or similar price*.
Nice try, troll. Gear doesn’t make good pictures, and it never did.
You are a marketer’s wet dream.
Your anger speaks for itself: as a noob, you don’t even see the need for proper gear. In fact, a compact would be plenty for you. There is nothing wrong being a noob – as long as you drop the teaching, which is hilarious.
Oh another “Pros only use FF” clone nick, why do you guys even bother to reply?
You see my friend, at those prices, M43 does compete directly with superior formats, and it gets beaten through and through. And leave size alone: if size is that important, there are some good fixed-zoom compacts around.
Any prospective M43 purchaser who is not a millionaire is going to wonder “is this worth?” and answer “you must be kidding”. I know I did, multiple times, and I am pretty wealthy.
What if I want size and quality at the same time? You can’t enforce your needs on mine. Btw, why are you talking about your wealth here? You think you are the only one with cash here?
If you want size and quality, tough, you won’t get it from a junk system. Sorry.
Ok junk format, get it. Now get out of here please if you have nothing to add beside trash-talking.
That’s lovely, troll. Hurry up, you’re late for junior high.
Don’t be such a demagogue, you know what I mean.
Or we can go to large format cameras, why stop in 645?
A7R (with R) is the best quality mirror less available, in IQ terms.
Also In the 35 format sensors(FF). I had D800E and I found the A7R a little better in IQ.
I have A7R + 3 top lenses
I have 43 (GX1, GX7, GH2) with 20, 25, 75, 14-140, 100 300.
The 43 is not even close.
I don’t think its wise to invest almost 2K$ on a lens for a second choice format.
Not for me.
You want it? you need it? get it.
I you have your professional needs, get it.
I don’t, and I found it ridiculously pricey, and not only me.
There aren’t large format sensors available, that’s why. If you want to shoot 8×10 film, you most definitely will have far higher resolution than a puny FF sensor, though. Even 120/220 has far higher resolution.
You are an art photographer, no? Why aren’t you interested in 645Z then if you want the best? Great lenses and all the resolution your heart can desire.
I do find it funny that you are comparing lower end Panasonic bodies and not the best lenses to a new body with – as you say – “top lenses”. What conclusion did you expect?
Go mount a 4/3 UHG lens to a E-M1 and tell me that is not sufficient for your needs. Or the Oly 12mm. Or even the inexpensive and super sharp 45mm.
I had many kinds of MF (Film), sold them all.
I also had the Mamiya ZD, its heavy and huge and slow.
There is a not a big different between the A7R 36 meg and the 40 meg Pentax 645D IQ. The 50 meg of the Z maybe, I don’t know yet.
I love small cameras, and I don’t need MF (and can’t afford it anyway)
Thats why I sold my D800E.
EM1 – Sufficient for my need? not at all.
My needs are quality, large prints, with portability.
Thats why I have A7R for my needs, and M43 to photo the family.
GX7 is Lower end?
GX7 same as the EM1 in IQ, very similar, maybe few % less sharper cause the EM1 don’t have a filter.
The Em1 16 megs is not for large prints, not for IQ.
Compare to the sony a7r its not even in the same neighborhood, no matter what Steve Huff says.
I said 645Z, not 645D. It wouldn’t be surprising that the A7R surpasses the 645D, since that’s a 4 year old camera.
I don’t understand how you can make these grand proclamations that the E-M1 and the A7R are “not even in the same neighborhood”. Because of megapixel count? Do you really think that?
I’ve recently seen large scale prints made with a Contax N Digital – a 10year old, 6MP DSLR. In the hands of a skilled photographer they look lovely, even now. I have large printed photo magazines from E-3 photos – they still look wonderful, and that’s a 7 year old camera.
The vast majority of even skilled viewers cannot tell the difference between art prints made from a modern m 4/3 camera like the E-M1 and something like the A7R. If you think otherwise you are deluding yourself. If IQ is gear dependent, it’s on the lens, not the sensor. But really the final determining factor of an image’s quality is the skill of the photographer. As the aphorism goes, it’s a poor carpenter who blames his tools.
Really? A “girl’s” sensor? How old are you? Twelve?
Comparing an $8k Canon or Nikon lens to this lens is a bit absurd. Those lenses are exotic telephotos, an equivalent of which does not even exist in the m4/3 format. And yes they can still make a profit on really expensive lenses that relatively few of their users buy because their user base is so much larger. Nikon’s equivalent to this lens costs $2,000 which is pretty darn close to the proposed price of the Olympus lens, considering it has a lot more glass in it to cover a full frame sensor.
And yes Canon and Nikon are doing fine…both have still been profitable. The same cannot be said for the camera divisions of Olympus and Panasonic…
The Nikon lens hasn’t got more glass to cover a large sensor. Very few lenses do. The Nikon has more glass because it lets in 4 times as much light.
And why does it need 4 times as much light? Right to cover the 4 times larger surface area of the sensor to yield the same exposure with same shutter speeds and ISOs.
Edit:
Actually, more glass can mean less light transmission, if the elements are just thicker. But if more glass means larger diameter elements (to cover the larger sensor with few optical aberrations) than it also means mor light.
No, on a larger sensor you can use the same amount of glass (ie size) and 4-fold the ISO, with no losses to a smaller sensor. You also save good money. If you get 4x the light, you get even better quality.
But that is not the same exposure settings, so my points are still valid. I am not talking about the IQ, just about an aperture, a shutter speed and an ISO value and the resulting exposure.
I don’t want to repeat the DOF and shutter speed advantages of m43, at least for me they are advantages.
But if you talk about IQ what happens to the optcal aberrations, if you use a m43 lens to cover the FF sensor? Thus, you need the more glass to get IQ on FF.
Which FF has 4 stops over say the GH4 in ISO? (Maybe the A7S?)
Please, please, you need to learn the basics before venturing into an expensive hobby. Get a proper book and study it. No shortcuts here.
Could you tell me what is wrong (everything?)? Because as far as I understand the whole thing (from the physical POV), the exposure is determined via 3 settings: the sensitivity of the sensor (ISO), the duration of the exposure (shutter speed) and how much light hits the sensor per unit area (F number tells us about that).
Do you know a good book?
(And I don’t want to go for the too expensive stuff, the G6 and the 14-140 and 45 will be enough for me for a long time. I know I’ve got still a lot to learn. :D)
There are not so many good books and I cannot tell you offhand, try googling for photography school textbook .
There are some great tips and books at strobist.com but that is a different matter.
You don’t need expensive stuff, no worries!
Okay, thanks.
The 14 -24 is a just ok lens nothing special , the Sony 16-35mm is a much better lens with a lot better anti flare coating. If you once tried the Nikon you already knew it is a flare machine.
“The 14 -24 is a just ok lens nothing special, the Sony 16-35mm is a much better lens”
ROFLMAO! Not sure what reality you live in, buddy, but it isn’t this one!
same thing.
Panasonic is profitable, Nikon is in red, so what are you talking about here? Nikon lost 166mllion US after the d600 dust thing , but more importantly they don’t just lose the money but also reputation and stock trust.
cmon they are overprice… very disappointing to see such a price. it destroying the whole system.
I think it’s all relative… I recall being at a Photo Expo this year. Birmingham, UK and I had the opportunity to play around with the GH4 and Nocticron combo. I was asked by one of the attendants as to what the price should be, I gave the person my opinion on the basis of my experience of the camera and the lens. I wasn’t far off in terms of my estimation. I digress… M43happy, the thing is this… We have such a choice that as individuals we have somewhat become spoilt as a body of photographers… Don’t see anyone at Phase One and Leica (who are the most profitable camera companies, source:Luminous-Landscape) If the lens produces the results and pays for itself by the professional bringing in a income, it’s built like a tank then it’s a case of… you get what’s you pay for, I guess.
The people who use m43’s for a living will make the purchase because they know that the kit will pay their bills.
The 35-100mm is too much money, but the 12-40mm is a bargain in comparison.
I was considering the Four-Thirds 7-14mm f/4.0 but will buy this one instead.
Well 9-18 is really not for prosumers. That lens is optically very mediocre. I have owned 3 these lenses. 2 of them were very decentered the last one was almost OK but I sold it since its corner and side sharpness was not good enough for landscape photography ! Anyway 9mm is not 7mm or even 8mm lens. Where is that small good lens ?? (sadly I don’t see even any 9mm good and small lens just as noted above)
Do you speak for everyone? I don’t like the price of every one of those lenses you mention, AND so for that reason I have bought none of them. You make a ridiculous assertion that ‘people’ still bought all of those lenses.
Do you own a m43 camera body?
I didn’t say I spoke for everyone. I just made a general assumption that the lenses mentioned did in fact sell. It’s not ridiculous to say ‘people’ bought those lenses because ‘people’ DID buy all of those lenses upon their release. Who else is buying stuff? Animals? Insects? Internet bots?! Are you implying that not one single person alive bought any of those lenses? How else do you explain these lenses showing up on the used market being sold by *gasp* ‘people’? Thanks for letting everyone know that you do not like the prices of every lens I mentioned. Fortunately for everyone else, the world doesn’t revolve around you.
Yknow, I’m starting to believe this is all planned by Olympus… to force the Camera division being sold at a very low price to Sony.
Olympus could still develop lenses and other camera tech, while Sony will finally have thier own Glass. Olympus won’t have to worry about operating costs, because that’ll be Sony’s problem. But every Lens from then on out will say SONY.
It’s a way for Olympus to keep their Medical division running smoothly, while still creating imaging equipment. It just won’t say “Olympus” anymore.
Blah…blah..blah…blah…blah…zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……….
¨Sony will finally have their own Glass¨ Are you serious ? what kind of ignorant trolling is this ? Just in case you actually don’t know, Sony camera division was built upon what used to be Minolta (google the name in case you’re more ignorant than what I think you are). They already have their own glass (although crappy nowadays, compared to true minolta glass). Besides, nothing of what you say makes any business sense at all.
I’m a photographer by profession and I use both Sony Alpha and Olympus M43 cameras. I want to say that you are completely correct… the greatest weakness of the Alpha line is their lenses. The quality of both the lens’ resolution and focus motors are decades behind Olympus/Panasonic, but what they lack in quality glass they make up for in ease of use, ergonomics and a high quality viewfinder experience far better than what my omd can offer. Both systems have their pros and cons; but I’m happy to say that the M43 mount is alive and well, while Sony has only released 2 Alpha lenses in the past 3 years…
Oly should go full frame and make E mount OMD one, Pana should make fullframe GX seven.
If it’s Nocticron level of spectacular, then fine, it’s worth it. Otherwise, it’s just overpriced mediocrity like the 12mm
It better be spectacular at that price, just like the 45/1.2 PL and 75/1.8 Oly are, but even more so . . .
It is way overpriced, considering the tiny sensor size it must be four times cheaper than great Sony FE 16-35mm f4. I think most with some sort of brain in their head buy the Panny instead.
I’m sure this lens could be even better than 12-40mm and I have a hope that MrALLCAPS will add a comment here. He’s my hero.
It’s amusing how this post already twice has brought out the trolls like never before.
I know. It’s funny.
No it’s not funny it’s sad. Problem is that most of comments are coming from users actualy using MFT camera … it says something don’t you think ?
I do agree. I don’t take this site very seriously. Steve Huff is a much better site and they don’t tolerate harsh comments from trolls. They don’t tolerate nonfactual comments and bogus statistics from uneducated people like this one does.
I’m not sure… the comments coming from m43 users here are mostly reasonable, some are unreasonably upset about this projected price, but not trolls.
The pure BS is coming from people who have no intention of ever buying a m43 camera.
Another thing on this forum is all the insulting comments and squabble that happens. Quite often its not between trolls but people who like Olympus vs People who Panasonic. It’s pathetic, really.
Like Nikon 14-24mm and Oly 4/3 7-14mm, it is difficult to use this kind of lens with CPL or filters. I have B+W KSM CPL and Lee filter sets, so I choose Fuji XF10-24 instead.
or nikon 10-24 one of the most underrated lens (not in terms of IQ) but it is the widest angle zoom lens with common filter thread and which can be used on ff….. on d800(e) in fx mode or 1.2 crop mode 25 mpx from 15mm without vignetting (dx mode for sure)….
better as the genuine 16-35 f 4 fx lens and the 18-35 3.5 (due to the fact that it is still at 15mm wihtout vignetting much wider than the 18, impacts on IG relatively less and acceptable…..
There are simple solutions for using filters on the 14-24 though to be honest CPL on UWA lenses are not very clever due to different effect across the frame.
Mft lenses are way way overpriced! I once was attracted by the small size and the weight of the system at a reasonable price, looking at the GH3, GH4 and Olys Pro lenses it has lost all it’s appeal to me. I’ll keep what I have (GH2 and a couple of primes) but I most certainly will not invest in any Mft gear in the future (rather a A7r for my old lenses).
I own both Sony and Olympus cameras. It’s hilarious… on sonyalpharumors.com everyone is freaking out because virtually no A-mount lenses and cameras are coming. We have the opposite problem here… people freaking out that Olympus is introducing a pro-line of lenses! I’d much rather my camera system be alive with opportunites, then the fear of being discontinued!
So you did a mistake. You should rather go a Fujifilm way … that’s a company that is pushing it now ….
And over at Fujirumors they’re upset that lenses are getting too large. And really, there aren’t THAT many lenses in that system, and every new one is more expensive than the last. Fuji does make some nice lenses, I’ll say that. But there is no equivalent for the super-compact, near-normal Panny 20/1.7, for example.
LOL yes shocking prices for Fuji even if we ignore the equivalence factor { F1.8 on Fuji gives same DOF and light gathering as F1.2 on mFT} lets see.
Pany 25mm F1.4 £420 Fuji 35mm F1.4 £407
Pany 42.5mm F1.2 £1200 Fuji 56mm F1.2 £850
Pany 7-14mm F4 £850 Fuji 10-24mm F4 £810
Oly 60macro F2.8 £360 Fuji 60 MACRO F2.4 £420
Oly E-M1 body only £1239 Fuji X-T1 body only £963
Total mFT kit £4069 Fuji kit £3450
Not bad for a camera with a larger better sensor ,better DOF control and so on.
Now can you also show us the charts that demonstrate ‘every new one is more expensive than the last’? Or ‘lenses are getting too large’?
Am not wealthy, but concede that the price of lenses is governed by costs of production and the market. Would I like a GH4 plus PL 42.5mm and this new 7-14mm (assuming good IQ etc)? Sure. Can I afford it? Nope. Would I like a Porsche? Sure. Can I afford it……
Had they released a nice wide tilt-shift lens like a Canon 17 TS-E then this price would be understandable. But just another ultra wide zoom is not bringing a hell lot new to the table and totally misses the point for the photo-shooting crowd in m43 format.