.
I got the following info from two different sources: The new Olympus 40-150mm PRO zoom will certainly be released at Photokina in September. They also confirmed the 7-14mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/4.0 will not hit the stores this year. Olympus will certainly display them at Photokina but that’s it. You will have time til Spring 2015 to save the money for those two PRO lenses 🙂
One more thing: There will be surprises from Olympus at Photokina. But more about that soon on 43rumors…
[poll id=”233″]
—
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
102 Responses
How about new Pen cameras? Maye one with M10 specs without EVF and $100 cheaper?
Any teleconverters in the pipeline?
Oly, if you read this; I still need fast 10,5 and 100 primes.
A 105mm f/1.8 would be a nice addition to their current set of f/1.8 lenses.
+1
It would be great if they made it a macro lens, too.
105mm is a great length for M4/3!
I mean the 60 2.8 macro is a solid solid performer… Don’t forget about that little gen.
For macro shooting i prefer manual focus. I have a Nikon 60mm f2.8D that I’ve had for quite a while. It’s an excellent lens.
guess the surpise is the teleconverter? would be a nice addon to the 40-150
I think Oly has a patent for that and should go well with a zoom like this. Perhaps a 1.4x with one stop penalty and a 2x with two stop penalty. Hopefully, they won’t be ridiculously expensive like this 40-150mm is likely to be.
Hopefully they wouldn’t cost $500 each, either. Affordable teleconverters designed specifically for the 40-150 and the 300 would certainly be welcome.
A 2x teleconverter would be a great, if long overdue, addition to the M4/3 system.
I’d buy one in a heartbeat!
Talking about PanaLeica 15mm f1.7, ThePhoblographer has a first impression hands on. From the images posted I see some bad green fringing on highlights, but it could be the high contrast scene. And no, already owning a Voigty 17.5mm and MZuiko 17mm I don’t need this lens and I won’t buy it.
Thanks for the heads-up on the images of the 15mm on The Phoblographer….I have the Oympus 17mm too…but this 15mm looks like it might best in the sharpness category.
Although the thought of having an expensive lens on my Oly with an aperture ring that does not work is not appealing….It was funny …the Phoblograper was “going off” on how great the click stops on the aperture ring felt..it blows Fuji away..blah..blah…but he had the lens on an EM5 and never mentioned that he can click all he wants…but the ring does not change the aperture!!!! LOL!!!!!
Are you sure Bob? Why is it impossible for a fixed ring to lock the aperture in place(probably by disconnecting aperture blades mechanism from the camera/motor) ? The lens also has an “A” op the aperture ring(simply speaking connecting the aperture blades to the camera again).
The above could work on all MFT camera’s, I see no reason why the Phoblographer would make an statement like this if it wasn’t indeed working. I mean, seeing the pictures of his lens/camera combo he seems to have the lens is his possession. 🙂
Oh…I am being my “assumption on the fact that the only other Panny/Leica lens with an aperture ring, the new Noctichron …It’s aperture ring does not work on any Olympus camera…so it would follow that this would be the same with the Panny/Leica 15mm, no?
I do not know all the ins and outs of it…but my understanding is that Olympus would have to change the firmware in their cameras for the aperture ring to actually be functional…and I am not holding my breath for that…LOL!
OK ….FWIIW…I just read a quote from someone on the DPReview Forum who stated that the lens aperture does NOT work on Olympus cameras..which would be my understanding as well…although you will get some better performance out of the lens on an Olympus from that standpoint that you have 5-axis IBIS…as the lens has none and unless you are using the GX7 you are out of luck for any kine of IS on other Panasonic camera bodies.
The preview on the Photoblographer seems to indicate that this new leica has a different mechanism. Let hope so!
I think that the phoblographer was just amazed at the “feel” of the click stops on the aperture mechanism…ie…he was just holding it in his hand and turning it (not actually taking a photo) and that is just had such a nice firm click, etc., much better than the Fuji Lenses..which I have heard is kind of cheezy. I could be wrong though…I am just guessing…it certainly is not clear from the Phoblographer…and I think he stated he had the camera in his hands for 3 minutes to take photos…so that is not enough time to check everything out….
Does anyone know????? Please feel free to enlighten us!
May work like manual lenses work: using A or M mode; albeit this is not as good since camera will not record aperture in photo files.
Take a look here… very good pictures.
http://www.dkamera.de/news/preview-panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh4-beispielaufnahmen/
Thanks…
LOL!
I am looking at those photos like they are mine and was like: WTF!
hahaha, I was there a 6 months ago. 🙂
I checked out this images. A few were great, most of the landscape photos seemed rather soft to me. Could be a number of factors, so I hope it isn’t the lens as I have already pre-ordered it haha.
The 15mm would be mostly redundant for me, too. I already have the Panasonic 14mm and 20mm. My Voigtländer 17.5mm is so much better and so much more fun to use, that neither of them see much use. I guess I just like the 17mm focal length. There’s just something about it…
Anyway, It’s great to see aperture rings start to appear on electronic lenses. It’s so much easier and more intuitive to use than dial twiddling and button pushing. BUT, what a bummer that Olympus cameras can’t take advantage of it! Hopefully Olympus can address that in a firmware update.
Or better yet, P&O could agree to mutual support of different products. I vote for a universal accessory port standard.
It would be nice if Oly made 200mm macro prime in PRO line that goes to 1:1 magnification
And fast enough (F/2.8?) –> I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
Whats the use of a big aperture for macro?
None. You can use a macro lens for other use too.
mmmm… I would like a 150 or 200mm 1:1 macro with a f8 – f32 aperture
🙂
I use my Nikon AI-S 105mm f2.8 and 20mm f4 as telephotos and both are extremely sharp as you might imagine, since they’re macro lenses. They make great multi-purpose lenses in that regard.
I use an old Voigtländer 100mm 3.5 macro lens with Nikon mount – it´s a great lens – in that way you can close the gaps in the mft lineup 🙂
Sounds nice.
Filling gaps is a great reason to adapt manual lenses.
i have plenty legacy macro lenses including 200mm/4 micro nikkor, but that lens goes only to 1:2 magnification.
as for wish to Oly make m43 200mm macro lens, there is a gap (or rather will be a gap) between 150mm and 300mm lens lineup (talking about Olympus line up only). so this lens would fill that gap and have double use, as macro and telephoto. make it f4 and cheaper option than 300mm/4 for those who can’t afford that lens or do not need 300mm
Unfortunately, this lens will likely be much more expensive and much larger than its nearest competitor, the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8. All that glass and bulk can’t come cheap. Hopefully, the optical quality will be there to back it up. Still, I wonder just how much better it needs to be to justify its purchase. Olympus already has a decent 40-150mm that is both slow and lacks the refinement of a quality instrument, yet can be had for a mere $100 on sale. This PRO version will obviously be faster, but if the speed is not needed, will the likely high price and massive increase of size and weight justify the currently unknown upgrade in image quality? We need to be talking about something both significantly sharper and much more impressive here. I will be looking forward to the tests as I’m sure we all are.
I fear it will be expensive (not as a CaNikon f2.8 though). But given the IQ of 12-40mm I think it will be a great lens, for those who need it. I own an MZuiko 40-150mm, but I never use it: 45mm, 60mm, 75mm beat it easily. They are more expensive, but even cropping an image is better than using that zoom lens, at least in my opinion.
I’m not that interested in it. I will sell my Panasonic 7-14mm and buy the Olympus f2.8 version.
Interesting, I really like the 40-150mm on my e-Pl1 (tack sharp) but it´s really soft mounted on the current 16mp sensor cameras. Is it only the higher pixel pitch or something else?
I’ll check it later this afternoon on my old e-pl2. I remember liking it, when using it on that camera years ago. Today, on Em5 and Em1 I don’t like it.
Last year my gf used it on epl2 during Venice Film Festival and pictures were nice. Perhaps it’s as you said, it’s because the higher pixel pitch, but I’m just guessing.
Thanks mate, that would be very helpful. 🙂
That’s odd. I have both an E-P3 and an E-PL5 (12 and 16 MP), and the 40-150 f/4-5.6 is tack sharp on both. The only thing that you have to watch out for is that it’s easy to misfocus at tele ranges if both subject and background are high contrast.
Check out the Panasonic 45-150mm. It’s really quite good at 150mm and sharp throughout it’s range. It’s also small, light, focuses quickly and is a great deal for about $200.
How does the IQ compare to the Olympus 14-140? Especially at 140?
If you mean the Panasonic 14-140mm I, I have that lens, but haven’t done any comparisons.
From what I’ve read the 45-150mm is sharper than the 14-140mm II, which is much better than the original.
It will be pricier than a Canikon 5.6, because M43 is generally a more expensive system. However, it will be cheaper and smaller than a Canikon 2.8, because it does not compare to either.
Having owned the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 for about a year, I doubt it will take much to beat it, especially in lens flare resistance, which I was told by the repair people to be completely normal, despite it looking horrific.
From my experience with the 12-40mm f/2.8 lens, I don’t expect it to be as good as my 35-100mm f/2.0, but better than my 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5.
I’m also ready for the 7-14mm f/2.8 lens. I like what FujiFilm did with their 10-24mm f/4.0 lens, with the extra range, but the lack of weather-sealing makes it vulnerable.
Did you try out the sun hood that comes with it?
I’ve never used the lens without the hood.
The sun wasn’t even in the frame. Using the 12-40mm f/2.8 just a moment later was much better even though the sun was in the frame and the lens hood is tiny.
Does that mean “release to general market” or “introduce”. Will the 40-150 even be ready for christmas business?
The 40-150 is neither wide nor tele. What exactly is it for, what will make it worthwhile to lug around? And there is the 35-100 2.8 for MFT already. The only of those that is needed desperately, is the 300 f4. It will be horridly overpriced for sure.
It´s a 80-300mm 2.8 lens – sure it´s a tele..
Live concert performance – this kind of lens is perfect for it, as the 70-200mm 2.8 are staples for this function in Canikon world. For me, is the lens that I’m waiting most.
How in the world is it not telephoto???? What world are you leaving in?
I’m eyeing it for my wedding work. I currently am using the 35-100 F2 on my EM1 for churches and the like. I may even stick with it, but this new zoom has more reach and I’m assuming lighter and smaller. I used the 75mm in a recent church wedding and that was great, but a zoom can be helpful in churches that restrict my movement.
Another smart a…s 🙂
40-150mm on FF equivalence is 80-300mm, so by definition it is tele!
With all those “1000mm+” superzooms around the meaning of tele is bound to shift a bit.
There is a limit to how much a definition can shift. If 300mm isn’t tele, something wrong. Last time I checked, you can get plenty good compression at that FoV.
It may not be the ultimate birding FoV, but there is a little bit more to telephotography than sports and wildlife…
I think Olympus was smart to extend this lens to 300. It makes it much more flexible than the standard 70-200 zooms. It may end up being my most used lens if it’s anywhere near as good as the 12-40.
I have no doubt it will be a great lens.
The X 35-100 is no slouch, so I suspect it will be a matter of (nit)picking priorities. size vs extra reach for instance.
Indeed. It’s always good to have choice. 🙂
Remember it’s an 80-300 equivalent, so portrait length up to medium tele. Very useful.
I can echo what others are saying. This lens is great for general purpose work where you’re not right in the subject’s face, but you want decent isolation. Small venue sports, weddings, photographing your kids playing outside, some wildlife, portraits, etc… I use my 40-150 f/4-5.6 ED quite a bit for a walk around lens with the family. It’s just perfect for that. A faster version would open up all kinds of indoor applications or better motion capture for sports.
This is a wedding and concert photographer’s best friend, an 80-300mm equivalent field of view with a fast consistent aperture. I love this focal length for just about everything. It gives great subject isolation and the extra reach afforded by the 150mm (300 equivalent) will come in handy indeed. I just wish it was coming sooner than September!
Looking at the Four-Thirds Olympus 300mm f/2.8 at US$5999.99, the 300mm f/4.0 should certainly be quite a lot cheaper–probably no more than US$1999.99.
A system with a small sensor can make sense with cheap teles. Not here: crippled sensor and no teles. Wait, there is that funny zoom that goes to F7.3 or something… Wait, there is PRO written on… This company is going to die fast.
Well, you could use the four thirds 150mm f2 is you don’t mind the price. You can also adapt practically any FF lens via an adaptor to scratch that itch. If your style of shooting is telephoto’s than maybe its best to look elsewhere until those gaps are filled.
I see that you are on a mission to educate. But that doesn’t work when dealing with trolls.
And the word PRO is over rated by the way.
I’ve been using Four-Thirds lenses since 2004, and I haven’t had a problem with them, even though the sensor wasn’t as good as they are now. Ten years isn’t very fast for the company to die, and it’s now more popular than back then.
m43 makes a lot of sense, when paired with cheap lenses
Compared to the full frame “equivalents,” even the most “expensive” M43 lenses are significantly less expensive than the same focal lengths and speeds from Nikon and Canon. Even the “outrageously” priced Panasonic-Leica 42.5 f/1.2 is a relative steal when you consider the cost of the Canon 85mm 1.2. Sure the DoF will be different. Not better or worse, but different. But still shallow. And still with beautiful rendering. And as big as it is, it is still way smaller, lighter and faster focusing than the amazing Canon.
Equivalences are not so hard to master… The ridiculously priced Nocticrap is “equivalent” to a Canon 85mm / F2.4, for example.
I don’t think photography should be reduced to a monetary number. There are a lot of expensive lenses in this format that make sense for the right people. I find the Voigtlander .95 lens line up intriguing- fast performance at 1/3 the price of a full frame equivalent. It’s not for everyone but it is for me. Which brings me back to price- its all about context and demand. For the right people under the right circumstances they can be a worthwhile investment.
“m43 makes a lot of sense, when paired with cheap lenses”
???
This is m43. Not Canon or Nikon. m43 cameras are generaly much smaller than FF or even APS-C. This means smaller lenses. Why can’t we have a much smaller 40-150 f4 lens, than a 2.8 lens? Are we still living in 2004, where even a Canon APS-C image quality dies after 800 ISO?
We are not. The E-M1 will give superb images even up to 1600 or even 3200. That’s one stop. One bloody stop. Therefore, why not a much smaller 40-150 f4 instead of a bigger 2.8? Most people would much rather have high IQ and much smaller lens, than that one additional stop.
Great point! Why not both? This is M43, so it seems only a matter of time until we see multiple options. Interestingly, Sony is already taking this approach with their FF mirrorless system: they’re doing smaller, “slower” lenses. But certainly not less expensive. 🙂
I’m in favor of both. Sigma and Tamron are you listening?
Sigma and Tamron have been making some great glass lately. I’ll bet they’d sell well if M43 native sizes, not just mounts. And i’d love to see a Sigma Foveon ILC for M43!
Generally, I agree with you. However, for this type of lens – telephoto zoom – a large max aperture matters. People will often use this lens for portraits at weddings and other events not as suitable for a good portrait prime. They will want good subject separation. And without getting into the equivalency argument, because I am not doing that, an f/2.8 aperture will only mimic an f/5.6 aperture in terms of subject separation.
The standard 40-150mm (and Panasonic 45-200mm) is smaller and less expensive and available. That’s why I’ll stick with my Panasonic 45-200mm.
Do you find the 45-200mm to be sharp? I haven’t had good luck with it, but I bought it for only US$100 new.
Its pretty sharp in the lower end, (like 45-100ish and starts to fall off) easily apparent at 200. still got some pretty usable images from it though even at 200, a great value for the money. I look forward to the Oly 40-150 PRO though if the quality of the 12-40 is any indication of what to expect.
Totally disagree. Lens fastness is not replaceable by ISO. It is always best to keep ISO as low as possible. So Olympus is right on track with its constant 2.8 zooms. For its properties, the 2.8/40-150mm is actually quite small.
Stop whining. m4/3 has enough small lenses already. Not everybody wants and needs the smallest.
Agree that m43 had a ton of choices already for zooms in this range. Time for a big 2.8 lens. Question will be how much. I’d say 1199.
If it’s not US$1499.99 as with the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 that’s a great deal. It was apparent from the Olympus 12-40mm that something could be better, cheaper, and weather-sealed.
How do I like your comment 1000 times?
We’ve already seen that the noise is variable and at ISO 1600 it’s high enough that it’s unsettling in business. Hobbyists may want small and cheap, but moderate lenses such as Olympus are doing finally hit the sweet spot.
These are PRO lenses. If Olympus wants to attract interest from true professionals — especially those shooting night sports and wildlife — then f2.8 constant aperture is a must. As an enthusiast shooter, I think I could get by with an f4 constant, but I have found f5.6 to be too slow in low light to get fast shutter speeds. I would like to see Olympus or Panasonic make a cheaper f4 constant lens in the medium telephoto range.
At first I thought the 300mm was the more interesting lens. Now that I own the 9-18 I love it. I think it’s the more usable and versatile lens for this format and look forward to a faster 7-14. I’m worried about the cost though as the 9-18 is already very pricey. If its a grand I’d say PASS.
Do you realize that you are comparing a 9-18mm Zoom lens to a 300mm???? LOL!
This is very true as both appeal to me. I’m not attempting to compare them outside of personal interest though. I also think there are more people the 7-14 will appeal to than the 300mm.
????…that is ridiculous. I have an Idea to create a photograph…my image has a need for a certain lens…so it is the perfect lens for my image….it is a creative tool.
…you talk about the lens like you are buying fashionable clothes…this does not bode well for your images….
Please la off the crack before coming on here and posting. Your making zero sense right now.
It makes sense that you do not understand what I am saying here.
I do not use drugs.
If you don’t have the optics I’m not going to buy the camera. I will stay with my E-5’s and SHG optics.
…buy the M1 and use your optics….
We need a 600mm F5.6 monster. I want to take pictures of people eating sandwiches on the moon.
with the addition of the 40-150mm f2.8 & 7-14mm f2.8, I think it will make very nice trio of fast high quality zoom lenses for MFT with the 12-40mm f2.8.
Except for more demanding circumstances where you might want a prime lens with faster aperture to get more light & shallower DOF and perhaps a bit more sharpness, these 3 pro lenses should be a very complete and comprehensive set that will cover nearly all your needs. from super wide to super tele, that constant f2.8 should perform admirably.
“They also confirmed the 7-14mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/4.0 will not hit the stores this year. Olympus will certainly display them at Photokina but that’s it. You will have time til Spring 2015 to save the money for those two PRO lenses ”
That was always going to be the case when they announced them, so no surprises with that, but I’m interested to know what the surprises might be.
That 40-150 is huge. How much smaller is this to my 70-200 and 100-400 L zooms?
I would really like to see a PRO version of the 75-300 or 100-300 lens.
Are you serious? It’s much smaller than those…
http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=47
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canon_EF_70-200mm_f2.8L_IS_II_USM_%2B_EOS_1D_Mk_IV.jpg
Apples and oranges… And the Canon is inferior because it does not have “pro” written on.