These are the detailed lens specs (via Digicameinfo). Reminder: Announcement on Wednesday January 29 at 5-6 am London time! Follow the announcement live on 43rumors.com!
M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 25mm F1.8
– Lens construction: nine seven groups. 2 aspherical lens
– Height: 42mm
– Maximum diameter: 57.8mm
– 46mm filter diameter
– Minimum focusing distance is 0.25m
– Maximum magnification: 0.12 times. 0.24 times 35mm conversion
– Comes in black and silver
– Estimated retail price of around 35,000 yen (399 Euro)
M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 EZ
– Lens construction: eight seven groups. One ED lens, 3 aspherical lens, one Super HR lens
– Height: 22,5mm.
– Maximal diameter: 60,6mmm
– 37mm filter diameter
– Minimum focusing distance: wide angle side 20cm. 29cm part of the mid-range. Telephoto side 25cm
– Maximum magnification: 0.225 times. 0.45 35mm conversion
– Comes in black and silver
– Estimated retail price of around 35,000 yen (250 Euro or around $335)
– Has a lens cap (correction, it’s not built in. You can remove it!)
BCL-0980
– Fish-eye lens of 9mm f/8.0
– Minimum focusing distance 0.2m
—
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
38 Responses
45/1.8 – filter diameter is 37(!) mm.
25/1.8 – filter diameter is 46 mm.
At least weird, isn’t it? Why a normal lens should have bigger front lens than a short tele with same max. aperture?
It’s good though, because I can use the polarizing filter from my 14 & 20mm Panasonic lenses.
The 25 is not a “normal” lens. The 25 is a 25mm lens. If you put a (FF) 25mm lens with 1.8 on a FF body, say a D800, then crop by 2 in the middle, you will get the same picture. This is NOT a 50mm lens, it is, as written on it, a 25mm/1.8 lens. The 45/1.8 is much more a “normal” lens (like a 50mm FF lens), it’s just not “normal” because the sensor is “cropped”.After cropping it has the same angle of view as an uncropped 50mm on a FF body. That is the reason people think this is a “normal” lens.
The lens is what it is written on, a 25/1.8 lens.
35mm is not something mythical, 25mm is as normal as 50mm is in “FF” or 80mm is in 6×6.
Or are you going to argue that 80mm in 6×6 is not normal either because it’s not 50mm ?
The OT compared the 25/45 to a 50/90 (“normnal, “tele”) pair from an FF experience and wondered why the “normal” is larger than the “tele” while he should compare it to a 25/45 pair on FF (where the 25 is larger than the 45).
Fine, let’s just say you were clumsy in expressing your, obviously valid, point (when it comes to the optics involved, not the “non-normality” of 25mm for µ4/3).
Oh clumsy, that’s me!
That makes as little sense as your first post. The laws of geometric optics are based on ratios and angles not on any absolute size. A 45 mm lens for m43 is a 90 mm lens for FF shrunk in every dimension by a factor of two. And a 25 mm lens for m43 is a 50 mm lens for FF shrunk in every dimension by a factor of two.
The relative properties of a 90 vs a 50 mm lens on FF are exactly the same between 45 and 25 mm lens on m43. Following your logic a 4 mm lens on a (smart)phone should somehow be compared with an 8 mm lens for FF.
Normal, you guys mean “standard”? A standard lens for any format is equal to the diagonal measurement of its capture medium which will produce a compression and relative perspective between subjective elements that most closely resembles the vision of the human eye.
For micro 4/3, that measurement is 22mm and for FF, that is 43mm.
Yes, what you call “standard” is what photographers of a certain age called “normal”.
So, you pick an arbitrary sensor/film size, calculate which focal length gives a diagonal AOV of about 45º and that focal length then has mythical properties? If you shrink a lens+camera by a factor of two (or any factor), does anything change in regard to geometric optics? The diagram showing the lens elements is exactly the same, you are just changing the scale.
You can also find different diameters in identical focal lenght lenses. The bigger usually the better (in terms of glass quality). I don’t findbit weird. And 46mm is still a tiny lens.
Yeah, it annoyed me that they did that with the 45. I had to get a step ring to use the 46mm filters. They should try and be as consistent as possible with these things. Show that they are thinking of the customer when they can…
Well, you’ll also need to look at the back elements of those lenses.
I’m not sure optics work quite the way you have them figured out…
How can 35,000 yen be both 250 Euro and 399 Euro at the same time? I take the prices are just wild speculations at this time?
399eur minus 250eur(yen price converted is 149eur price difference.
now…149eur from initial price 250eur is 59%
somebody says that lenses has eu duty like 10%, …VAT in EU countries is like 20-23%
as we talk about tiny lenses…transport costs are not a case
so the rest 30% of initial price is what ? Oly ?
The street price will go down eventually, Tomas. Yes, taxes are higher in European countries so it rarely works with direct currency conversion. Let alone the salary differences between western and eastern Europe. Let’s see if the IQ of this lens from real world reviews will justify the asking price ;). It looks promising on papers.
agree about vat …but anyway the prices are disportional to jpy and us
but specs are nice …similar to 25 f1.4 actualy
It’s even more simpler than any conversion routine you’ve written. Camera companies don’t go to the trouble of monetary conversion rates, they just charge put the same number irregardless of currency i.e.
A less that cost $399 in the US will cost 399 pounds in the UK, irregardless of VAT or the actual corresponding value after conversion. Different markets, different salaries, different prices.
This is something people still don’t understand, that’s why you see countless trolls whining about the Euro price before seeing the official US prices, as if the converted EU to US price will be anything close to real, which it won’t.
There are no conversions in this game, just take the same value and change the currency symbol to your local currency, that’s it.
The pancake zoom is full of exotic glass. Should be just as sharp and contrasty as the 12-40 at common apertures. Its bokeh might be mediocre though.
The 25 has a surprisingly large front element, which bodes well for its performance. The lack of ED elements implies high clarity (“micro-contrast”).
Front lesns is much bigger than 17.8！ looks really nice atleast：）
so now the diameter is topic of the day? lol!
I am prevented to get these lenses by those I already have 🙂
I agree with FF that it is a 25mm, and since it acts on a half frame, it must have twice the resolution of a FF lens to give the same sharpness of a 50mm.
That is the achievement – or must be.
Not to sound negative, but I had the 25 2.8 for 4/3 and it was nice and small and OK optically, but the blue ring on the front really bothered me. Does anyone really like the blue ring on the front of a black lens, or even a cheap looking chrome band?
I think Fuji is making some nice bodies and lenses that don’t look so funny, with silly blue or chrome strips on them and I wish Olympus and Panasonic would catch on.
The blue ring was for the 4/3 Standard tier, that has been dropped entirely. m4/3 uses chrome rings, that might or might not be pleasing, with black.
it would be nice to see how the E-M10 looks with the 25mm. There is no possibility that this is a pancake however.
At this point I am much more curious about the evolution of the Pens, if they will get an EVF. If you delete the flash in the hump, what is left of it?
If the Pens are to have any real chance of success, they MUST have built-in viewfinders.
Too little, too late. If price on the 25 is accurate, it’s going to have to provide a whole lot to displace the PL which provides 2/3 stop faster and is a beautiful lens optically for about a hundred more. It will also force the comparison again to the 20/1.7 which is faster, smaller, lighter and the same price, albeit a bit wider, but is closer to an actual standard lens for the format. If this lens comes in at under 300 Euro/dollars, then I think we’re talking, but at four hundred, it is going to have to be one hell of an optical performer to sway those who aren’t buying the lens for the name on the barrel.
The 14-42 seems to be the same uninspired kit lens, just smushed and at least the new Panny provides us with a 12mm optic on the wide end, which I think is far more useful in a kit zoom then the extra on the long end and in that way is more a unique offering. Seems to be a really good optical performer too.
If this pancake zoom has the same performance as their current kit zoom, I will very likely buy one for its size to fit on my PEN.
Over the 12-32 Panasonic when you already have a 14-42 (I assume by your replacement comment)?
Nothing can replace the awesome Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 (the original, that is. I don’t care for shiny fronts). Even if they bring out an instant-AF updated version that most of us here on this page seem to crave for, I still regard the original 20mm as one of the greatest lenses of all time. For me it defines the Micro Four Thirds system. Small, fast aperture, high performance, full of character and perfect for a “one lens” setup (for true minimalist “rangefinder-style” shooting). I only use centre point AF so the slow AF doesn’t bother me at all even on ye olde E-P2 (because, guys, it actually is quick enough for most situations). And I even love the way the lens renders things. The slightly “coarse” contrasty look, slightly dodgy bokeh coupled with the insane sharpness makes it a lens with way more character than the clinical Leica branded 25mm, which by the way is ridiculously big to be put on a M4/3 body (but to be honest, what other mirrorless lens isn’t ridiculously big these days?)
The 20 mm is a classic indeed. Just started using GM1 and changed over the lens from my GF1. Rock solid, made in Japan. I don’t crave for faster AF, but the Olympus slide-for-manual-focus mode might be interesting. The lag with the current fly-by-wire focus is at times quite annoying.
The 20mm is one of the major reasons I got into this system myself, but I have found the PL25 to provide a far more unique profile and I’ve even seen that the newer 20 version 2 has a bit going for it versus the older version. The Oly 25/1.8 is going to be more like the 45 (plastic, no push/pull focus ring, etc) and less like the 12 or 17 it appears unfortunately as that might have made it very interesting, but as is, assuming this pricing is right, I couldn’t find a reason to buy it over the Panasonic 20 or PL25 if I didn’t already have either (or in my case both) let alone looking to buy a standard focal length from scratch unless I wanted all of my gear to say Oly on it. Late to the party.
Oly, let’s see some lenses FASTER than f/1.8 for this system eh? And, as long as you’re pumping out already existing focal lengths that are slower than the Pana counterparts, how about a 42.5mm f/1.4 priced at 700-800 euro/pounds/dollars/pesos? That would actually make some waves and as long as it was up to snuff, it would sell really, really well I would bet. I’d buy one in a heartbeat.
Anyone know the price of the 9mm fisheye? Sounds like a fun toy lens to use and abuse on an older body without too much pretense. The 15mm is USD $50-60, and it would be nice to be in the same price range.
I’ll likely get the 25. But have to admit i’m very curious how the 9mm will perform. Need something wider than the 12-40 sometimes and don’t want the Pana 7-14 because Oly will make their own soon enough. I’m hoping the 9 is better put together than the 15mm f8 body cap, it does look to be. Also, plastic or metal made on the 25?
Will the new 14-42mm also suffer from huge distortions (software corrected 🙁 ) ?
The Diagonal of the sensor being the normal focal? I kind of like the concept. Probably it’s the easiest to make optically, and it does make sense geometrically.
BTW m4/3 has an almost square aspect, so a moderate WA as the 20mm makes sense.
Day one purchase on the 25mm 1.8. Super excited. This olympus system I’m building is looking mighty fine next to all my Sony Zeiss stuff. Two systems for the win!!!