Image of the new splashproof 14-150mm lens.
Preorders (if you preorder through those links you will support 43rumors…thanks!):
E-M5II in Black or Silver at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus. In Europe at WexUK, Namencolor.
14-150mm II lens at Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
FL-LM3 Flash at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Olympus ECG-2 External Metal Grip at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Olympus HLD-6P Battery Grip at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
HLD-8g at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
E-P16 eyecup at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
HLD-8G and HLD-6P kit at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Full leather case at Amazon, Adorama and GetOlympus.
Olympus PT-EP13 Underwater Housing at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Olympus Stylus Tough TG-860 at Adorama, BHphoto and GetOlympus.
Tomorrow at 6am London time Olympus will announce the new 8mm and 14-150mm II lenses. And they will certainly show the 7-14mm and 300mm PRO lenses too at CP+ (with pricing to be announced in Spring). Here are some more info about the lenses:
8mm f/1.8 fisheye PRO lens:
– It’s watherproof
– made with high quality material
– will ship in Summer. Pricing to be announced in Spring
– very fast and silent autofocus system
– comes in Black only like any other PRO lenses in the range
14-150mm f/4.0-5.6 II ED lens:
– splashproof
– optical performance is improved over it’s predecessor
– costs 649 Euro
– 285g weight
7-14mm f/2.8 PRO lens pricing will be announced in Spring. 300mm f/4.0 PRO lens pricing also to be announced later (mid 2015 likely).
Reminder: You can follow the Olympus E-M5II launch event liveblogging here on 43rumors at. The official deadline is 6am London time which is:
– 10pm Los Aangeles time (Still February 4 there).
– 1am New York time
– 7.00 Berlin time
– 15:00 Tokyo time
To get notified on all upcoming news and rumors be sure to subscribe on 43rumors here:
RSS feed: http://www.43rumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/43rumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/43rumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/+43rumors/posts
63 Responses
hopeful that the 7-14mm gets a dedicated filter holder system
A 14-150 splashproof is an interesting match as the tourist zoom / travel option. I just wish either Panasonic or Olympus would make a 12-60 or even 12-80 f2.8-f4.0 lens. Something more versatile and less pro than the 12-40 and 12-35 which are quite expensive.
I don’t particularly care for splashproof, as I haven’t had a water- or dust-related lens defect since I got my first camera back in the film days, but I find the “optical performance is improved” part interesting, as none of the existing M43 superzooms (Olympus, both Panasonic variants, Tamron) seems to even come close to Panasonic’s “Leica” Four Thirds superzoom in image quality, which I’m really glad I bought and kept when I changed from 4/3 to M43. I wouldn’t mind being able to exchange it for a smaller and lighter design some day, though, as long as I don’t have to make compromises regarding image quality.
I think in the small-and-light department panasonic will stay ahead. They seem to have the best capabilities in aspheres, and that’s what you need to reduce the number of elements while keeping mtf up.
But if you have a splashproof camera, you need a splashproof lens too, otherwise water and dust have an entry point into the camera body. So it’s not just about protecting the lens.
He may have bought a splash proof camera for its other features and may not need the splash proofing capabilities.
As an aside I’ve carried cameras without sealing many times in driving horizontal cold rain in the mountains where they have got totally saturated. It’s impossible, without using a drysack, to keep cameras (or anything else) dry after eight hours in those sort of conditions.
Granted I wasn’t using them much as it’s pointless taking photographs when there’s water running across the lens and the viewfinder and mirror is permanently fogged up.
My four thirds E30, E620 & E400 cameras never failed despite taking up to 12 hours to dry out afterwards
No, I don’t. Before the I got the E-M1, I never had a camera which had environmental sealing, still none was ever damaged by water or dust. And the E-M1’s sealing, though I don’t need it, either, is still an advantage even when using unsealed lenses.
A “Pro” fisheye is a bit silly. Nobody is going to buy it for $800 (or more) no matter how fast and silent the autofocus and how wide the aperture. Not when the Samyang 7.5 sells for $240 and does a great job.
ok, I love my samyang too. but Af with moving objects (e.g. children) could be nice. I agree a “pro” fisheye lens is a little bit over the top …
But Samyang 7.5 is f/3.5. That’s 2 stops slower. The difference for my night shots would be huge. I really like my Samyang, but I could use those extra 2 stops of light, since 90% of my fish-eye shots are night shots. My only alternative to get better fish-eye night shots would be to buy a full frame camera just for that purpose. I’d rather just get a lens for my existing system, much cheaper.
But what I find interesting is that Olympus even decided to go with such a niche product and even pushed the envelope on specs. And I expect top notch quality, too. And high price, unfortunately (although PRO lenses are priced decently actually, for what they are).
Another thing that many people don’t get, is that specialty lenses are not made to be sold by the million, but to raise the prestige of the system. Not sure if fast auto focusing fish-eye would count, but who knows what Olympus plans next. Tilt-shift maybe?
So, I’m hoping the rumor is true, and I’ll be paying close attention to this lens. Who knows, maybe one day…
Flash or video lights, problem sovled
Lol. I’d like to see how you use your video lights to light up the landscape and capture more of the faint stars and details of the Milky Way. That would be interesting to see 🙂
Just move your rig to the top of Everest, or better yet the ISS. Problem solved.
People buy the $700 gold ringed Nikon 10.5mm fisheye. It is one of the best fisheyes available. If a lens is good people will pay for it.
You are right, but many would not put that much money on a system they perceive as crippled.
You are right, it would be silly to buy a m43 lens if you are in to a system like FF Nikon..
The fact that people still are buying Nikon gear is proving you wrong.
I’d prefer Oly to release the 7-14mm before the 8mm fisheye. I’m really curious about the former, but not much about the latter.
I can see only one use for an AF fisheye: underwater. But how big is that niche?
Ok, maybe the wide aperture makes it interesting for other uses.
skatevideos
music videos
+ snowboard/ski movies (splashproof + freezeproof a big plus!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyzoBtmU5k
Am I a clairvoyant or what?
A 1.8 fisheye with a gh4 would be an insanely epic combination for the skate and BMX industry. Night filming would be much easier and we wouldn’t have to spend 15-20g on a video setup anymore.
There is only one thing I dont use FE for, and thats underwater..
You typically can’t get close enough to the fish for good wildlife underwater shots, but it would be pretty great for shooting shipwrecks and stuff like that. AF in a fisheye would be very useful for shooting things up close with it. There were a lot of times prior to getting a body with peaking where I would have really loved AF on my Rokinon 7.5
I don’t really care about the uwas, give me the 300 f4 as soon as possible!! I bet the fisheye being a pro is a mistake by the admin/source. It’s probably premium, otherwise it would have been visible in the oly pro -site.
Or…it’s an 8mm rectilinear Olympus Pro Lens! 🙂 (please do not ruin my fantasy)
8 mm f1.8 rectilinear sounds bigger than the 40-150 2.8 😛
Soooo true….-sigh-
but it wouldnt be big.
UWA is all you need now that we have 63 MP, just do a crop..
But with a 300 + 63 MP I can take a photo of a deer + crop a macro of the fly in it’s fur 😛
Still with that silly pro label, LOL. And now, with wobbly sensor to boot.
Why not do some real innovation? Example: a sensible sensor, for a change. Non-software-correction-required lenses. Sensible pricing. Acceptable autofocus.
Muppet
Oy, a canon clown without a clue…
Better a pro label than a laughable white L lens (L for Luxury, come on, how lame can you get?) or a golden Nikon ring (pretentious much? Why not add some chrome bling bling while you’re at it)
Hahaha!
Canon’s white L lenses are dipped in Badger Milk.
Hard to say which of you fangirls is stupider… Enjoying your anger and your vivid imagination, still.
Wobbly sensor? You know this how? Insinuating that Olympus do not have acceptable autofocus is just stupid. One of the best in class (well, maybe not for fast moving targets, but you know what? People actually took images off fast moving subject using manual lenses before… Its not your equipment that sucks, its you). Non-software corrected lenses? I am sorry, but I was under the impression that most of the lenses today use software correction. How silly of me. Sensible sensor? You mean a m43-sensor that is better then full-frame? Since the current sensor is in line IQ-wise with APS-C sensors (and that is a 3 year old sensor). Seriously, what is your problem? Exept for just being a troll and making me bite? Stupid is what stupid does.
Funny Flaming!
Sensible pricing… you mean, like the 5Ds, probably ?
Sensible in troll world = ancient Canon.
I feed on fangirl tears. Muah muah muah.
Folks, check out:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=
http://www5a.biglobe.ne.jp/~hu5150/dcl/
camera_news/article/olympus/2015/0204_03.html&
prev=search
– line in
– ISO LOW 100 (fake)
– Swivel does not tilt..(Im actually crying)
Does it only have a 1/4000 mechanical shutter?
I know that many will think I’m being a troll but We don’t need more freakin fisheye lenses for m43. How about a rectilinear 8mm?
A rectilinear 7mm would be even better.
Nah, you’re not being a troll. If you’re curious what trolling looks like, check out LOL’s post (two down from here). We really don’t need another fisheye. A rectilinear UWA would be very welcome, but Jono is probably right about it cutting into the sales of the upcoming 7-14, which will probably give you amazing ultrawides. At that end of the spectrum, I don’t really see a huge difference between a HQ zoom and prime the way I do as it gets more telephoto. I’ve been totally happy with my Panny 7-14.
That’s fair. I do have my eye on the 7-14. I have a Nikon FX camera in additions to my m43 and the Nikon 14-24mm; it is an incredible lens. Never though twice about having it instead of 14mm prime. It’s just too good. I have no doubt the 7-14 will be the m43 world’s equivalent.
Not a troll. We don’t need any more fisheye lenses. An ultra wide prime fastish lens would have been the t1ts though. Instead we get another hobby lens. Sure I’ll get flamed for that last comment.
A fisheye lens is not merely a “hobby” lens if employed creatively. A full frame FE is more versatile than it may appear to the uninitiated. It is not the first lens I would to my gear bag, but I would prefer to have one nonetheless.
Why a fisheye Oly…why! If it was a UWA you’d sell twice as many.
This is assuming equal pricing, size and weight as well as decent IQ wide open. Yes, lots of if and it would be an instant classic.
Probably because Oly ZD traditionally produces full lens systems, and a full frame FE lens is pretty versatile. Besides, an UWA prime may adversely affect sales of the upcoming 7-14/2.8 WA zoom.
Fisheye does have its purpose as effect lens and in astronomy use. But while fisheye always have wider diagonal angle of view, its much harder to use and requires usually heavily post processing, that lowers quality.
I would take 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro over 8mm f/1.8 UW if both would be rectilinear and prime would be half the price. Why? Because using a ultra-wide angle objective can be hard to compose. Many wants it because “its easier to use” but it really is harder and less often usable than telephoto objective in landscape photography. Instead trying to get everything in frame, its just easier to pick the cherries in the landscape. But… 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro is a must to own as it will be very usable because the zoom!
At that point I can carry four objectives:
7-14mm f/2.8
12-40mm f/2.8
40-150mm f/2.8
60mm Macro f/2.8
Of course I could replace 60mm Macro with a extension ring, to make 12-40mm or 40-150mm to offer 1:1 ratio (subject size 17.3x13mm, equivalent to 2:1 ratio on 35mm) or even more without huge quality loss. But Macro has the capability focus far as well and it has awesome focus ring for small work.
And I would anyways get the 8mm f/1.8 if it would be rectilinear and small as a pocket objective to company a 45mm f/1.8. It would be awesome combination. Get spaces, get people and landscape. Olympus could even sell a bundle then, 8mm + 25mm + 45mm. Or a “starter kit” 8/17/25/45. There really would not be much to wish more as starter.
UWA’s are always harder to compose with. However, they are capable of truly intriguing images when used properly. I have never owned a lens wider than that of a 4:3’s 12mm medium WA. It would be very interesting for me to explore the capabilities of the 7-14/2.8.
I believe Oly ZD is serious about developing faster primes. So they may take a while to produce.
In Ultra-Wide Angle objectives, each millimeter counts a huge difference to angle of view. More than actually moving around. Like 7mm and 8mm has huge difference.
That’s reason why I would take 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro first over any prime because I can zoom 7-14 range after finding the camera angle. Working with just the prime can be huge problem, but then again aperture between f/1 and f/1.8 can open totally new features when shutter speeds are faster, and many would love to get that extra light to speed light amount in nightskies etc.
What is one reason I will get after all, after long time the UWA Ultra Fast primes as well.
I am very much aware of the differences in degrees at the UWA level. I am a close up/macro fan and always takes minimum focusing distance (MFD)into account with each lens purchase. I have traditionally been biased against WA zooms because their MFD is almost always much worst than that of primes. However, the MFD for the moderate 12-40/2.8 zoom gives me hope that Oly ZD will have a short MFD for the 7-14/2.8. A UWA prime should have an even shorter MFD.
The reason the fast primes may take a bit longer is because they will almost surely require exotic glass to keep good-to-great resolution from the center of the lens to the edges.
I would rather see a sharp, sealed 12-50 f/2.8-f/4 than a slow 14-150mm. But to each their own, I guess.
Imagine if everyone trash talked every lens they don’t have a use for… There are how many hundreds of lenses being manufactured right now, and I only use three of them, THE REST ARE GARBAGE!!!!!! I for one will be buying the 8mm fish because I need it for a very specific purpose. I’ve played with the samyang, shot some fun photos with it, but nothing I’d publish and nothing good enough that I even wanted to spend $250 on my own. The thing sucked in low light. F1.8 with the ‘pro label’ quality? SOLD. I need a bright fisheye lens with autofocus. Hoping it’s $800 or less.
Didn’t you know, You only need Olympus Pro line from 7mm up to 210mm and you have continues zoom range. You don’t need anything else, now go away and go water your flowers…..
😉
8mm FE is massively wider than 7mm.
Interesting, yet another 8mm Fisheye lens in the m43 lineup. At least it is f/1.8 with AF. The real question is what AOV is going to be available on this 8mm fisheye. If it can do 180 degrees on the horizontal instead of diagonal, this will be a very cool lens. I’m still excited about the 7-14/2.8 Pro and the 300/4 Pro coming out.