[shoplink 56524 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Image on top shows the [shoplink 56524 ebay]OM 50mm f/1.2 lens (here on eBay)[/shoplink]
I am now 100% sure Olympus will launch a new f/1.2 prime lens line at the CP+ show in late February! I have no info yet when those lenses will actually ship in stores but trusted sources said Olympus will disclose a clear roadmap at CP+.
I am working to get the details and specs of those lenses. Exciting!
Bit of history: Olympus OM system had two f/1.2 lenses: The [shoplink 56524 ebay]50mm f/1.2 (here on eBay)[/shoplink] and the [shoplink 56525 ebay]55mm f/1.2 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
—
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!
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
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
209 Responses
7 mm f/1.2? 😉
How many kidneys do you have going spare?
At least 4.
Wife and kids?
Just rent them out for a steady income stream. ?
good for stars ! but what else ?
Under water photo and video
i didn’t even think about that. good idea … but more stuff to buy 🙁
….at this point a 7mm or 8mm f/2.0 would be welcome, right?
Even a 7mm or 8mm f4.0 would be.
Cool.
I thought those hyperprimes were a higher priority than pricey telephoto primes like the 300m f4.
I just hope AF is included and Olympus doesn’t go the Nocticron route with crazy prices. When the lens costs as much as a D600 and a cheap 50mm f1.8 combined, what’s the point? 🙂
The 300 mm is definately in high priority, even if it’s a niche lens – currently there’s no quality supertele’s over 150 mm in the whole system including Panasonic etc. NONE. There are plenty of fast prime’s already.
I’m sure it has AF, wouldn’t make any sense not to have it. I hope it’s a 50 mm f1.2 portrait lens that’s priced under 1000€.
Maybe we would have not needed 7-8 normal zooms. Then we would already have 300 f4 and 17 f1.2 as well. Lens lineup is very-very random in m43 land.
These will be premium priced. I’d expect near Nocticron prices. And sizes that start to rival FF f/1.8 lenses. I see these not so much for shallow DoF (FF will always win) but for taking away some of the high ISO advantage of larger sensors
Why not for shallow DoF? Yeah, full frame 85/1.8 will produce _slightly_ shallower than 42.5/1.2 on m4/3. But the difference is so small that it will be worth to consider m4/3 even if shallow DoF is really important for someone.
Yes! Although we are going to see a nice little bump in resolution when stacked BSI comes to FourThirds, 864 sq.mm will retain the high ISO advantage over 370, 330, 225 and 116 sq.mm sensors.
Apertures have always been a nice weapon to relax the pressure to use an ISO you would rather avoid. The Zuiko PRO lens game has been and will continue to be focused on narrowing the margin to full frame, not only because it helps sell cameras, but because the sales of cameras drives the sale of profitable glass. I like it. The secondary use of aperture and focal length, to make bokehlicious photos is cool too. You don’t always want it; a decent amount is easy to get already; and you can always get more if you are willing to step back and mount a longer, low-aperture lens. My first vote for an f1.2 would be 34mm.
The question I cannot give a crisp answer to is about poor light photography: how much of it is done, what kind of photographer specializes in it, what his subject matter may be, and the like.
The experience I have on the OM-D with the current set of f1.8 primes is that need for the 3200 ISO setting is rare to nonexistent. Inevitably, the only time I use it is when I need a focal length served by one of the zooms. Seems the solution there is to save up for the PRO models. Truthfully, in thousands of pictures, I have only used ISO 6400 once, with fear that I would need to use DxO Prime in post, which turned out not to be the case.
As there seems to be a good chunk of money on the poor-light margin, I am not sure who is spending it or why. Would you care to address the question, take a stab? (The belief that the full frame sensor shoots a superior picture at every exposure value is patently false. How much coverage is enough?)
I hope they focus on getting it a small and light as possible (within the limits set by the specs)
Awesome! But I actually wish that they were wider than f/1.
f/0.45 would be amazing, wouldn’t it?!!!! And wouldn’t it be just freaking awesome if the lenses were smaller than the current prime lens lineup?!!! I am so stoked for that!!! Certainly, that’s going to happen!!! Hooray!!!
There are plenty of f/0.95 lenses and several for M43. None are autofocus. This would be an opportunity for Olympus. F/1.2 is exotic for FF but far less so for M43.
f/1.2 is pretty exotic in MFT. The only auto-focus f/1.2 lens for MFT is the Leica branded Nocticron. Manual focus lenses are relatively easy to design as fast lenses. f/1.2 is just fine and hits the sweet spot. Especially since none of the existing manual focus f/0.95 lenses is really sharp edge to edge wide open (I certainly know, I own the Voigtländer since day 1). A f/1.2 can be designed to be a lot better performing wide open than any of the faster lenses.
As long as it’s sealed, I am very excited about this new lens lineup news.
Wouldn’t the reduced depth of field make autofocus too much hit and miss???
and yet Most long time Leica users would not use the Noctilux as their prime 50mm lens. I wonder how often you would use such a lens. because such a lens in addition to being heavier and more expensive would have diffraction starts at F4.0 or 4.5 . A very bad idea
Noctilux f0.95 has its max sharpness at f5.6. From f8 and smaller apertures diffraction STARTS to creep in and lower image quality. It’s a piece of engineering.
The trouble is, with high-end glass and engineering, Olympus can make an f1.2 lens that is sharp wide open. I don’t think they can do that at f0.95 or f1.
Voigtlander hasn’t yet made a lens that would be considered “usable” wide open by Olympus’ present standards.
The sharpest f0.95 lens out there for M4/3 is the new Mitakon, but it has other aberrations and bokeh that is not that lovable. I still think it’s the best of the bunch, but for a halo line, I think Olympus wants to play it safe and make lenses that they can guarantee to be excellent.
And there’s no point in making a fast lens if you can’t shoot it wide open.
I thought the sharpest F0.95 was one of the SLR Magics, but only if you win the quality control lottery and get one that’s made to spec.
My memory may be faulty.
The SLR Magic 25/0.95 is/was sharper than the Voigtlander, but I think the sharpest samples I’ve yet seen are coming from the Mitakon. But again, I imagine it also depends on sample variation.
Basically, I’ve never seen anything particularly sharp from a Voigtlander when shot wide open, which leaves me inclined to just crank up the ISO by a stop and use a 25/1.4 or something instead…
I would have bought one of the Voigtlanders if it was sharper. I could live with the lack of sharpness by itself, but with the weight and manual focus they have too many compromises. One of the new Olympus lenses look like a better bet as long as the focal length is suitable.
I agree the F1 can make more impact and marketing noise . because other system don’t have it. But on the real word F1.2 was fast enough for most low light situation .If Olympus make a 67/75 f1.2 will be very exciting for portrait shooter
17 f1.2 please make it happen… then you can my money…
Then you can the lens 🙂
17mm f/1.2 … I’m in 🙂
I’m just a dad photographing his kids. I love my 1.8/17. Great colors, sharpness, and all. But I find myself reaching for the 1.4/25 more when I’m indoors due to the slightly greater light gathering. I’d go for a 1.2/17 if it is reasonably priced (i.e. <$1k).
LOL..sorry for type error .. just too exciting for reading this news which I waiting for years .. I mean take my money….
The new Pen is being announced at CP+. Now a rumor of a new ultra fast lens being announced. Could it be the high-end kit lens for the new camera.
Looking forward to those lenses! F1.2 is a good compromise between speed, size and, hopefully, price! Weather sealed primes are really missing here.
Yes, I agree a lot. I would love a weather-sealed prime. More than a little more aperture.
Most m4/3 users are perfectly content with a max aperture of F1.7 especially if the lens performs well at max apertures. having a lens opening at F1.2 makes the lens diffraction starts at 5.6 or even larger. A bad idea in general. Plus photographers who are convinced that they need this for portrait already have a very good lens for that with the panasoninc 42.5mm
How does the max aperture affect diffraction starting points?
It doesn’t, thankfully.
25mm with either PRO or O12/17 build would result in emptying my wallet.
My wish is coming true. My assumption is these f1.2 lenses are m.Zuiko Pro lenses and hence by definition are sealed?
Well you know what happens when we ass u me…LOL!
Portraits lens f/1.2? would be nice, hope not so big nor expensive 🙂
“I want an f/1.2 lens but I don’t want it to be big or expensive”…THAT’S FUNNY!
I bet you want it water sealed, too…. and to have OIS for the Panny-users, too. LOL!
Some glorious design with 15 elements in 13 groups, 3 asph and a kitchen sink, come on, that ought to be cheap 😉
Please, make it 1:1 and pocketable 😀
LOL! Damn you are right I forgot that short, minimum focal distance is a MUST, too. Internal focusing…and…..
Don’t forget the leather stuff pouch, with pleather option for the animal friendly!
The metal lens hood must be included too 😉
I’m afraid you’re going mental there, it’s clearly a physical impossibility with m43rds 😉
I know I am being sarcastic…but EVERY time a fast lens is mentioned there are all of these posters demanding that it be ultra high-quality when wide open, they want it small small, AND inexpensive. Its sooo funny. It annoyed me today!!!!! LOL! What you get is the Mitakon…and even that piece of junk is too expensive for these whingers!
Ha ha! I know! We always hope that sarcasm can help some people to think twice before asking silly things.
Its already available: Pana 42.5 f/1.2?
We need longer FL than the Nocticron. Maybe Oly will resurrect the 55/1.2.
Make it the 17mm. There is no decent 17mm m43 lens yet, nothing weatherproof or pro quality either with this important FL. So it makes more sense than yet another portrait lens. We have enough quality portrait lenses.
It would be nice if these lenses were made in the 3 classic focal lengths. That would be cool!
I do not believe that there is a need for a 1.2 lens but if there is going to be one I agree that the most logical one would be with a 17mm for very low light street and event photography. and It should have a clutch with a real dof scale. Personnally I think a high performing 17mm with a 1.4 aperture would make more sense than a max F1.2
Thumbs up for a PRO 17mm 1.4, I’ve been waiting to buy one.
And waiting, and waiting, and eyeing the Sony RX1 for its sublime lens.
Wide fast prime. Rectilinear. Between 7-9mm. Auto Focus. Weather Sealed. I’ll buy it.
Just don’t ask for small at 7-9mm F1.2. 🙂
You’ll notice I didn’t. But to be honest, I’d be happy with F/2.8
I want a 14mm as equivalent of (28mm) in FF . As we all know the fastest one is only lumix lens with an F 2.4 .
If they can make it like the 17mm or 12 mm in design with pull out clutch mechanism , it will be great also F 1 will be awesome.
Is the 15mm f1.7 too much wide for your need?
Well, i think the is natural by, 25mm F1.2 and also water pro.?
Which triplet would you prefer:
The classic, but well covered:
14 or 17.5, 25, 42.5
Or something a little different:
10.5, 20, 67.5
I’d like either, but might prefer the latter, given what’s already available.
evergreen: 14, 25, 65
10.5 and 20 are definately some of my favorite focal lengths. I would add 40mm then the 67.5mm.
My favorite lenses: P14 w/ wide adapter (about 11mm), and the classic P20, next one, to me the 45mm is a bit too long, would like something around 40mm or a little less. I use a FL55mmf1.2 w/ speedbooster (about 39mm) and I prefer this focal length over 45mm, then 67.5mm sounds OK. I like using my 85mmf1.4 w/ speedbooster (about 60mm). I might get a sigma 60mm f2.8
I would certainly prefer 10.5, 20, 67.5 but I don’t know if that has particularly universal appeal.
An f/1.2 67.5 would be a darn interesting lens. My take one of the normalish focal lengths would be a useful tool but I couldn’t see myself buying 3 or 4 f/1.2 lenses. For me, since I have the PL25 f/1.4 I’d probably prefer the 17.5. But a 67.5 would be dang tempting.
I like the idea of classic line like the Voigts… 10.5, 17.5, 25, 42.5… I’d buy the 10.5 and 17.5… I feel the 17/1.8 could be “more pro” in build and optical quality, so I’d be interested in upgrading.. I don’t have an UWA, so, easy choice…
As for 25 and 42.5/45… crowded field… I already have both the Voigt 25 and the Oly 25/1.8 and there are plenty of 42.5-50’s out… I have the Oly trusty cheapo 45, but also the excellent 50/2.0 Four Thirds lens (weather sealed, macro and sharp as my 75)…
Oh, options!
Sigma patented a 25mm f1.2, this could be it.
http://www.43rumors.com/new-sigma-patent-shows-a-new-25mm-f1-2-and-f1-8-micro-four-thirds-lens-design/
Good catch! I think the 75mm was also designed by Sigma.
Sounds cool, but will only be worth buying if sharp at 1.2
I would love a 25mm and 45mm 1.2 version.
17mm as well, but less needed (for me).
And of course they HAVE to stay small and light. That’s why I’m onto M43 in the first place.
If they are big and heavy, I’ll pass.
These lenses are a stop faster than their f/1.8 counterparts, so simple physics say they will be noticeably bigger and heavier, especially if they make an uncompromising optical design. I’m expecting them to be in the same ballpark as the Pana 42.5mm f/1.2.
It always makes me laugh…”I want TOP performance, and..yes…I need a dump truck…but I want it to be the size of a Mini (so I can fit it in my garage), and the cost of a Hyundai. It’s hysterical!!!
Please add waterproof to a depth of 40 meters and OIS! It’s killin me!!!!!!
I never said that. I simply said: If it’s going defeat the purpose of M43 in the first place, in terms of size and weight, then it’s not for my. That’s all.
A F1.2 lens is not going to be very small, not even on m43.
Look at Pana F1.2 lens(and then a little smaller because of no OIS).
And as long the Body+lens as a whole is compact and equivalent DoF and low light performance is comparable, then whats the problem?
Of course you can use a full frame system with a F2.0 lens to have better performance, but that certainly isn’t smaller, and as a whole certainly not cheaper.
It’s going to be big and EXPENSIVE. They ALWAYS are. Actually, I think that my 42.5 Nocti is not that big (even with OIS that I do not need), and I bought it on the Asian market for $1200. That is a bargain for that lens in my book, especially if you look at what is out there in all markets at that quality and aperture. I also think that the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 is relatively small for what it delivers, as well and at $700 v.I or $800 v.II on the Asian market ..it is a great buy as well for what it is and what is out there in the market for MFT and other systems.
(Note: the lens at the top of the page is STILL commanding $400-$500 on eBay!)
That’s right.
Compare any comparable focal length f1.8 with an f1.2 lens from any system and the size, weight and price differential is dramatic.
People should expect the same here.
I remember the patent being disclosed here a while back for 12mm and 14mm f1.0s. Hopefully they choose to go 12mm… 14 is just plain boring. Also a properly corrected and fast 17/17.5mm AF lens that’s actually worth purchasing would be awesome. The system definitely needs a couple excellent, ultrawide AF primes in the 7-10mm range but I don’t see anything faster then f2 really being necessary for such focal lengths.
Haha, I think they’re trying to make useful lenses, not exciting ones. A 12mm f1.0 is a really obscure kind of lens.
14mm seems more universally usable, but a lot of people like 17mm, so that’s pretty tight spacing…
Who knows, no matter what FLs they choose, someone will be unhappy.
Not f/1? Oh well.
It will need to perform good at f/1.2, be weather sealed, and be priced for the system, not for the marked aperture. As in, it can’t cost near as much as Canon’s 50mm 1.2.
Shouldn’t it be comparable in price to the Canon 100 f2?
The rumor states that they will launch an f/1.2 lens “line”, meaning probably a 25mm, 45~mm, 17mm~, maybe some others.
The M4/3 “PRO” 25mm f/1,2 should be priced right where it needs to be, between the 25mm f/1.8 and a full frame 50mm f/1.2. Closer to the 25mm 1.8 to justify its existence.
I suspect f/1.2 was a small compromise for higher performance and slightly lower cost.
Every f/1.0 or 0.95 lens I have tried does not perform well at full aperture.
You also have to allow for a professional grade AF motor which is going to make the lens bigger.
Would it be all that expensive to make an additional run of full manual lenses with the same optics, or more compact 1.4s?
Market them as PEN PROs [PROstalgia sounds medical…] – the optical jewel gestalt would complement PEN series’ duality as great photographic instruments on the one hand, and high end accessory on the other.
Separating cameras from smartphones is ever more vital – look at the resurgence of vinyl for one clue, among others.
They can’t do that because Sony limits the peaking and magnification options for manual focus lenses from the factory. Olympus cannot make a better manual focus experience than Sony A7, because Sony won’t allow it.
Straight from the rabbit hole
Interesting, how might that work? I use manual focus lenses for 98% of the time on my E-P5 and 100% on the A7, but the Sony gets so little to do that it’s hard to compare. However, the “lower” physical resolution and slightly better peaking seems to indeed make focussing a bit easier on the Sony.
The standard [50 years!] old PEN-F 38mm 1.8 is an absolute joy to use on the E-P5, though, if you have a really good specimen.
Sorry, not interested since these will be more expensive than FF lenses and corrupt the m43system. Better go FF, it is cheaper and shorter, maybe even lighter. m43 is mainly about compactness and weight. The current focal lengths with f1.8 makes more sense, improve those to Pro versions and the m43system is safe, since the m43system never was for those who want extreme f-stopps or shallow DOF. I like the m43system because it is humble and refined. The ones who want extreme specs never felt comfortable with m43.
that makes sense
Corrupt the m4/3 system? There are a lot of small lenses (and small camera bodies too) already for the system. Please show me where a canon 50/85 f/1.2 lens is cheaper and lighter than the Panasonic 42.5 f/1.2 lens? Combined with the weight of a FF dslr (which all are heavier than the heaviest m4/3 camera), there is no weight comparison. I for one would like faster glass, more professional grade glass to address that end of the spectrum. In order for the m4/3 system to evolve it needs to include as wide of a variety of glass as Nikon/Canon. It’s difficult to do since those two have been around much longer, but they are getting there. The last thing the system needs to make redundant f/1.8 lenses. Those exist already, they are very good, and they are affordable.
@ bryang206 & doomsterkent: f1.2 in FF never was about light gathering but shallow DOF. A f1.2 in m43 equals f2.4 in FF DOF, the canon 1.8/50 is about $100, the 1.2 Oly will be more than $1000. You are right that f1.2 in m43 is faster than f1.8 but not of much relevance in practice IMHO. m43 f1.2 only makes sense if tack sharp wide open, what I doubt. For bokeh better go with longer lenses IMHO. You are right that there are already very good f1.8 m43 lenses. The m.zuiko 25mm f1.8 that I own is great. Still I would like to pay more for a pro version if it was weather sealed. The m.zuikos 1.8/17mm and 45mm should be upgraded since they start to show age, why not as pro versions? I do not argue that some people would not be interested in extreme m43 lenses, but for me, there are other priorities in the m32system since I owned the excellent 75 and sold it due to its size..
I don’t see how you can just disregard their light gathering capability on lenses like that and only take into account the DoF it produces. That’s not a very objective view. Everyone has their reasons for needing particular lenses. I see those lenses as a part of quite a few wedding photographers kits; and it’s obvious, besides their shallow DoF subject isolation, having every little bit of light gathering counts to freeze that action especially in low light situations when shooting hand held. I have the PL42.5 f1.2, not only for getting me shallow DoF on m4/3 but also when shooting in low light situations (like when I shoot on set stills on films sometimes). ISO can only be pushed so far on m4/3. it’s great being able to gather more light to bump up the shutter speed w/o having to raise the ISO.
A 42.5mm F/1.2 lens on
mFT is exactly equivalent to an 85mm F/2.4 on FF with regards to DOF control,
effective AOV and critically total light gathering. And any of the current 85mm F/1.8 lenses at F/1.4 will easily
outperform the Panasonic when on a FF body. Here is the 75mm F/1.8 Olympus compared to the cheap Nikon 85mm F/1.8G .Wide open at the extreme edge the Nikon can outresolve the 75mm at its highest centre score. Amd this is on an old 24mp body, it would be higher still on the 36mp bodies
Sensor resolution plays a big factor in how well a lens does on these tests. The E-M5ii in high-res mode outresolves the D810 ever so slightly.
Also, it’s not a fair comparison to compare the PL42.5 f1.2 to the Canon 50 f1.8. How much longer has Canon been around? They’ve had many opportunities to come out with the same focal length lens (at different f-stops), and having multiple lens manufacturers coming out with competing 50mm lenses for one camera only drives down the cost. Do you honestly think the the 50mm 1.8 has the same optical/build quality as the PL42.5 f1.2? Other than shallow DoF I fail to see where the Canon beats it. Sharpness wide open? Build? Image stabilization? As crazy as it sounds there are photographers out there that will pay a premium for corrected optics and better build quality regardless of how big or small the difference is. If they want the best, they’ll pay for the best.
No intention to be unfair here and I agree with the most you say. My point is, that a technical discussion will never come to an end. I am just too long in photography that – for me – extreme specs became irrelevant and I appreciate the m43system for what it was so far. I have different views and I’d not like to see if the f1.8 lenses became the inferior cheap lens line and I would be forced to carry a f1.2 lens for optimum IQ. Honestly f1.2 would be interesting for seeing what technically is possible and I certainly would get GAS. But for my purposes the versatility of the smaller combos make more sense and I wish to improve those. If you have reason for a faster lens line and Oly sees a market there, then go for it, no problem. But please Olympus, do not forget those who want small great lenses. It is those people who supported Oly for years and Oly’s success is based on.
Then you can go with FF…
F-stop not only for DOF but more importantly for faster shutter speed. The super fast prime can allow you able to get better shot on dim light situation .
About the size F1.2 prime for M4/3 still much small and lighter than FF system.
If you want compact f1.8 prime we already have lots of choice on the market.
Trying to understand what you mean by corrupting. Is this similar to what some Sony a7 shooters see as f/2.8 lenses corrupting the E-mount turning the format into essentially and large dslr?
That’s what’s great about these systems. M43 or Sony FE- they can be used as compacts or semi pro tools with good ergonomics.
Speak for yourself. M4/3 are used by pro photographers and videographers alike. I am a professional videographer who uses the M4/3 system, and have worked with hte best in Begium, who also uses M4/3. Then, there’s Anurag Sharma who is one of the best documentary wedding photographers that I’ve seen in the UK. Bottom line: M4/3 is a professional system, and I have shot weddings both with Full Frame and M4/3, yet I’d take my M4/3 system every time. People forget about other benefits of M4/3 too, like its ability to focus at stupidly short distances.
I wasn’t disagreeing with you.
This is not even rumor, mere speculation. 43rumors is now like a dried up well.
Is this upcoming lens a sincere attempt at more light gathering for low light situations, or an attempt at creating less DoF?
Yes!
Wot?
Yes, Sir
Sorry, couldn’t resist:
Tower: “Have you got enough fuel or not?”
Pilot: “Yes.”
Tower: “Yes what??”
Pilot: “Yes, SIR!”
Humor! On a m43 (wtf???) site!!! An unexpected treasure!
ehh…. both?
Uphill job (DoF) if you aim at 50mm eq focal length.
i hope its a 12, 14, or 17mm
The PanaLeica 42.5 f1.2 is nearly the best lens ever, if they get near that I will be very happy and poorer.
Only if you look at other mFT lenses compared to a lot of cheap FF options on FF cameras { with better DOF and gathering more total light }. Images are lens + camera and this is why larger formats win out every time
No, they don’t “win out every time”. Properly optimized for m43’s strengths, and depending on your needs [OK, my needs], a m43s combo will be better suited to getting results. Minimum DOF is one technique – it gets tired quickly if abused, in my humble pixelations.
They win out every single time in all aspects of image quality,
be it DOF, tonality, resolution, DR as I say camera plus lens is all that
matters. Assuming reasonably similar sensor generations. You are talking about convenience an aspect of mFT that I personally value greatly but it is nothing to do with image quality.
That’s why I wrote “getting results”, and enjoying myself. Noone has ever written to ask what camera I use [95% E-P5, 5% A7], but rather to comment on the style of photography. Plenty of people appreciate a Nikkor NOCT even though Hubble’s up there.
A “good enough” arguement is always going to be a personal choice. All systems are a balance between maximum image quality and size/weight. I am a dual system user Panasonic mFT and Nikon FF both have their own strengths and weaknesses , I agree totally that for fun mFT wins hands down
Interesting. Am awaiting a pre-AI Nikkor 35mm from Japan. And totally trying to keep my weight in check! =P There’s something else that matters a lot, and that’s “Gestalt” of a system.
…Sort of.
The Nocticron is very nearly as sharp at f1.2 as a Canon 85/1.8 is at f1.8 when you take into account the 4x larger sensor (it has 75% more resolution when you don’t take that into account).
However, stopped down to f4 the Nocticron is sharper in the center and across the frame than you can ever achieve with the Canon at any aperture. So it’s more versatile, in some ways, being an exceptional short telephoto prime.
http://www.lenstip.com/394.4-Lens_review-Panasonic_Leica_DG_Nocticron_42.5_mm_f_1.2_Asph._P.O.I.S._Image_resolution.html
http://www.lenstip.com/291.4-Lens_review-Canon_EF_85_mm_f_1.8_USM_Image_resolution.html
Not to mention build quality, aberrations, bokeh, focus speed, OIS, and other Nocticron advantages. But yes, you need to pay an extra $1000 for those, which offsets to an extent the far greater cost of FF bodies.
So there’s some advantage to FF, but it’s not nearly as big as many think.
Ah, the much loved Lenstip the last bastion of the little
sensor guy as their unique methodology favours smaller sensors. The bottom line is that a cheap 85mm F/1.8 such as the Nikon 85mm F/1.8g on a FF camera will easily out resolve the very best lenses available for mFT. Just to come close to FF a mFT lens must double the resolution of a FF lens assuming the same MP number. Considering bar one the entire mFT camera range is stuck at 16mp and FF is now hitting 36,42 and 50mp there is simply no way to compensate for the smaller lower res mFT sensor enough with any lens design .
Looks like, you do not know… E-M5 II hits 63mp. Almost doubles the D8XX resolution. And those “cheap” 1.8G Nikkors are far from perfect in optical terms.
That is a rather silly statement if pixel density on the
sensor was the most important thing then mFT would not be at the races. I never stated that the F/1.8g lenses were perfect none the less in combination with the FF Sony sensors in their FF cameras the end result is higher resolution than any mFT is capable of, along with the larger sensor advantages better DOF control, better DR, better tonality and so on.
Your statement is even more silly than mine… You just losing your plot. And keep repeating about DOF… This time as a better control… I simply answered to your claim regarding resolution numbers you quoted. 😀
P.S. E-M5 II has, I believe, Sony sensor 😉
Lenstip, Photozone, whoever you pick that shows real numbers (rather than just subjective “Excellent” “Good” “Fair”) all tell the same story, they just are presented differently. They are also easily converted from one metric to another. lw/ph is just lp/mm divided by 2 and multiplied by the sensor height.
Lenstip just happens to have an exhaustive and quantitative list of samples to choose from. Photozone simply hasn’t tested Nocticron yet. You can compare the 75mm/1.8, and you get 3095 lw/ph for the 75/1.8 vs. 3554 for the Nikon 85/1.8, and 3082 for the Canon 85/1.8. So yes, this says exactly what I said otherwise, and in the past – you can get a very real 15% resolution improvement from shooting with (some) FF cameras. Awesome. Too bad for Canon 5D Mk II users, your 21MP sensor can’t actually resolve better than a 16MP M4/3 sensor, apparently…
Note also that those “cheap” $400-500 f1.8 lenses on FF are almost as sharp as you get in those systems unless you’re graduating to an Otus. The Nikon 85/1.4 is no sharper at f2 than the 1.8 lens is. The Canon 85/1.2 is a bit sharper when stopped down to f2, but now you’re paying $2000 to shoot at f2. Great!
As for you final comment, saying that “bar one the entire mFT camera range is stuck at 16mp” when there is a camera (and clearly many more to come) that has 20MP is like saying. “Bar one, the entire Nikon FF camera range is stuck at 24MP” or “bar one, the entire Canon FF camera range is stuck at 22MP.” Super useful statement, isn’t it?
.
The Nikon D800,D800e, D810 and D810a all shoot at 36mp you can also use the Nikon lenses on the Sony A7R or A7R11. I have the gx8 it is a great camera and it is the only 20mp mFT camera on the market . If you are chosing to pick random out dated sensors such as that on the 5Dmk11 it is much better thn the dated 12mp mFT sensor of the same time. The point is you will get better results from the F/1.8g lens than any mFT combination
Nothing that I’ve said denies any of that. I was mentioning the 5D Mk II only because that’s what the test data was using. Also, it says something because there are still a lot of pros using 5D Mk IIs, and so if a 16MP M4/3 camera and lens can compete with that output even in terms of resolution, isn’t that useful to know?
Obviously larger sensors give more resolution and better resolutions. Obviously! But I think people frequently overstate that benefit. You can get a modest benefit over M4/3 (say 15% resolution, as shown) by using cheap lenses like the 85mm/1.8 on a 24MP full frame sensor. But to get a large advantage in perceived sharpness you’re going to need to spend a large amount of money.
And again, you’re right that the Nocticron costs 3x the Nikon. But a D810 costs 3x what a pro M4/3 body costs, or in real numbers, $2000 more dollars. You can buy a few lenses for that difference, after all!
I totally agree but for me, I get very acceptable results using my EM-1’s and the BEST m43 lenses. At base ISO with a Nocticron or 75 f1.8 I can get close but once the light drops and ISO goes up, its game over.
That said, I have handheld some great indoor theatrical images on m43 which printed up nicely.
As a Nikon user for years, I love Nikon gear and I miss its capabilities occasionally but I don’t regret switching to Olympus. Its taken me a year to get used to the EM1 (the on/off switch was the worst)….. but as I get more comfortable with the system, I feel I’m getting results ‘close’ to my D3 …. ‘most’ of the time 🙂
“However, stopped down to f4 the Nocticron is sharper in the center and across the frame than you can ever achieve with the Canon at any aperture. So it’s more versatile, in some ways, being an exceptional short telephoto prime.”
In the center, yes, across the frame, not quite. The 85 1.8 achieves the equivalent of 72 lp/mm at f/8 where the Noctitron only ever hits 68 lp/mm. Whether you can actually directly compare these numbers in this way to get a useful comparison of the glass is an entirely different story though.
Who cares when photon density per pixel is same regardless of the format?
4/3 sensor already has over 11% better dynamic range than best 35mm sensor (before A7rII) and about 15-20% better quantum efficiency so it doesn’t matter!
Remember, we still get same exposure for 1/4 of the sensor size!
haha, you are talking about dynamic range and QE, but have no idea about basic physics. It’s just funny around here ^^
It would be funny if it was not quite so sad
according to sensorgen.info the gh4 has a Qe of 56% and the a7s
65% the full frame camera clearly wins ^^
Not sure what this is, but 5D m2 has 31% and 5D m3 has 51% 🙂
we already have a 50mm equivalent 1.2 with autofocus on m43 made by panasonic. The Olympus should really be 1.0/0.95 Voigtländer shows how to do it 🙂
I think that the difference will be a full line of Olympus f/1.2 prime lenses designed for the Micro 4/3 format with high performance auto-focus for still photography. So they will be smaller and sharper.
I shoot mainly video so I really don’t want anything sharper, as I generally find Micro 4/3 lenses to be too sharp for video.
Do you mean 25mm f/1.4 pana leica, or 42.5mm f/1.2 pana leica? Or they’ve released another super fast prime?
That
would be the Olympus fanboy “equivalent ” where amazingly you can
complete the first half of the sum by multiplying the focal length by the 2x
crop factor while ignoring the effect on aperture { DOF, total light gathering etc}.
This will be a no doubt overpriced lens that gives us the same result as an
F/2.4 50mm lens on FF at probably multiple times the cost . Baring in mind that
there are very good 50mm F/1.8 lenses such as the Nikon F/1.8 that already costs
half the price of the Olympus 25mm F/1.8
I’m not sure why people keep roaming MFT sites and trolling it’s users with their FF supremacy. Why can’t people just enjoy whatever the fuck they enjoy. Christ..
Good news, at least system continues to grow. I’d vouch for a 17.5 f/1.4 personally, I’d use that more than any other lens, maybe panasonic will make one in future. I’m sure some people will find use in 1.2 lenses, but I probably won’t be able to afford it for some time (i’m guessing 1000$+ price tag from the start). Also, i’m super sad that Sigma doesn’t want to bring it’s amazing Art line up to MFT. I look at those lenses on FF, and I can’t help myself being a bit jealous that we don’t have it 🙂
Edit: I think it makes sense for Olympus to make a fast 50, they only have 1 in their line up, most makes usually have 2 versions of a 50mm, a cheaper 1.8, and a faster 1.4 or 1.2, so they might do the same.
OK
This sounds interesting .
It looks like the Nocticron finally have a true rival .
Make it a 50mm F1.2 & I’ll definitely get it .
What do you think a 50mm/1.2 Olympus can do that a 42.5mm Nocticron doesn’t?
I guess it will be weather-sealed, but it’s unlikely to be much cheaper. And the Nocticron is currently the best M4/3 lens yet from an optical point of view, so if you are expecting more resolution than that, you should probably just buy a larger format camera. Or confirm that you’re actually printing larger than 20×30″ on a regular basis…
It will probably be cheaper because it won’t have the OIS. You’re forgetting that Oly 75 1.8 is considered (and rated) the second best lens on the system, and it’s half the price of the 42.5. I think Oly can make a lens that is at least equivalent to the Pana leica, but cheaper, and maybe weather sealed.
It won’t be cheaper if it’s at the same aperture and weather sealed. The 75/1.8 is a superb lens, but it’s also 1 stop slower than the Nocticron. Speed costs money. Just look at the new Panasonic 25/1.7, which is 1/3 the price of the PanaLeica 25/1.4…
Seems like the focal length difference between 42.5/1.2 and 75/1.8 would balance out dof effect, relatively. Maybe the 42.5 will be more useful and functional
Again, Oly doesn’t need image stabilization systems and the R&D that goes into developing one for a lens. I agree that speed costs money, so taking the same speed (1.2) but minus OIS (R&D and the actual electronics/motor), you get a smaller price tag.
Don’t hold your breath too long buddy, it won’t do you any good. Those bright primes are very likely going to be branded “Pro” and if it’s a bargain you want, guess what, you won’t get it. You won’t.
The pro fish eye is just a couple hundred cheaper than the Nocticron. The pro 40-150 is actually more expensive. A m.zuiko pro 1.2/45 will cost a lot, despite lack of OIS.
We’ll see when they come out. I’m not saying they will be cheapo samyang level lenses. I’m just saying it will probably cost less than the Pana leica when it was released.
Also, get your facts straight, a weather sealed, recently released 40-150 pro zoom is 1499$, the wide pro zoom is 1299$, and the fish eye is 999$. Pana Leica is 1599$, i’m looking at the official oly/pana listings.
Yes, at B&H the nocticron sells for $1,599.99, the 40-150 f2.8 $1399.00 and the 8mm f1.8 is $899. Your maths sucks big time.
Well, I think the AF would be slightly superior…
I’ll get it as well at that focal length
a 17.5-25mm F1.2 would be my dream lens. Puts it right in the sweet spot. 35mm-50mm for FF.
Great. Sign me up for a 12.5 and 25 1.2
Rarely useful without a global shutter. And for sure much more expensive than f/2.4 primes for FF.
Yes, but the f/2.4 primes for FF are way more cheaper than f/0.15 primes for FULL FRAME!
Oh hold on!
Sorry but f/1.2 is always f/1.2 and pass same light amount as f/1.2 regardgless of the focal length or sensor behind it (excluding transmission changes).
But hey! Remember that after f/2.8 every 35mm sensor doesn’t anymore get anymore light, they simply boost the signal without you knowing it. All your “FF” lenses after f/2.8 are stuck to f/2.8 and you are just fooled by secret ISO boosting all the way up to f/1.2!
Oh boy, the amount of Bullsh** in your post is too high. And since you are trolling, I won’t even correct you.
He’s trolling of course, but the physics are correct. For the same angle of view, an f/1.2 lens for m43 has about 1/4 of the front area of an f/1.2 lens for a 135 system. Thus collecting 4 times more light onto the sensor.
The only problem is, these 135 systems are large and heavy and often obtrusive.
As someone wrote in this or another m43 discussion, if you want the best image quality, there’s always Hubble out there. (Giant sensors, giant lens on that one)
“Sorry but f/1.2 is always f/1.2 and pass same light amount as f/1.2”
Wrong, it passes the same intensity, but not the same amount in the same time because area of the image circle is ~4 times less on m43 compared to 135 format.
So what? The point is, doesn’t need to pass more light. If I need a glass of water, I pour just glass. Does not need a bucket for it 😉
And put under the same rain, a bucket will contain more water, simply because it has larger whole on top. 🙂
But I DO NOT NEED a bucket… Glass will do 😀
thats why ff lenses with speed boosters are so much fun!
Its not all about DOF …. Shutter speed is also a factor. I’ll take shutter speed over DOF anyday. You can get wonderful bokeh with the 75 f1.8 … same for the Nocticron and many other lenses.
Why the fixation with FF ?
Are there FF forums where medium format users bag FF because of their sensor size and limitations? FF is just a format …. like any other. It has advantages and disadvantages over both medium format and m43.
Life is a compromise …. go take some images.
The complexity of an m43s f1.2 is the same if not moreso to design than a full frame f1.2. The only difference is less raw materials being used but that cost isnt as significant as the rest of the manufacturing process is.
Smaller elements are much cheaper to manufacture, polish and cover with coatings. Smaller focusing groups require smaller, cheaper focusing motors. Almost every marginal cost of a lens scales with amount of the glass.
right but it seems pretty obvious that, barring cellphone sized lens elements, the manufacturing tolerances/manual Q&A required to make a high quality lens likely holds the lion’s share of the overall cost. That and economies of scale don’t work in m43’s favor.
It is very clear from lenses like $50 14-42/3.5-5.6 and $119 FF 50/1.8 that “manufacturing tolerances/manual Q&A” play no significant role in any cost. Even in developed countries the laborers cost $10-15/hour and can inspect 30-50 lenses per hour, for the total cost of a few cents per lens. And with proper manufacturing processes, tolerances are very low to begin with.
Smartphone lenses actually need MUCH MUCH higher mounting precision due to MUCH MUCH smaller pixels.
And if you have seen how the lenses are actually manufactured, most time is spent polishing glass elements in a machine, with time/machine depreciation, polishing materials, glass materials proportional to the size of the elements. BTW, cost of optical glass is not trivial either, especially given how much of it is lost in production of each element.
I don’t really see the point in those lenses. Everyone that needs the shallow depth of field and extrem light probably has gone Full Frame anyway.
Or if you want a mirrorless, the Fuji f/1.4 lenses offer even more than those speculated Olympus once.
For me µFT is about a nice and small. Those huge expensive lenses are only for sucking money out of some fanboys who need an ego boost
fast lenses are useful for low light shooting. It is true of course that in that respect an m4/3 camera with an f/1.2 lens will be par for the course with a Fuji f/1.4. So, it all depends on the size, quality, and price of the new Zuikos. Let’s wait and see.
I’d never exchange an olympus body for a Fuji. Just saying. Too gimmicky.
Bull! After a lifetime of lugging large 35mm / FF cameras and lenses, I switched (back) to Olympus to save weight. As a professional, I NEED fast lenses and I don’t care if they are a bit larger and heavier as they will still be 50% less than the FF equivalents.
Don’t worry, m43 will continue to make small f4 lenses for users like you but why bitch about them making f1.2 primes? You don’t HAVE to buy them.
Sorry but you should buy a smartphone as you want small and light!
4/3″ is always smaller and lighter with equivalent performance than larger formats!
Do you know how much would cost to have an 24mm f/1.0-1.2 for 35mm sensor? How big and heavy it would be?
M4/3 cameras are always smaller and lighter!
lol. I came from digital full frame (analog medium format before that), and yes, µFT is small and light. But not when you consider equivalence. I didn’t (back then) and my back thanked me.
a 25mm f/1.0 is equivalent to a 50mm f/2.0 lens on a full Frame body. Looking at the 50mm f/1.8 STM I do know the price (about 100$) and size.
Sure, the Olympus will be superior in any way, but it will probably be 10x the price and the size will be bigger too.
I hate how some here think, that µFT is the only (and superior) system and don’t know anything about physics
And I still shoot 8×10….
You are just stupid if you think that f/1 ratio changes light gathering per detail to something else because sensor behind it is different size!
It is regardless of the size! Is it 8×10 (or bigger!) or is it a 1/2.3″ (or smaller!).
Light gathering per detail is identical (it is God damn ratio! Not a value!) but depth of field is different, just as physics explains it!
For both, subject isolation as well as light gathering the entrance pupil is important.
So while a hypothetical 25mm f/1.0 will let more light per area (what you call “per detail”), the FT sensor is just 1/4 of the area. And in total amount of light is about the same (in comparison to a 50mm f/1.8 for full frame)
umad?!, M4/3 has already got “small and light” handled. I wouldn’t trade my 12-40 for anything. I bought into the system primarily because of the 20mm pancake and the great price to quality ratio on a lot of their offerings. I can “go light” any day of the week. I lost low-light and narrow depth of field capabilities in the trade, and I miss them, but not enough to go back. I’ve been looking for an “ultimate low light prime” to replace my 20mm, due to sluggish AF and banding issues, but nothing out there really sets itself apart. If they can keep the AF speed up, with reasonably sharp corners, I’d buy a 20 or 25mm f1.0, even if it’s huge. Then, I can drop my ISO a little, thin the DOF a little, miss my Canon a little less. Olympus is catering to people like me, who didn’t buy into m4/3 for size alone. Be happy with your small lenses. Let others rejoice at new gigantic lenses (without unnecessary OIS). As for equivalence, it only matters if you use other systems or are considering changing systems. For someone in m4/3, with no intention of changing, f1.0 is brings in more light and has thinner DOF than f1.7 for a given focal length. End of story.
The point is choice. We’ve got nice and small covered very well. It’ll be nice to also have larger aperture options. It’s not like these lenses are coming at the expense of nice and small options.
I like that i’ve got my pancake 20mm f/1.7 for when I want to go small, but also have my heavier SLR Magic 25mm T0.95 (still very small however!) for when I need the extra speed.
A system doesn’t have to just do *one* thing!
Omg yes!! Please finally give us an Astro lens!! 12mm f/1.2 <3
Finally. Olympus we need full set of weather sealed primes of the best optical quality. Fingers crossed they are the best prime lenses and professional quality that you have ever made. I can’t stand using a zoom in the rain just because it is one of my only weather sealed lenses.
Very fair point, I’d love to own the 75 f1.8 but a negative on a otherwise brilliant lens is the lack of weather sealing. I think for the price one pays this should’ve been a priority.
Disappointed in f/1.2. I wanted f/1 or faster. Shallow dof difficulty is the #1 drawback in m43, and f/1 or f/0.95 would have helped that.
If that’s so important to you then maybe m43 isn’t for you. 1.0 or faster with AF and solid corner performance? The lenses would be huge and crazy expensive. Absolutely not what m43 needs.
I’d be down for some normal wides (12-17mm range) and a Nocticron competitor. Please Oly, no 25mm lens we have enough already and honestly, I can’t see the value proposition in an Oly 25mm f1.2 that will likely cost about $1,000 when we already have the fantastic PL25 f1.4 that can easily be bought for $400 just about everywhere.
you mean you bought the PL25, and don’t want to have GAS because oly came out with a 1.2?
No, because there is no real value proposition to even new buyers who don’t own either lens since, it likely won’t be much sharper, the light gathering/DoF difference between 1.4 and 1.2 is pretty negligible and I’m sure the price for the new Oly will be close to $1,000 but you can get the PL25 for $400 easy.
It will be 25mm f/1.0 so your gas will strike,sorry. Then we have one more among 7 other 25mm.
But nothing like 17.5mm and 42.5mm or 67.5mm. Just 17mm, 45mm and then 100mm
17mm would make most sense because the fastest lens is currently 1.8. 25 and something wide (12, 14) are also possibilities. 45mm is too close to the Nocticron. Anything more tele is too niche.
I wonder what Pana will do? 12-50 4.0 maybe? And still no one wants my money because there is no compact 9mm.
Too close to the noct but i bet the oly will cost less than $1,000 whereas the noct is $1,600. I’d argue that oly making a 25mm 1.2 is a much worse idea since it would likely be about $1,000 and wont be that much better than th PL25 which can be found for $400.
12mm, 14mm, 17mm and 25mm would make most sense imho. 45/50 would also be doable but there is already the panasonic lens.
I doubt that the will bring 4-5 lenses of course, maybe 2 or 3.
Ans I expect them to cost more than 1000US$ each :’-(
very nice – hopefully it will be priced reasonably – not $2500 🙂 I would love to see a 90mm F1.2 or 50mm F1.2 – just please come out with a affordable lens – in the range of $200-700 – remember Oly that a F1.2 in M43 is not a F1.2 in FF or APS-C – so price accordingly – and it does not need to be weather sealed 🙂
Sadly sensor size doesn’t make complex lens design much or any easier.
90/1.2 for 200-700US$?
What do you smoke?
I agree that weather sealing isn’t necessary, and will keep the price down substantially.
I’d LOVE to see Oly offer their PRO lenses with a non-weather sealed option. No doubt they’d sell more.
Doesn’t sound like a well thought out strategy to me.
I guess they looking to replicate the four thirds lens line up maybe?!
Probably, but I would consider 1.4, 1.8 or even 2.0 as fast enough for practical use. Not sure about creating a new line of 1.2s and duplicating existing focal lengths.
In low light I am using Nocticron f1.2, and 17mm f1.8 If I could have a 20mm or 17mm f1.2 I will be very happy to work at ISO 3200 instead 6400 where the limit of the sensor is clearly visible. Hope Olympus will have a decent price for this lens, like 1200 usd.
Woohoo! 300mm f/1.2, weighs 50 kg and costs US$20,000.
Spring where??? This is the world. Spring in Japan would probably be most logical ….
Hoping for a 17mm Nocticron from Panasonic.
“hey will still be 50% less than the FF equivalents”
No, they won’t 😉
Disagree … An EM-1 (with battery pack) with a 50mm F1.2 will weigh a lot less than a D4 with a Nikkor 100 f1.2 (if it existed) and even if you want to use the stupid DOF chestnut.. it will weigh less than a D4 with a 100 F2.
Was hoping for F1.0 but if it makes the lens much smaller while keeping the IQ high, so be it.
8mm f1.2, 12mm f1.2, 25mm f1.2, 45mm f1.2
17.5mm f/1.2
Let them have their jollies. What else are they supposed to do with their sad lives?
It’s sad because I bet most of them are grown ass men, yet they remind me of gamer communities and their Holiwars. “Look at me, I’m smart and all knowing and you are not, neener neener, my purchasing decisions are the absolute and nothing else matters.” ridiculous
What about a 7mm and 10.5mm f2.8?
I think it’s great- I am excited but a few things. Fuji has the better lens line up all the way down to 14mm. They are all fast but do get pricey. The 25 and 45 neither have the build quality or all out speed and we have no ultra wide angle prime option which is ridiculous. Sony and fuji are also moving in the other direction by offering slower, smaller premium 1.8 or F2’s. So now Olympus will move in the opposite direction and try and compete.
You can get the new fuji 35mm F2 from fuji for 399.00 and it has a metal exterior. It also features 9 blades and is sharper then there previous 35mm 1.4. That price though. That’s what Olympus is up against.