Good Morning!
I finally sleep 10 hours and I am a bit more relaxed and “lucid” today. Yesterday I had to work at -15 Grad Celsius and than we had all those sensor rumors and discussions. I hope I can give you soon more updates about the image quality. The only thing I can tell you know is that a trusted sources (not Olympus marketing guys) tested the camera and said video quality is better than GH2 and image quality is definitely improved in JPEG (he didn’t test RAW). Of course those test had been made by a single person and you know that can be very subjective. So forget discussions about who made the sensor, how good/bad are the specs….we have to see the real images to see if can be happy or not!
Ok, let’s start to talk about a very good news. Olympus will announce two new Micro Four Thirds lenses that will be available early summer:
1) The 75mm f/1.8. It has a metal design. I haven’t seen that lens yet but I guess it has a similar 12-50mm finishing. It’s a perfect portrait lens!
2) The 60mm f/2.8 macro is weather sealed like the E-M5 body and has a close focusing distance of 0.19m.
I have no info about the price yet but those are definitely nice addition to the already good looking Micro Four Thirds lens range.
For my European friends: Watch out the new refurbished items at [shoplink 22691 ebay]Olympusmarket (Click here)[/shoplink]. They have all new E-PM1, E-PL3 cameras on auction!
Personal note: Thanks for all discussion we had yesterday. Will learn from your critics and suggestions. I already have taken some good decisions. Will tell you more about that after the E-M5 announcements. Thanks!
212 Responses
Cool
Lets have it.
F2 macro too big & too expensive
F2.8 (tamron sp 90 is f2.8) affordable, small enough for m4/3 body.
Oly colors, creamy oof.
Weather sealing says use outdoors : butterflies , crawlies et al
Not to mention that for macro work, the 2.8/60 will be stopped down most of the time..
Both sound like great choices to have. I want to wait and see what gives with the Panny 35-100/ 2.8 first though. Very happy with the 45/1.8, but the 75/1.8 sounds like it will priced like the 12/2.0. My family budget doesn’t cover such an expensive specialised lens!
Very nice additions as far as focal length goes. It’s nice to see that they continue to fill in the range. It’s their single biggest advantage over the competition! However, they need to stop with all these kit lens iterations and get a couple of fast zooms! Can’t wait to see what Panasonic’s fast zoom will do….
yup…serious fast zoom will be sweet…something equivalent to 70-20/2.8 or better
@admin…any rumors about fast zoom ?
These are very good focal lengths, so let’s hope the lenses are, too! If the the level of overall quality is on par with Oly’s 12mm and 45mm, that’ll be great!
I already have a Nikon 60mm f2.8D macro lens. It’s excellent for macro work and as a short telephoto/portrait lens. The Oly 60mm would have to be flat-out spectacular to beat it, especially given that macro shooting is better done with manual focus.
75mm is a good focal length too! It’s close enough to the classic 135mm to barely notice the difference. Voigtländer has a 75mm f1.8, which has gotten rave reviews and been on my short list of lenses, along with the 100-300mm, for quite some time. It’s nearly the exact same size as the Nokton 25mm, too! The Voigtländer is $715 from cameraquest, so the Oly will have to beat it in terms of build, image quality AND price for me to change my mind.
Either way, it’s great to see Olympus stepping up in the lens department!
I have confidence in Olympus primes. They have a long history of making world-class lenses.
Now for a 100/2 and a 150/3.5 or 4. Oh, and a 300/4.5. Then we’d really be talking.
The Voigtlander 75/1.8 is on my list too, but that’s a Leica M-mount lens, so don’t forget the added size & cost of the adapter. I’m waiting for Voigtlander to come out with a native micro 4/3 portrait lens. If you like shooting manual focus, there’s no way any autofocus lens, no matter how “pro” is going to feel as good as old school manual glass and metal.
Actually it shouldn’t be as expensive.
Medium telephotos are telecentric to begin with and relatively easier to design compared with wide-angles. For example, both Canon and Nikon produce stellar 85/1.8 lenses for 35mm fullframe under $500.
150m f1.8 YUMMY
Zuiko 85 f2 was nice.
This is gonna be as scrumptious as 45mm f1.8
Seconded!
Interesting, but I’m curious and a little disappointed that they didn’t go for a 62/f1.8 instead, replicating the classic fast 135mm portrait lenses… Having used the Pentax-M 150mm on film it always felt like a bit of a nothing length…
That would be a 68mm lens, right? 🙂
Um, yeah, gees I’m awesome at math 🙂
67.5mm actually.
Jesper, right. I was fixated on the macro!-) Apologies, Nick.
I think he meant the portrait lens not the macro one.
@Nick the problem is these two lenses will be to much alike in term of focal length.
Yep I meant the 75mm
Why is everyone replying to people in the future in past tense.
I loved the Sigma 150mm on my 5D2 for portrait work.
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=50604678@N02&q=150mm
135 vs. 150 doesn’t really matter, not a big difference.
telephoto prime!!
Can’t we get a fast 25mm? Cheaper than the Panny (preferably)
I don’t guess there’s anyway to make everyone happy. I actually want a more expensive 20 or 25mm f/1.4 to go along with this camera. I’d love to have a weather sealed standard prime built like the 12mm f/2.
Yes, a 25mm f1.8 (with better AF than the Panasonic 20mm) would be very interesting.
Personally, I would prefer a 90mm tele lens, maybe f2. 75mm is a bit too close to the 45mm. But that’s just me, YMMV 🙂
In the US, the Panny has gone as low as $450 new. How much cheaper can you expect for a fast focusing, 1.4 lens with pretty darn nice color and contrast? You can’t have everything for free, ya know.
There are already 2 superb, fast 25mm M4/3 lenses, the Leica 25mm and Voigtländer Nokton 25mm f0.95. At this point, it would be silly for Olympus to replicate that focal length. It’s a great move for them to fill lens gaps in the mid-range prime lens department. This has been one of the glaring shortcomings in the M4/3 lens lineup.
60mm and 75mm are really very usable, all-around lengths. Great move, Olympus!
+1
That depends on what the projected sales are. A third of the 25mm pie might be much larger than 100% of another focal length.
It’s pretty crowded around the 25mm focal length now for sure, but none of the current standard primes are weather sealed….which we will now need for a weather sealed body. And from a personal standpoint, I simply love the way Olympus constructed their 12mm f/2. I very much want an entire set of primes built to those standards (with weather seals added).
I would love to have an OM-5 kit with the following all metal weather sealed primes:
7mm f/2.8
12mm f/2
22mm f/1.4
45mm f/1.2
So the previous rumor (not by admin) about focal lengths was correct — but the aperture of the macro somewhat hyped… (said 1.8). Well, I guess that in macro operation, the DOF is already small, and Oly sell these LED lights to illuminate the snails and frogs…
The 75 — isn’t that longish for a portrait lens?? Ok, perhaps for gorillas in the zoo… And with 1.8, it will be a perfect concert lens! ESPECIALLY if the manual focus is improved!
Small DOF is the creavtive point by macro photo. 😉
… but as the subject becomes closer to the lens the DOF becomes shallower, necessitating smaller apertures (and good light). A large aperture will make the DOF unusably small, verging on becoming a “plane” of focus. So a dedicated macro lens is often not “fast”.
A short-telephoto lens for portraiture is used to minimize DOF and maintain a workable space around the subject. Lighting is for another day.
f2.8 gives you flexibility in terms of exposure. If it’s sharp by the time you stop down to f5.6, that’s good, especially if you prefer shooting in available light or have less than zero desire hump a heap of gear into the forest looking for mushrooms and crawly things.
There is a fine line between shallow DoF and usable DoF
Would you mind post the link?
I hope this 60mm is reminiscent of the highly regarded 50mm macro 43 lens. IOW, I hope it’s so sharp, it gets used for camera body testing (like it’s precursor, the 50mm macro 43 lens!-).
First !!!
I cant wait for the EM-5 ^^
Seriously, this kind of comments is pathetic…
+1000
it would be more of an accomplishment if you manage to post the LAST comment and brag about it 🙂
This entire rumor blog so far is a nice piece of viral marketing.
But be carefull, I think it is getting over the top.
The camera and its specs have been overhyped and many people will have a hard landing after the real thing shows up next week.
Even if there are evoltionary improvements, it simply cannot live up to the hype. In that case, the Oly marketing guys did not serve the purpose very well.
Yes I’m am currently trying to land but it’s difficult 😀 My money was ready for EM-5 but now I’m split…
Well, imagine an E-P3 (already great camera) with:
– Quite better sensor (better resolution and high ISO)
– Integrated EVF (and probably a pretty decent one at that)
– Weather sealing and solid construction
– Even faster AF (and better tracking of moving subjects)
– 9fps (and faster operation overall)
– Much better video
– Tilting screen
– New image processor
– Even better in-body IS
– Optional battery grip
– …??
So after the hype is gone, the disappointment might as well go. In the end we’re talking about a really good camera. And with the much better lens line-up since the E-P3 was released, it’s really a tempting option.
You seem to have gleaned the same as me from the basics being written here, and discarding the wishful thinking of some.
It looks like my next camera, but I will wait a while.
How do you know that the hype wasn´t created by competitors market departements? What better way to get new customers than over hyping a competitors products and then hoping that the customers will be disappointed enough, when the real specs are known, to choose an other brand.
@Rchard. yes, a much more interesting view.
We all know how much over hype leads to product disappointment, I hardly think Olympus benefits too much from this site in the long run. Just a lot of disappointed fans always. (Thank god, because I only have eyes for Panny lol)
Great. Fill the gaps in the lens line-up 🙂
I have the 45 F1.8 so another portrait lens isn’t too interesting to me. a short-tele macro though might be very interesting … if it’s priced closer to the 45 than to the 12 (which I also have and love … but blimey it was expensive)
I’m not clear on whether .19m focus on a 60mm lens would give full macro or not though….
Seems like 0.19m should be close enough for 1:1. The Nikkor 60mm macro goes to 1:1 and only focuses to 0.22m, so 0.19m should be at least as good.
I’m not sure whether the Oly lens would be considered 1:1 or 2:1 (given sensor size). I think it’s still 1:1, but the closely pixels give effect of magnification.
Also, because of the smaller sensor, the depth of field should be a little deeper with the Oly than a full frame 60mm.
Sorry, I’m not that good in physics (nor in english), but how can the depth of field get influenced by the size of the sensor? Isn’t it a characteristic of the lens (focal length, focus and the aperture) no matter what kind of sensor you put behind it?
I know that smaller sensors normally produce a smaller depth of field but isn’t it because of the smaller lens with its smaller focal length?
I’m really wondering because you’re not the only one who claims it and maybe you’re right and I just don’t get it…
“know that smaller sensors normally produce a smaller depth of field but isn’t it because of the smaller lens with its smaller focal length?”
Yes, I think that’s it !
“How can the depth of field get influenced by the size of the sensor”
Imagine you shoot an image of a persons head with a full frame camera on a tripoid with a 50mm legacy lens. Now you change to a camera with an smaller MFT sensor, but still use the SAME legacy lens. You will notice that with the full frame camera you had an image of the full head, but now, just the nose and parts of the eyes are in the image. What will you do? You wil take the tripoid, go some steps back and extend the distance to your model, until you have the whole head again covered in your image. It’s the change of the distance to your object, enforced by the sensor size, that changes the DOF.
Things just get difficult to understand because in real life you use a different lens.
P.S.: Of course, in the example above, if you change the lens instead of the distance to get the head again in the image, that also changes the DOF . It’s just more difficult to understand if you change the distance AND lens.
@Pipo, as you point out, the depth of field is determined by the lens characteristics (focal length, focus, and aperture). Those characteristics determine the diameter of the circle of focus. The shallower the depth of field on the subject, the smaller the circle of focus (i.e., the smaller area we perceive in focus) of the image projected by lens onto any sensor. So for a given focal length of lens (regardless of sensor size), the diameter of focus remains constant (physics) for a given plan of focus (where any sensor resides).
However, the size of the sensor controls the crop of the image onto any sensor. So a smaller sensor yields (effectively) larger depth of field since any smaller sensor crops the resulting composition more tightly around the in focus area. That’s why typical video cameras (with their tiny sensors) have such large depth of field — they capture a larger proportion of (or all within) the diameter of focus. It’s also one reason why videographers have been getting so excited by dSLR video cameras — the larger sensors yield a “unique” depth of field to the video giving videographers more artistic control over their depth of field.
For MFT (micro 4/3’s), our sensor is on the smaller size (compared to 35mm dSLRs). Because our sensor crops closer to the diameter of focus, our (cropped by the smaller sensor) image results in a composition which is relatively in focus (compared to a more generous 35mm crop). So the close crop of our smaller sensor captures less of the out of focus image (project by lens onto any sensor), yielding a larger proportion of in focus compositions.
So a 60mm lens yields a 60mm circle of focus yields a 60mm image projected onto any sensor. But for a given image, a smaller sensor will capture proportionally “more” of the in-focus image (than a larger, e.g., full frame sensor). In MFT case, we crop closer to the diameter of focus but with some room for out of focus capture (i.e., outside the diameter of focus) — with the compositional effect of capturing a larger depth of field (but really, it’s just the same image cropped closer to the same diameter of focus by our smaller MFT sensor).
So the smaller sensor does not change the diameter of the in focus image projected by a lens onto a sensor, but the smaller sensor will crop the in focus composition to a larger proportion of the composition. That’s the effective “increase” of depth of field for smaller sensors. That’s also why smaller sensors are less attractive for shallow depth of field than full frame sensors; full frame sensors capture more out of focus material beyond the usual diameter of focus. So smaller sensor, smaller crop, and less out-of-focus composition surrounding the in-focus subject.
So your physics/image perception is correct, but the smaller sensor adds a crop to the image projected onto the sensor — which affects the final captured (cropped) composition. And that crop results in a compositional “increase” in effective depth of field.
Have you ever done macro? F2.8 on a 60mm is almost as shallow DOF as the 50mm F2.0 on the (m)43.
In Macro this is often allready too shallow.
I have the Zuiko 50mm F3.5 with extension tube and man you would want to stop down on insects else you only have one leg in focus ;-).
Joking aside F2.8 on 60mm is shallow enough for for some serious work.
Also I like 60 iso 50 since you can be further away from some subjects you don’t want to come too close to to avoid disturbing them.
yes I think it stays 1:1 (same projected size on the sensor) but the equivalent focal length is double and field of view will be half as sensor width is half…
45mm is too short for portraits for me, a 75mm is much better.
that depends on personal preference of the photographer, I think the general rules are good for a beginner to start with, and after the experiences, the choice for your fav focal lenght can be chosen. (btw a portrait can be a close-up as well as a halfbody or full figure shot of the subject). I like the 28mm,50mm,85mm(i prefer to use the classic FF lenghts instead of halve them for FT) and I have seen a guy doin GREAT full figure shots with a 300mm lens.
I will happily add the 75mm to my camera bag! Perfect to blur the background and no need to stand so close to the person when taking portraits.
Yeah i hope the will be a nice lens.
Morning Admin,
You have any idea about the frame rates in video (EM-5)? 25p/50p 1080p in PAL like Nex-7 has for example?
Thanks for the good work!
no. But I will ask now.
No specs yet. But should get more info soon.
If it does 60p and PDAF then they will still have impressed the whole community even the dreamers – like me 🙂
75mm f1.8 sounds delectable. But I’d expect a price around $600
The macro is usefully long too. I think we should be expecting some nice lenses from Olympus from here on out.
Don’t forget to add $50 for the optional lens hood! 🙁 Damn Olympus!
It’s good to see interesting new m4/3 lenses. Will make it harder for me though to justify spending my cash on the E-M5, when there is such a wide range of interesting lenses.
Choices. Choices.
i need a 17 1.2 lens, dankeschön
I agree 17mm is needed. What is the point of a small weather sealed camera, if it does not have a good walk around prime. This will be a good hiking / travel camera – it needs a good hiking / travel lens. 17mm.
A weather sealed 25mm would also be good.
Yes
crop factor kills those announced lenses, much too long
I think macro is enhanced by the crop factor… like getting a 2:1 macro + more (apparent) depth of field. Both potentially nice bonuses when shooting macro.
We alreay have the nice 45mm f/1.8 if you need a shorter focal length.
We all know about the crop factor. We all know about the trade off and advantages.
And if there is a market for those lenses, then it is simply not too long. Fact is, it is about time they produce anything beyond 45mm, except for slow zooms.
Too long? No such thing
Agree, I would have personally preferred a 100 f/2.0… but the a 75 f/1.8 still sounds damn nice.
But, I can see from your peter’s name these would be too long for him 😉
Oh no, the opposite. These focal lengths are very much needed. I will be buying both.
The 1.8/75mm is definitely good news.
From all what i can see so far, the EM-5 data is rather disappointing.
Oh My – Goodness… According to Google Translate, in Spanish this is: Oh Mi – Dios :-). Italian?
Italian : Oh mia – bontà… Well, doesn’t fit.
Will the real E-M5 be a disappointment? Perhaps for those who really believed in the hype. But for sane people or people who have experienced a cold winter day already, probably no disappointment: we know the E-M5 will not be perfect. And we know the NEX-7, the X-Pro 1, the GH3, etc. are/will not be perfect either.
Check this out:
http://admiringlight.com/blog/micro-43-vs-a-full-frame-legend/
The GX1 has every bit as good IQ as the mighty 1Ds mk II, except for a TINY bit less dynamic range (but including high ISO!).
This bodes well for the E-M5.
Yes, the GX1 sensor is pretty good at high ISO, comparable to any full frame sensor (as long as you care about FoV, DoF and shutter speed, which normally you care about).
To match a shot between for example the GX1 and the 5DmkII:
GX1: 25mm, f/1.4, 1/60, ISO 1600
5DmkII: 50mm, f/2.8, 1/60, ISO 6400
Those two shots will share the same FoV, DoF and shutter speed. And which one will have better quality? About the same.
The problem with the GX1 sensor is when you compare at base ISO for the maximum quality for a large prints. With the 5DmkII at ISO 100 and the GX1 at ISO 160, the difference is very noticeable (if you pixel-peep into shadow areas).
Looking at these comparisons, I’m not sure any more that Oly were forced to use the GX1 sensor. It seems very well possible that Oly could have used the GH2 sensor, but by their own choice opted for the GX1 sensor because that one has clearly the better high ISO performance.
Looks like ISO 3200 will be very well usable with the E-M1 🙂
I think they didn’t go for the GH2 sensor because they would have needed to redesign the IBIS around a bigger sensor.
I would prefer a shorter macro. I don’t want tele perspective on the three dimenional stuff I shoot in my studio. Currently I still use the ZD 35/3.5 most of the time but I would welcome a similar lens for m4/3 with distortion correction. The ZD 35/3.5 is sharp but has significant distortion, which sometimes can be a problem.
But this is better for butterflies,dragonflies…
There is already an PL 45mm macro.
The PL 45 mm is still a little long for my use and way too expensive for what it is.
use ZD 35mm with MMF-2. Its a great and cheap macro.
Read my original post above!
You still have the manual slr magic one
1:1 internal focus barrel never comes cheap, unfortunately.
Correct
Not interested, but I think that’s very good news. Lens lineup is rounding up nicely, with a couple of more body shapes this is going to be one hell of a system…
Hehehe LOL
Is this a 1:1 macro lens? (The Zuiko 50mm Macro is 1:2 right?)
If this is a 1:1 macro lens, I am very happy!
Hello Admin,
are there any zuiko wheater sealed telephoto zoom lenses?
no
Well, that depends on which Zuiko:
original Zuiko (OM-mount): no
DSLR Zuiko (ZD): yes, 50-200, 90-250, 35-100
m4/3 Zuiko(m.ZD): no, but Panasonic will announce 35-100 soon
Where’s the high-quality wide-angle in black that would match the body?!?!
Test sample a 12mm F2. !
That’s too wide, too much distortion, not a very common perspective. I need an allrounder, a 35-equivalent.
20mm F1.7
or even, dare i say it, the 17mm F2.8…
Ok so we all wish it was F2 but 2.8 is not by any means unusable!
But why not a 17mm you can take in the rain?
Bingo. Rain, snow, waterfalls, rafting… These are places and conditions where I really want to have a camera, especially one that can be operated with gloves on. Weathersealed small, wide, primes are high on my list.
The 75 sounds neat, but all metal suggests it will be expensive. I’d love to see the 17mm and 20mm pancakes refreshed with improved aperture and faster focusing, respectively. If I could get a fast pancake in the fifty mm range i’d never need a zoom again.
Both are nice. I was hoping for 90mm but…
Will probably go for both. Macro should arrive soon. Spring will be coming soon, too.
Good day to you admin, and thanks for your hard work.
I’m one happy bunny with this post – if you strip away the hype and the way Oly seem to have deliberately (deceptively?) raised expectations, then the EM5 is about as good as it gets in m43. And now we seem to be getting a fast 75mm which will fill a big optical hole in my present outfit.
A wideish and a normalish weather proofed pancake please ?
For me the most used lenses will continue to be the two panny pancakes. If oly could replace those with something weatherproofed i’d be happy. (I live in the city in europe with most rain. Last year we had over 3000mm !)
Or something in the line of the 14-42 X only wp’d I.e. a normal that is very collapsible
Bergen?
Yes
“Gåmann” 3000mm ;-), but i need also waterproof camera.
Wow, hvor stor andel er fra Bergen her?
Godt spørsmål.
Sounds like what you really need is an underwater housing ;-).
You don’t want weatherproofing, you need and underwater housing.
I guess they are filling the gaps at the long end, but a little surprised they are both similar range. I’m another looking for a better pancake than the 20mm (better AF and Video). Looks like the 25mm 1.4 will be next for me. Pity, was hoping for another Olympus lens. /violins
+1
It’s a pity the 25/1.4 is much bigger than the 45/1.8. Doesn’t really make sense to me.
Admin, any rumors for 12mm, 45mm end this new primes in black?
I thought 75mm means 150mm F1.8 .
Forget it as it doesn’t make point to have it once you owned a 45mm F1.8 .
Save $$$$ for long range lenses .
It’s not possible to compare like that. The FOV would be like a 150mm on FF at least on normal focus distance (say 10 feet). The DOF at 10 feet is comparable to FF 150mm f/3.6. However, at closer focus distance it’s different
The difference between 45mm and 75mm is quite large. Working distance is a lot further away with 75mm and DOF is way shorter (apprx a third).
75/1.8 is very good news! 🙂
I love using my old zuiko 85/2 – the 75/1.8 would be a nice replacement.
75/1.8 is perfect for indoor cultural events such as concerts, theater, et. I’ve used the 45/1.8 for such things: leaning on the stage, 5 m from the artist, the lens covered half the body; with the 75, you could get close-ups.
+1 on that. The 45/1.8 is ideal for dance and theater performances, as long as you’re in a small theater; in a large theater, you need something longer because you’ll be farther from the stage.
In these situations I’ve been using a 100mm f/2 Canon rangefinder lens plus an adapter; it will be nice to be able to switch to something that has AF (and, I hope, a slightly more compact size.) If it has the same image quality and AF speed as the 45/1.8, it will be exactly what’s needed.
I think I will love that 75 1.8
I just wondder if it will be sealed too, i really hope so.
I cannot for the love anything decide why anyone would want a telephoto lens as narrow a field of view as a 150mm. I think 135mm is already pushing the edge. 150 is even narrower.
Landscape – 300mm f4.5 (film)
http://farm1.staticflickr.com/95/278524528_85c4593fe9.jpg
I agree with the idiot. A fast 135mm eq. makes more sense, and be much more useful. Wouldn’t want anything longer for portraits. A nice landscape like that is silly to use F1.8. Tho it could be a winner for concerts and perverts.
That says more about you than it does about the lens. There are a number of times when I deeply wished for the 150/F2 4/3 lens – for concert work it would have been superb.
Anytime you want close up from a distance – particularly with dim lighting and movement – large aperture and long focal length rocks.
I believe that’s why people typically use a 70-200/2.8 for concerts.
I only use long lenses
Oh, this satisfies my lust for the lovely 4/3 150/2. Legendary, but legendarily expensive.
Hopefully this one performs like that one.
think out of the box! 😉
Lovely. Especially the 75mm. I have a Samyang 85 which has been a pleasant surprise, but I find it slightly too long even for tight portraits. This will be a worthy replacement.
Pleasure to hear about that 60mm macro. Always hoped for one. Now only lens I ask would be 17mm with aperture faster than F2. (Or 25mm F1.4 with that lovely 12mm zuiko focus ring would be lovely too 😉 )
I’d like to see that snap focus on a normal lens. It’s a little bit pointless on such a wide angle, especially without focus peaking.
I can’t tell you how disappointed I am. No lens is fast enough, wide enough, long enough, sharp enough, focuses close enough, is well built enough or cheap enough to satisfy me.
You can tell how awesomely great a photographer I am that no equipment made by any manufacturer is good enough to satisfy my exacting requirements or can match my obvious skill. Look at me, aren’t I great.
Who want’s an autograph? Form an orderly line please and no pushing at the back.
My respects for admitting your superiority. Now excuse me I have to go back making shopping lists of unannounced products instead of taking pictures.
LOL, you should write “sarcasm” because everyone doesn´t understands that. 🙂
This should be a template, so half the people here can save time writing up complaints.
I don’t know that I’ll buy either of these lenses (just bought a PL45, and I use a 5D2 for portraits) but even knowing just these specs, I really WANT them both. Imagining a 45/1.8 with a 75mm focal length would be a spectacular portrait lens, and a 120mm macro with the M43 DOF advantage and a relatively light weight (handholding macro can get awkward and heavy when you’re at weird angles) will be a real killer lens for bugs.
Now all we need is a good macro flash and some extension tubes and M43 will become perhaps the best macro system on the market, balancing deep DOF, decent cost, small size, low weight, good IQ, excellent EVF and LCD screens, and even (optionally touchscreen) AF.
C’mon M43, we’re right at the gates!
The only lens I want is a 17/1.8 Pancake as sharp as the 20/1.7 with the focus speed of the 12/2…
Hear hear! An updated, sharp, good-rendering, fast-focusing 17/1.8 or 2 pancake would be a perfect M43 lens.
I want a zoom lens similar to the 14-54 2.8-3.5. 🙂
Check ricohs new aps,c module fantastic, small and light, gxr rocks more and more
I wonder what Olympus policy is going to be, regarding weather sealed lenses. Will there be a high grade series with weather sealing but also superior optical performance? The 12-50 seems to indicate otherwise. But then, what will decide which lenses get weather sealing and which don’t? Wouldn’t weather sealing have been at least as appropriate for the 75 as for the macro?
+1
Still waiting for weather sealed
7-14mm
12-60mm / 14-54mm
And 50-20mm replacements before buyong into m4/3
If it takes another year thats ok
But more than that I will seriously consider jumping ships
4 years of waiting is enough, jump
Yeah…my only regret is not doing that before buying the 7-14 and 50-200. D800, 14-24mm and 24-70mm is the way to go
You shoot UWA in the rain? I don’t want to sound dismissive, but that seems more of a press/event photographer’s job, which has never been M43’s focus anyway. (fps/buffer too small, shot-to-shot too slow, no fast teles for indoor shooting, etc.)
I know a lot of people go gaga over weather sealing, but most hobbyists head indoors when the rain starts. Weather sealing is not important for most in this segment. I know it’s important for some. Just not most.
I shoot urban landscape photograpy, so UWA is useful for me. You never know when a truck will drive by and hit a puddle that splashes on your equipment. It’s happened before, and it will happen again. That’s why weather sealing is mandatory for me.
Interesting, I currently have a D700 with 24-70 and 70-200 (& primes). It was when I was considering complleteing the trilogy with the 14-24 I started looking at m43 as a smaller travel alternative. I kind of regret buying it all when I look at some of the new cameras like NEX-7… but the minute I hold the D700 in the my hands, it really does feel like the perfect camera (to me).
A 60mm f2.8 macro could be just the thing for dragonfly photography and I will be waiting for its release. The 0.19m minimum focus distance should be sufficient (1:2 reproduction ratio of 4:3 sensor is given at 0.23m with a 50mm lens) and the slower aperture should help keep the size and price down. I’m glad they haven’t made a lens too close to the 45mm Panasonic.
7 1/2″? You’ll get that close to a dragonfly? Tell me how! 😉
I have a GH2 and a Nikon 60mm f2.8D macro and it’s damn tricky getting close enough to flying beasties to actually get a shot.
Tried it with a Nikon TC-201 2x teleconverter and it was much easier to get the shot, but I was losing 2 stops and it was a pretty unwieldy setup with the adaptor, teleconverter and lens.
So, I got a Nikon 105mm f2.8 AI-S for that kind of thing. I can’t wait for Spring!
Both the new Oly lenses sound extremely promising!
Yes please to both of those lenses!
Beautiful. The new Olympus camera and these lenses are adding tremendously to m4/3 at this crucial point, IMO. Bring it on Fuji (overpriced-overhyped retro hoopla) and Sony (how to build a whole system around one single piece: a sensor).
YMMV, but for ME m4/3 delivers, and at affordable prices, here and now. The competition? I dunno..
😉
I think these two new lenses are great additions to the MFT lens quiver. Unlike Sigma, Oly seems to be looking at the available lens lineup and choosing areas where there is some weakness. Having a 75mm f/1.8 is an awesome prime with a very low f-stop, something missing in the line-up. (We already have two 45mm lenses for portraiture, so this is a nice addition and should offer tons of bokeh…no IS though :-(). Sounds like the construction will be along the lines of the 12mm, f/2 lens. So I am betting the lens will be very desirable, but will also come with a hefty price tag.
The macro fills in nicely, an open spot for a native, autofocus prime, too.
I don’t think it will be all-metal like the 12. In that case it would surely have been weather sealed too. More likely, metal finish like the 45.
I was just taking admin’s lead. I have both the 12mm and the 45mm and I hope it is built like the 12mm, the 45mm is really plasticy. The 45mm is a nice lens optically though, and priced much better so maybe that does make more sense for MFT.
It will probably be marketed as a luxury item in the vein of the 12, thus having all metal build and absurd price tag.
If you look at Olympus’ recent m43 lenses you can see the typical lack of planning and forward thinking – no two lenses look the same, those marketed as higher end products fail to deliver optically (compared to lower end products) and do not have weather sealing.
This is too bad, especially considering how the 43 lens lineup was meticulously planned and structured into 3 product tiers based on OPTICAL as well as build quality, and Panasonic’s lens lineup.
The 43 line up had way to many zooms for the enthusiast shooter. I feel it was aimed for the “Pro” and “novice”. While the m43 lens are for the “enthusiast” and “novice”. Bring on the Primes.
On the m43 lens nothing matches as color etc.; for the most part. I think all lens made after 1970 should be black, never liked faux silver. I expect lens such as the 12-50 power zoom are aimed at video also. I expect the OM-D to be able to use power zoom.
The 43 lens are available for your m43, I understand some work very well. Some are even smaller with adapter then a NEX on the Sony.
Not sure Oly will be making a lens with IS… I think they expect you to be using their camera bodies. 😉
That is what I said…”no IS :-()
Wow, a 75mm f/1.8 lens! I was hoping for something in the 70 to 75mm realm, this lens will certainly come in handy.
And a 60mm macro….not bad. Would also be a very useful lens for me.
Honestly, I’m more excited about the lenses than the EM-5…
Good job Olympus!
– Olympius
+100
Yes, and like Nico, not that crappy plast-icky silver finish.
Some of us have standards, y’know. 😉
The long telephoto is a welcome addition to the system, kudos to oly! I hope it comes in black, and not that awful silver finish of the 45mm that is easily scratched (i have one). They should update the 17mm, that would be fantastic – weather sealing and faster aperture.
Man, the lens lineup is looking better and better every day! Its amazing hoy Sony has the IQ and with the nex7 a great body, but not the right lenses
75/1.8 = ++good
I hope Olympus does not take the run on the 1.8/45 as opportunity to increase the price of the 1.8/75 to an abnormal level!
Admin, I’m on vacarions in a remote place in the Chilean Andes with a very weak and intermitent celular signal. You cannot imagine how tasty sound your rumors in these conditions. It takes about 5 minutes just to get into the 43 rumors page. I’m quite confident the E-M5 will be a much better camera than the E5 and the E-P3, which I’m carrying with me. The new lenses sound great, but I would have prefered a nice 9 or 10 f2 and a 17 F1.4 or 1.8. I have the 45 which is phenomenal for portraits and landscape. Thanks for the news.
I agree. We badly need a faster 17mm. That is one of the most popular focal lengths. But the 75mm does sound very tempting.
Just wait. From the statements coming out of Olympus it sounds like they really want to accommodate you (and me, come to think of it).
Admin, I’m on vacarions in a remote place in the Chilean Andes with a very weak and intermitent celular signal. You cannot imagine how tasty sound your rumors in these conditions. It takes about 5 minutes just to get into the 43 rumors page. I’m quite confident the E-M5 will be a much better camera than the E5 and the E-P3, which I’m carrying with me. The new lenses sound great, but I would have prefered a nice 9 or 10 f2 and a 17 F1.4 or 1.8. I have the 45 which is phenomenal for portraits and landscape. Thanks for the news.
I can’t believe all the kvetching in this thread about these two lenses. If you look at the total picture, they help fill out the Micro Four Thirds lens lineup very nicely — lengthening its lead over other compact mirrorless systems.
— The 75/1.8 is an awesome addition! It will be great for theater photography, indoor sports, and tightly composed headshots. This plus the 45/1.8 will cover a huge range of documentary situations. I don’t have a lot of money to spend on lenses, but I definitely will want this one myself, even though it’s likely to be expensive.
— The 60 means we now have a choice of two macros (along with the Panasonic/Leica 45.) The 60 will be nice for people who need a longer working distance for small living subjects; the 45 is nice for object and portrait shooters.
— We already have an excellent compact “wide/normal” (Panasonic 20/1.7) and an excellent high-speed normal (Panasonic/Leica 25/1.4.)
— We have two excellent wide lenses at different price points (Olympus 12/2 and Panasonic 14/2.5.)
— And we have a gaggle of uninspiring but useful zooms in a senseless agglomeration of focal lengths. But when the two Panasonic “bright zooms” arrive we will have comprehensive coverage of all the professionally-necessary ranges.
This means that if the image quality of Micro Four Thirds is adequate for your work (and in truth, it is for most) then you will not be held back from most kinds of photography by lack of lens choice. Other compact mirrorless systems (especially those starting with “S”)? Not so much…
+1!
What we DON’T have is a decent 35mm equivalent lens. 17mm f2.8 doesn’t cut it. And don’t mention the 20mm- it’s not 17mm. Big difference between 20mm and 17mm. That 17mm needs to be 1.8 or 1.4. 2.8 is ridiculous.
olympus is good in giving their customer what they don’t want, maybe in a year or two we’ll get a decent 17,5
They are giving me what I want!!!
That would have been much more interesting. I’d kill for a 17mm with the quality and built of the 12/2, including the manual focus feature. F1.4 or 1.8 would be great obviously but not necessary. I’d be happy with F2 so long as it has the classic zuiko character and quality.
Ridiculous?
Since when 17mm f/2.8 became ridiculous?
17mm 2.8 was THE very 1st prime lens in M43 system, and for all its intentions and purposes, it served very well.
So why don’t you stop ridiculing yourself, and go build your own 17mm 1.4?
Gears of war
Hi Admin,
Any news about the Olympus E7??? Thanks
75mm a perfect portrait lens? Says who? That’s a 150mm eq, whereas most 35mm / FF portrait lenses are in the 85-100mm range, with a few shooters using 135mm. 150mm is going to require a lot of room to back up, and will flatten a subject’s features a lot.
The speed makes it interesting, but the focal length is a bit “in between.” I’d love to see a 100mm f2 with AF, but the 75mm is a bit too long for portraits, and a bit too short for indoor sports.
Oh well. The macro looks interesting, if it turns out to be not too expensive.
So use the 45/1.8 that would be 90mm eq, Right between the 85-100mm you said.
I agree that 135mm eq. is best for portrait work. But we get 150mm, and I can live with that. Currently I use a 57mm Hexanon for portraits, so that’s another compromise.
Curious to see how its bokeh compares to other fast portrait lenses.
There is a 45 1.8 mFT Olympus. That gives the traditional 90mm length for portraits.
A lot of portraits are now taken with a longer length lens now; I have been surprised by how long. I think this is for easier lighting, and tight head and shoulder shots; also to compensate for the “bayer effect” of sensors vs. film (this may be conscious or unconscious).
I personally like the “100” size using my 50mm legacy lens, but I learned to shoot on the “85” size. Now I am re learning to shooting portraits on “115” size, there are some shuttle differences that I have to learn and improve my technic to be proficient with.
Great news on the new lenses! 🙂
Now, if Olympus or Panasonic would come up with a T/S adapter for the OM and other lenses, it would be great!
That, together with a better flash system that would be reliable would make the system even stronger!
Its called a Lensbaby.
Great news! I have the need for reasonably fast lens in the 75-85mm range to video my daughters’ stage events from a distance. Until now, I’d been considering a 85mm Nikon mount (Rokinon) or waiting for pany’s upcoming 35-100. Looks like there will be three options on the list now. I’ve been using a Nikon 50mm, but not quite long enough. Auto focus would be a bonus with the Oly or Pany. While I’ve dealt resonably well with the manual focus on the Nikon, it requires too much concentration – fine for paid work, but not when trying to enjoy the children’s event at the same time.
Two very interesting lenses. The 75mm will need an Olympus with IS – or a tripod. 100mm would have been even more exciting for me. It may be that the Pana 35-100 with OIS would be my chioce anyway.
The macro – great focal length, separates it from the 45mm lenses. Concerning extended DOF: Take several images with different focal points – then blend them in post processing. There is a software that does it very well: Helicon. Difficult with moving objects of course; pro’s do freeze down the insect using spray – then have time for several exposures
Unbelievably excited about the 75mm. Awesome focal length and aperture. However, if it’s priced like the 12mm that enthusiasm will vanish. LOL!
Not that excited about a 60mm f2.8 macro unless it’s cheap, and it won’t be. No lens is ever cheap in micro four thirds land.
Indoor sports photography anyone? I am currently using an adapted Pentax 85mm f2.0 manual focus lens on my Oly bodies for basketball, gymnastic, and swimming photos, and the 75mm will be a welcome addition to my 45mm. With kids sports, the trend is to sit parents/fans as far away from the kids as possible (I guess to avoid issues), so you need low light lenses with reach. Very challenging conditions, to say the least.
I hope it is priced like the 45mm, and not the 12mm.
You pay for the you get.
Some things are overpriced to all but a select few. Some things are generally considered fairly priced and a good value. No, you shouldn’t always be expected to pay an exorbitant amount to get a decent product. Silly cliche.
There are compromises, though. With the 45/1.8, you sacrifice some (perceived) build quality vs the 12/2, for example. Olympus for years now has made good compromises, in that for the lower tier lenses they’ve sacrificed build quality for optical quality, at least in the 4/3’s realm. Perhaps not so much with µ4/3’s, but with more primes coming out that could be changing.
If it’s priced like the 45mm it will be a must have lens. If it’s priced like the 12mm I’ll pass.
These new lens are good news. It shows that Olympus is filling out the product line with useful prime lens for the enthusiast. Us enthusiast love are primes. The 75 is for me. Next Olympus I hope will introduce a 10, and a weather sealed 17 or 25.
I am afraid they will might be priced high. If you need a macro. There is a bargain in the 43 ZD 35 macro, if you have an adapter, or a used OM 50 3.5 or 2.0 (among others). Every photographer should try many types macro shoots.
If you have a mFT camera and are thinking about upgrading, think about buying a lens or two and skipping a generation of cameras. You will get more enjoyment in glass then plastic and silicon IMHO. I feel a camera is just there to put at the end of your lens.
A lot of people are confused about 4/3 and dof. People always tell me they want a larger sensor so they can get shallow dof. Well if you look at the competition olympus gives you a more shallow dof when using apples to apples
example
oly e5 using 35-100 2.0 shot at 2.0 10 feet away gives you a dof of .18
Canon 7d using 70-200 2.8 shot at 2.8 16 feet away (because of the crop) gives you a dof .2 and
Canon 1dm111 70-200 2.8 shot at 2.8 13 feet away gives you a dof of .16 (not much difference.
So while larger sensor gives you less dof it only works if you are close to the subject and then you are too close. That is why i chose the e5 over the 7d
75/1.8 with fast and reliable AF? Yummy!!!
Perfect for indoor events and just what i was waiting for.
The only lens i’m still missing is a 300/2.8 that is small and lightweight enough to carry it a whole day.
That will never happen, simply because of physics: the front element has to be ~105mm in diameter. For an all day 300mm (can there be such a thing?), think in terms of f/4-5.6.
My dream lens for m43 is a 300 2.8 OIS. Wonder how small they could make it. Surely smaller than the Oly 300 2.8.
but how much smaller? I wonder about that too.
I believe a MZ 300mm f2.0 would be about equal to the Nikkor AFS 300mm f2.8 and similar. A MZ 300 f2.8 Would be relatively light from reduced diameter and length.
Hmm, I’ve got a Jupiter 9 (85mm f2) and like it a lot for shallow depth of field work. The 75 f.18 sounds great if affordable.
you have samples with the jupiter? I understand its the cheapest option to get a decent 85 mm
dont worry..there are plenty of people on the globe who can make great portraits with long lenses. The fact that someone calls a certain FL perfect for specific style doesn’t have to be taken as objective statement.
Now if only Olympus would come up with a weatherproof version of their old extending auto extension tube, I could use it and the 60mm f2.8 for virtually all my handheld macro photography. Olympus certainly need some m4/3 extension tubes of some kind.
It’s interesting that the 60mm f2.8 macro has a minimum close focusing distance of 0.19m. That’s closer than expected for a lens of this focal length. It indicates that it is an internal focus design, which shortens it’s focal length by quite a lot at it’s minimum focusing distance. Unless that is it unusually goes greater than 1:1. Even though the distance seems close, if it is a compact IF design it should have a very good working distance.
btw. I pointed out that the displayed prototype of the PL 45mm f2.8 macro was an IF design well before anyone else. If I remember right a few argued with me about that, but the rest is history.
Or any version, really.
You can take any lens and make it macro by taking it off the camera and flipping it around
That doesn’t correct for the typical macro range with magnifications between 1:5 and 1:2. And how do you operate the diaphragm like that?
Greg
@OM-4ever You are wrong. When you get to telephotos the size doesn’t differ much for the same focal length and max aperture regardless of the size of the sensor. The minimum size of the front element is the focal length divided by the maximum aperture. a 300mm/F2.8 would need at least a 107mm front element. A 300mm F2 would require at least a 150mm front element at be much larger and heavier. A 300/F2.8 would still be roughly the same size.
The advantages compared to FF is that m4/3s would only require a 150mm lens to get the same field of view. A 150mm/F2.8 would only require a front element of 54mm and could be much smaller and lighter than a FF 300mm/F2.8 (not to mention smaller and cheaper filters). You also gain a slight advantage vs APS-C 200mm/F2.8 would require a 72mm front element.
hmmmm a 60mm macro, sounds good as long as its 1:1. Nice sounding focal length … halfway between 90mm and 150mm at full-frame.