I confess, I am not really happy with todays Olympus announcement. I understand that there is a “marketing reason” why those lenses have to exist. Maybe zoom lenses is what “normal” people buys when they go in store. But we are still missing a Zuiko MFT lens we can be really proud of. We have some good lenses like the [shoplink 14818]9-18mm[/shoplink], but no fast prime lens, no high-quality and reasonable fast zoom, and only one pancake lens! And most of the current lenses are copies of already existing Panasonic lenses (or is Panasonic copying the Olympus lenses?). Take a look for yourself:
[shoplink 14822]Panasonic 7-14mm[/shoplink] – [shoplink 14818]Olympus 9-18mm[/shoplink]
[shoplink 14802]Panasonic 14-140mm[/shoplink] – [shoplink 14800]Olympus 14-150mm[/shoplink]
[shoplink 14792]Panasonic 45-200mm[/shoplink] – Olympus 45-150mm
Panasonic 100-300mm (to be announced soon) – Olympus 75-300mm
[shoplink 14820]Panasonic 8mm fisheye[/shoplink] – Olympus 8mm fisheye (on roadmap)
Panasonic 14mm (to be announced soon) – Olympus 12mm (on roadmap)
Thousand of 43rumors readers voted for High-Quality prime, pancake and zoom lenses in many of our polls. We need more “WOW” lenses like the [shoplink 14796]Panasonic 20mm f/1.7[/shoplink]. But we also need lenses that are essential for a complete lens repertoire (where is the normal 25mm f/1.4 lens?).
There will be no need to switch to a NEX or NX system or any other system if the lenses are good enough! So please stop playing cat and mouse, stop to fear the market. Try to have some vision like when you imaginated the MicroFourThirds system. Surprise us!
That’s just my personal opinion, feel free to comment this post…
Me, 43rumors.
122 Responses
Olympus and Panasonic can not collude not to produce certain lenses!!!!!!!
Correct. Oly and Panasonic cannot get together and have one make lens X and the other make lens Y. Although I have personal moral and political issues with antitrust law, such collective/collusive behavior is illegal under most countries’ antitrust laws (except for collective/collusive activities by unions).
I could make a legal argument under antitrust law (again which I personally do not think is moral) that publishing lens roadmaps economically signals market division to another manufacturer. There are plenty of US antitrust cases in which prosecutors have made similar arguments.
honestly i dont think olympus is ignorant to these requests
They are most likely perfecting the design of the primes before they are announced. I would rather wait longer for better lenses then get new lenses that are of lower quality.
they have to get these zooms out to stay competive , even if they are slower then the 4/3 counterparts you have to take into account that the lenses are smaller and are collecting less light on the same 4/3 sensor. The only really fast lenses you will see are the primes on micro4/3. Everything else will be above 2.8.
There is no 14mm on the Olympus roadmap. It is most probably a 12mm
If you compare the lenses, don’t look just at mm, take care for the weight and size. Zuiko lenses are always smaller and lighter that lumix lenses.
I don’t, really, need primes. I need the flexibility of fast zoom lenses, like my 12-60 F2.8-3.5 Four Thirds zoom, if I’m going to consider going into Micro Four Thirds. Otherwise, there is no real reason to abandon my small Four Thirds SLR bodies.
All the flexibility I need would be filled by and E-620 sized body with two high quality zooms and something like a Panasonic LX-5.
As a big Leica fan, and a previous owner of the Contax G system, I’m obviously a fan of small rangefinder and semi-rangefinder cameras, but I need fast lenses. F6.x at 600mm (equivalent) doesn’t in any way cut it. Yuk. What’s the point of a lens like that?!
Thinking back, back, back in history, the 500mm “prime” mirror lenses were generally F8, so maybe there is a market for a 600mm F6.x. You tell me.
I’d like to shoot roller derby. I’d think a fast 300mm would be good for that.
Just wondering, would a 25mm native u4/3 be that much better than a MMF-2 + 25mm 4/3 lens?
How much are people willing to pay for a native u4/3 lens relative to a regular 4/3 lens?
Would Olympus canabalize sales of 4/3 lenses if they offer the same lens in u4/3?
As Oly develops the smaller motors for u4/3 lenses, should u4/3 lenses cost more to make than regular 4/3 lenses?
I am just trying to understand things from a business standpoint.
Are people willing to pay a price premium for native u4/3 lenses, or do they want the u4/3 lenses at lower prices than 4/3 lenses?
Everyone seems to want Oly to produce various lenses, but very few people mention a price at which they are willing to buy. Oly has to know that expected sales price and quantity to allocate resources to make various lenses, especially if a new product may canabalize sales of existing products in Oly inventory warehouses.
Yes, maybe Olympus can’t produce more lenses than they do now. But I believe there is a lot of people willing to pay for a good lens!
If you build a baby Leica (or Contax) people will buy it.
Yeah exactly. I think that the m43 as the “Leica of the poor” concept appeals to a lot of people indeed.
Olympus should realize that it is not the only camera manufacturer, In fact, it is competing with people who have much larger market share. Fearing a new product may cannibalize sales of existing products in Oly inventory warehouses is short sighted. What Olympus need to do is make products competitive to lure customers from the competitors.
I am really disappointed with the u4/3 75-300mm lens.
CHEAPER and SMALLER please!
I am disadpointed too!
As a professional photographer, who shoots with the E-3 system. I would love to buy into the Pen system but I need pro quality body and fast lens to do that. Olympus makes some of the best glass on the market but with everything slow to market makes me wonder how much Olympus wants to keep their pros?
So far, lenses from Panasonic and Olympus have differed a bit: mini wide zoom vs bigger ultra wide; collapsing kit zoom vs non collapsing; light compact ultrazoom vs stabilized heavy ultrazoom. It was fine, we had the choice. Long zooms will also differ a bit. But with primes, such differences are not so obvious and copying becomes literal: 8mm fisheye vs 8mm fisheye; 45mm macro vs 50mm macro; 14mm F2.5 vs 12mm F2.8. That’s too close! The two have to think about closing the holes in the lens lineup first and be a bit creative. Why not make a faster wide prime? Why not make a collapsing ultrazoom? Portrait primes are also missing. And none of them make any wide/tele converters or extenders.
Lots to think about there …
NX and NEX are worse, so no competition from them (yet). The lens choice for Sony translucent line though is probably five to ten times larger than for m4/3, and there are many people that already have some. That’s where the greatest threat will come from.
Yes, Olympus releasing (almost) exactly same focal lenses and apertures as Panasonic is disappointing 🙁
And the only good lens they should have copied, namely the 20mm f/1.7 is left out. Really dumb marketing choice.
Well, at present Sony doesn’t have that many lenses, but maybe they’ll announce something for photokina. If they do release the fast and pancake/small primes I want (40-45mm equivalent f/1.7 or faster, 85-95mm eq f/2 or faster, 24-28mm eq f/2.8 or faster – I have to figure out their crop factor so see actual fl needed), I’m eager to switch, despite their frustrating interface.
Sony is clever in making super wider angle and fish eye converters for its wide anger prime lens. This make the super wider angle and fish eye much much cheaper to own.
M43 is all about compact size, not 2.0 zooms. If you can cope with slightly more size, why do you need the m43? Just get an E620 and some great 43 lenses
Too much overlapped and overpriced lenses.
I have 2 m4/3 cameras but I will not pay 1000 Euro for the 7-14mm, 900 Euro for the 70-300mm or 800 Euro for the 45mm macro Leica.
I’m in stand-by.
I’m waiting Photokina to understand the Oly and Pana way to m4/3 in the near future.
> I’m waiting Photokina to understand the Oly and Pana way to m4/3 in the near future.
I think the chart showing that mirrorless cameras has gotten the 30% share of the market is all what one need to understand current state of affairs.
New market was opened – all jump on it by releasing more stuff, trying to profit from the early adopters and public eager for something new.
IOW, IMO there is little to understand: it is a chaos at the moment. The very same chaos, characteristic to any young market.
Hey, we are still missing the fast prime 4/3 lenses too 😀
I want even smaller camera (as the NEX-5 DESIGN except its interface) and some good prime lens. How to win Sony without effort, don’t stop the hack, damn you Panasonic!!!!!
> But we are still missing a Zuiko MFT lens we can be really proud of.
I will repeat my dream: *pancake* zoom 20-30mm or something like that. Or probably not zoom, but with several focal lengths. (I have something like this exists for the rangefinders.)
Both Oly and Pannay seem to be moving MFT as just another lens system, while I personally want them to concentrate more on the portability. When it comes to lugging equipment I think pretty much everybody has already camera, set of lens and accessories – and a dedicated bag for all of it.
Pancakes are IMO important because they are what allows the cameras to be truly “pocket DSLR”.
A pocket DSLR is what I want from MFT.
And BTW, I also want a MFT camera which has both viewfinder and IBIS. Pannay has EVF, but no IBIS. Oly has IBIS but no EVF.
Viewfinder – electronic or optical – I do not care. For portability it simply shouldn’t stick out / should be part of camera.
G2/G10/GH2 with IBIS isn’t happening. Thus I’m waiting for Oly E-Pn line to produce the camera.
I believe that the lense everyone will fall in love with with M4/3 is the macro lense that is coming up in the spring
its probly going to be a 50mm and fast too
if its less than 500 bucks i will buy a mft camera
I agree.
WE NEED FAST PRIMES on m43!
Nothing against NON Oly-Panas prime manual focus lens in range 10-12-14 mm with 2,8-3,5
While the limits of current production capacity is probably playing a role here, this sounds a lot like typical cautiousness on the part of camera makers. The irony is that Olympus and Panasonic have scored a major breakout hit with micro four-thirds. Being bold and stepping out of the box has paid off big-time for them. But, here they are playing it ultra cautious with lens introductions – just like Canon, Nikon and all the others.
Okay, I’ll cut them some slack. They’ve now got the range from 7-300mm (14-600mm equivalent) covered with zooms, each has a pancake lens and fisheyes are on the way. From this point forward, they need to wow us – and, more importantly, potential converts to micro four-thirds – with some truly impressive lenses. Faster zooms and more primes – faster, smaller and lighter.
I must say, with the exception of Panasonic’s 20mm f/1.7 pancake, I personally tend to lean forward Olympus’s interpretation of the micro four-thirds lens formula: smaller, lighter and less expensive. But that’s just me.
Final thought: I agree with those who feel micro four-thirds is a kind of “poor man’s Leica.” That’s why I want both Olympus and Panasonic to bring out rangefinders with built-in viewfinders. OVF or EVF is fine as long as resolution of the EVF is at VF-2 levels.
Can’t agree more!! Oly really makes me disappointed, again. I used to be an E-510 & E-30 user, gave up, and put my last hope to vote for E-P1 over Pana GF-1 9 months ago, and wishing Oly will continue their innovation, but looks like I’ve to sell my E-P1 and go get a dirt cheap, used GH1 to accommodate my m4/3 Pana lenses or simply sell it all.
RIP, Oly.
@Admin
Did not hear anything about the rumored Panasonic Primes (1.4 or faster)…. Any news?
+100
Yup this needs to happen… and not in a few years time, TODAY! This is the only thing holding back the m4/3 system from gaining a substantial amount of new users. If oly or panny want to take advantage of being a first mover, they need to see this through asap.
Thanks for the post, but unfortunately it seems Olympus doesn’t pay any attention to sites like this or to forums. If they did they’d have already produced at the very minimum a 25mm f/1.8 pancake. I’m starting to wonder if they consult photographers at all to be honest. Seems like their only concern are people that don’t even know what aperture priority mode is.
I’m really interested in m4/3 but I’d like a Pen with a 3″ hi-res screen and a 12-60 very high-quality zoom before I buy into the format. The 9-18 and the 20 f/1.7 are so far the only lenses that interest me. The 45-200 doesn’t meet my standards for quality.
With the launch of the E-400 and 14-42, Olympus learned that people bought Four Thirds for its size and cost, not its quality.
The system really was excellent, and could hold up to Canikon in many regards, but few pro photographers could be convinced to “take a chance” on Olympus when the bog standard 1D / 16-35 / 24-70 / 70-200 / 400/2.8 kit is so good and so pervasive in the world of pro photography. An E-3 and 14-35 might match a 1D and 24-70 in the vast majority of cases, but matching the default choice is never good enough to win converts. You have to beat it handily.
Olympus did that with their compact offerings. The E-410 / 14-42 / 40-150 kit trounced anything Canikon had to offer (except in noise performance), and the 25/2.8 offered a compact kit that even Pentax’s pancakes couldn’t beat. With the road ending(?) at the E-620, Olympus still has the best compact DSLR on the market.
I thought Olympus had learned and applied this lesson with Micro Four Thirds. While Panasonic made big SLR-like equipment like the G1, 14-45, 45-200, and 14-140, Olympus did what it does best: they made tiny equipment without a significant loss in image quality. The EP1, 14-42, and 9-18 were the smallest of their type ever created, and they weren’t priced with the excessive premiums of early Four Thirds equipment.
This is why I’m so disappointed with this new announcement from Olympus. Where’s the compact designs? Where’s the affordable price tags? Where’s the envelope-pushing body? Why would I buy an Olympus 40-150 when I could get a Panasonic 45-200 OIS for less, today? Why would I buy an Olympus 75-300 when I already have an Olympus 70-300 (adapted) and a Canon 100-400 for my 7D? And why would I buy a repainted EP2 with a bundled junk flash when I already have an EP1 and an FL-36R?
I agree. There’s nothing interesting in this announcement, which is sad. I have two thoughts to take away from this announcement:
* I hope Panasonic’s 100-300 is a world-beater in compact design and affordable price tag, so I can finally have a “full kit” with my 9-18 and 14-42, and leave my (very large) 14-140 at home.
* I hope Olympus sees the reaction of some of its fans as a wake up call to get back to doing what they do best: produce the absolute smallest equipment possible. This design ethos is the entire reason for the existence of Micro Four Thirds, and Olympus’ skill in this area is why they are doing well in the face of juggernauts like Panasonic and Sony. I only hope they figure this out and claim enough converts before Nikon and Canon enter the market and instantly claim 50% market share from the waiting Canon and Nikon DSLR hordes.
Jeff, judging from these prices, don’t expect the 50 macro to be cheap, especially if they manage to make it f2 (I expect f2.8 to keep it small). I would not be surprised to see it double the regular 4/3 50, perhaps $800.
im not wow crappy story i want the next level of 4/3 format
Fully agree.
I COMPLETELY agree with 4/3 rumors. wHERE ARE THOSE FAST PRIMES, OLYMPUS !!!
are we forgetting the goals of m43?
——
“We are now preparing for a future product with an EVF. But for this product [E-P1] we were concentrating on small size,” he said. This, he explained, was because of how the company sees the market for Micro Four Thirds: “The idea of removing the mirror and shortening the distance back to the sensor dates back to 2002/01. The E-420 is the smallest DSLR in the world, it has good penetration into the young and the step-up [from compact camera] categories. We know that more than 20% of compact camera customers have thought about buying a DSLR but are put off by the size, weight and complicated operation.”
And this is a market with huge potential – compact cameras outsell DSLRs by around 10:1, so 20% of the compact camera market is more than double the current number of DSLRs sold. Micro Four Thirds therefore won’t necessarily cut into existing Four Thirds sales, he says: “We don’t think one will shrink as the other grows – Micro Four Thirds will expand into traditional compact camera markets.”
—–
taken from http://www.dpreview.com/news/0906/09061600watanabeinterview.asp
—–
Isn’t Olys m43 goal to provide cameras and lenses to attract P&S market to Quality photography? Does this lens map just reflect that?
Obviously it does, which is what is so off putting about it from a photographers perspective. We photographers have been begging for an affordable Leica M for years; m4/3’s could easily fulfill that dream. However Olympus has clearly shown they have on immediate interest in photographers. All they care about are people that want to take photos of their kids soccer games.
I’ve never shunned a brand before, but Olympus is really turning me off to them. I’d rather give my business to a company that cares about photographers as much as they do soccer moms.
exactamundo.
Its about soccer games, mom vans, and disposable income.
It seems Olys goals and its customers (our) wants are out of sync. Sad 🙁
Yes. Yes. Yes. A thousand times yes. I currently shoot with Canon 5D Mark II and a G11. Back in the (film) day, I shot with Canon New F1 and Leica M3. I would love to go back to the digital equivalent of that. The 5D Mark II for heavy lifting and a MFT for street photography. My dream kit would be a 12MP body like the E-P2 with a few lenses. A 10mm f2.8, a 17mm f1.4 or 1.8 and 40mm f2 with external VF’s for the 10 and 17. I really dig the small form factor of MFT and image quality of MFT. What’s holding me back is the availability or primes.
thanks
There are two populations catered for by m4/3: those who also use DSLRs and those who don’t. Thus far Olympus has been the primary lens supplier for the second group while Panasonic has made lenses for both. Voigtlander, who recently joined the m4/3 consortium, will surely make lovely fast primes for glass connoisseurs who are not deterred by the lack of luxuries such as AF or aperture control.
This specialization is very welcome, even though it takes time to acknowledge that Olympus is occupying the lower-end slot. Of course, exceptions (look at the roadmap) will be appreciated.
My point is, don’t expect fast primes from Olympus. Even the 12mm and 50mm will probably be relatively slow (circa f/3.5 and f/2.8, respectively). OTOH, Panasonic may have something up its sleeve already and Voigtlander may surprise us occasionally in the future with some very nice lenses.
A smidge of a letdown isn’t it? But don’t complain about Oly missing the boat on compact designs–these new zooms are very small for their reach. However, should we be expected to compromise on all other fronts for diminutive dimensions alone? Oly sacrificed speed and price on the alter of size. Especially on the 75-300mm. The price tag is embarrassing and I expect most people will vote with their wallets.
As nice as a small system is, there is plenty of competition and Oly can’t pull pranks like this and expect to get paid at the end of the day.
My two cents.
Seth
I agree except, having used the panny 45-200, which I sold to get the 14-150, I think 150mm is pretty much at the limits of a hand held ep body. If I have to bring a tripod, then I’m ok packing bigger kit, too.
i still can’t believe that 2 years past and still no 45 or 50mm f1.8 or f2.0 lens. This is not marketing this is plain stupid. I own a g1 and waiting for photokina for an upgrade. But nikon and canon at the door with their mirrorless lenses, sony pushing hard, and these guys still have no prime lenses. This is a joke.
I’ve not bought into M43 yet, but I visit this site EVERY DAY to keep up on the latest news. I SO want in on this system, but Olympus has yet to put forth products that make me take the leap. Outside of Leica, Pentax is the only camera company that focuses on high quality, solid metal and glass prime lenses – and the K7 (and soon K5) is a seriously attractive camera whose size rivals the size of the GH1. I’ve used almost every brand out there and it’s time to move on to my next system. If Nikon, Canon or Pentax go mirrorless, then I’ve got even harder decisions to make. Photokina will be the tipping point for me. Please Olympus – be great. I’ve got Pentax waiting for me already.
That said, I hope the 4/3rds division has a clue and that Olympus yet has something to announce that is compelling and competitive with current pricing. Sep. 14? So I’ve heard.
If Panasonic is planning on moving into the realm of broadcast HD with the AF100 high quality glass will be an utter necessity, it is not an option.
They may be p&s oriented, but they are in trouble then. Sony has much better distribution and marketing, and NEX could eat them alive. I am sure that their thinking might be EPL and kit lenses (14-41 & 40-150) is much smaller than NEX kit and that cannon of a telephoto for the NEX, but again, oly would have to be in the same store right next to the Somy, and they won’t be. Additioanlly, having seen the NEX in one store where they sell the Oly, all the sales people very much pushed the NEX as superior, and raved about the upcoming a55.
So, even if they are focused on the p&s market, I don’t think they have the distribution channels to win. This means they continue to have a niche market, which are the people posting to these boards. We are less price sensitive, but we need the products. It doesn’t look like the products are coming.
If I didn’t have the excellent 14-150 in my possession right now, I would have already tried a NEX for my vacation. But NEX doesn’t have a lens like this one, so i stay with my EP1.
Oly, your sensor is at a disadvtange and you don’t have the distro for consumer market. You must win on lenses, and these two new ones are crap.
Also, you insult all of us by repackage your least desired items (17mm and flash) into some overpriced bundle with yesterday’s body. That’s just plain insulting and a slap in the face.
The 75-300 f:4.8-6.7 is disappointing especially for his 900€’s price.
Are they kidding? Voigtlander makes a Nocton 25 mm f:0,95 for less than 900 €, and Olympus wants to sell such a piece of slow lens for more than the Nocton?
I wonder about the price of a micro 4/3 fast prime from Olympus. With this kind of pricing, the price for a 25 mm f:1.4 should be about 2000 €. If Olympus wants to sell micro 4/3 lenses at Leica prices, they should come back to school and learn how to produce lenses like Leica…
I agree, that single focal lenses with large aperture and/or compact (and thus probably short range like 14 – 35, 14 -50 or 12 – 60) zooms with high grade optics are really essential for a system with a sensor like 4/3 ( and thus both to 4/3 and M4/3. I think Olympus was already a bit short on single focal lenses in the 4/3 system, except the SHG 150 and 300 mm lenses, the 50 mm HG and the 8 mm Fisheye lens. They should have a 10 or 10,5 mm wide angle at f 2.8, 2 or 1.4 (like the old Zuiko 21 mm lens), a 25 mm f. 1.4 r f 1.2 (like the Zuiko 50 mm f 1.4 or 55 mm f 1.2) a 35 mm (70 mm) or 42,5 (85) mm f2 or wider lens and finally a 70 mm (130 mm) and/or 100 mm (200) f 2 lens. This lens line up can off course be matched by zooms covering part of the range, however, compactness will even be more difficult to obtain. On the other hand I think it is a bit premature to be so negative towards the new lenses as many posts have been. We do not know about the optical quality (only the focal lengths and the aperture) yet and it certainly is natural for Olympus to want to downsize the 40 – 150 mm kti zoomlens from the 4/3 segment, as that (with the 14 – 42 mm) have been one of the best quality/price camera products on the DSLR market for years. Compared to most other kit zooms its optical quality have been rated fairly high overall. Olympus’ have just stated in the press release concerning Voigtländer/Cosina, that they will continue to “develop and enhance the product lineup for both standards to meet the diverse needs of our customers”. The fact, that the first thing, they announce themselve after that is all round easy to use lenses may indicate, that they still believe 4/3 being the prouct line for the customers with more sofisticated/advanced needs. All in all it is probably just a priority issue – (and it may be wrong on their behalf, since they may lose many serious amateurs, semi professionals and/or professionals in need of a “second” camera to Panasonic, Sony, Pentax and/or Canon/Nikon if they come along quickly. I have heard camera shops saying that Olympus were very slow in the transition from OM to 4/3 and they lost the customers on that way.
I got MFT because i like the idea of a small Camera, yes with capital C!
I thought they will come out with a good little zoom lets say 12-60 2.8.
The reason for MFT to exist is the advantage of small size, but if they keep coming out with so stupid lenses there will be no reason to buy a MFT camera.
i don’t want to go around with 10 single focal lenses to have decent luminosity options, what i need is a decent zoom.
the 14-140 is too long and too dark
Pana 20/1.7 IS “normal” lens, so there is no real need for 25/1.4.
Missing lenses:
10/4
12/2.8 or /4 (“must have”)
14/2
70/1.4 (“must have”)
100-300/4
200-400/2.8
All primes being pancakes would be nice.
>Pana 20/1.7 IS “normal” lens, so there is no real need for 25/1.4.
I was going to point that out.. a 45mm is true normal (=35mm).
I have been reading all the comments and we are all screaming about different missing lens.
the groups are –
1. We need Faster primes and people will pay for them. I see this as $1000-$3000 primes, that only Leica will make.
2. We need Fast constant aperture zooms. f2.8 or f4 that will be priced in the 1000-2000 price range. f2 would be 2000+
3. We need small set of primes. 12mm, 20mm, 70mm. but some think they need every lens under the sun. 12 14 20 25 42 50 70 100 200 300
I agree with the small set of primes in the 3rd statement. I live in a tourists town, and see the m43, nx and nex day in and day out. and most of the people i see using them are using slow zoom lens. most Dslr lens i see used is the 18-55 18-105 and 70-300 4.5-5.6 Most have no idea what aperture is. once in a wile i do see a large 2.8 zoom or a m43 with a prime lens (mostly from asian male tourist).
I see very little market for large zoom lens. and even less market for a AF f/1 ultra fast prime @ $2000
I wish we could all ask for one thing and try to influence oly/pany.
12mm
50mm retractable 1:2
70mm
and in camera fish eye correction for the ultra wide.
and for zooms I would say these lens might sell.
7-14mm (we have)
18-70 3.5-4.5
14-45 2-2.8
any larger and I truly do not understand the point to m43. (even the zooms now i dont understand using them, but if thats what people want.)
stop asking for the world and you might get what is needed.
Personally I only need 2 lenses:
A: Compact (preferably pancake) 12 mm prime. This one will be used 90 % of time. F/4 is enough. Faster would be better, but only if it doesn’t make lens bigger.
B: Fast portrait prime. 60-70 mm. Preferably f/1.4. F/2 would be acceptable if it allows this lens to be a pancake.
In case of “normal lens”: It’s quite common to accept range 35 mm – 60 mm 35EQ as a “normal” lens. Being strict, only “real full-frame normal lens” is probably SMC Pentax FA 43 mm f/1.9 Limited, because diagonal of 35 frame is 43.3 mm ;-). And so the “real (M)4/3 normal lens” is 21 mm (according to diagonal of 21.6 mm). 😀 But it is individual. My base is 24 mm 35EQ. If you prefer portrait, you would call 85 mm 35EQ a normal lens. Or you can call normal 500 mm 35EQ (or even more) if you are into nature/wild-life. And so on. 😉
mft is not a ‘poor man’s leica’. Without fast primes, it’s a ‘poor leica’.
mft is not a ‘poor man’s leica’. Without fast primes, it’s a ‘poor leica’. Need fast primes, or fast zooms in the 2.8- 4 range.
If no more surprise in E-5……
M17 f2.8 is really a “toy” lens with worst performance. I need 17 f1.4, a classic visual angle of 35mm with large aperture
Small camera with big sensor is the only reason for the current M43 success. Buyers bought the EP1 EP2 for the small size, not for the reason of getting ride of the SLR mirror box. Olympus needs to know that lack of a real finder is a problem for the format down the road. A digital Leica CL is the future for M43. If Olympus does not do it, then others like Pentax Nikon will do it with APS sensor.
For me, I would prefer all metal DSLR in the size and shape of OM-4Ti with bigger sensor. If that is not available right away, a better made DSLR in the size of E620 size would be more preferred over the finder-less EP cameras. I currently own EP1 white with leica/Zeiss lenses.
Rich
get an ep2 with the EVF
Leica CL = future M43? YES!!!!!
So, can someone clarify: we are not getting any new 4/3 lenses in September? I wasn’t sure if something would realized as a E-5 kit. I was hoping a new lens (or at least a new version) might be released. I would love a standard lens with a little more performance than the 25mm pancake, that doesn’t cost $900.
dito, also very, very disappointed!!
who, want´s an aperture of 4.5 und higher, only point and shooters, definately not me!
zuiko, was standing for superb lenses and what´s now …..
Not even “point and shooters” want 4.5 nowadays!
“Panasonic 7-14mm – Olympus 9-18mm
Panasonic 14-140mm – Olympus 14-150mm
Panasonic 45-200mm – Olympus 45-150mm”
This is silly, instead of competing against canon/nikon/sony, panasonic and olympus are competing with each other, this format will be doomed if pana/oly will continue down this path because it clearly shows that theyr trying to get most $$ of current users w/o thiking about the systems worth in the long run, this makes me sad, please forward that to some high rank’s in those companies perhaps they will wake up
Based on antitrust laws in many countries, Oly and Pana cannot agree that way to avoid competition in the lens market.
if we would believe what you are writing then it would mean that Olympus and panasonic have to design the same focal length lens by law?
now think about what you wrote
No, I did think about what I wrote. I am an attorney. Oly and Pana cannot get together and decide to divide up the u4/3 lens market by building non-competing lernses. Such activity would raise antitrust law issues in many countries. While I personally may not like such antitrust laws and would defend a client accused of antitrust violations, I would advise a client to be concerned with antitrust laws before entering into such an agreement with competitors.
What I wrote was that Oly and Pana “cannot agree” to avoid competition in the lens market. Each one acting independently is a different scenario legally than Oly and Pana “agreeing” on a market division.
What you or all the other posters (i.e., we) of this board “believe” is not material. The only issue is what Oly’s and Pana’s legal counsel advise them to do or not do. Based on US antitrust law, I would advise them not to expressly or implicitly agree to divide up the u4/3 lens market.
BTW – I think your suggestion for Oly and Pana is fine, and could well be better for u4/3 users. As I previously stated I am against antitrust law on moral grounds and in support of totally free laissez-faire that would allow Oly and Pana to enter into such agreements to divide up the u4/3 lens market.
However, under current antitrust laws I would advise a client such as Oly and Pana to comply with antitrust laws by avoiding getting together to agree on dividing up the market for u4/3 lenses based on focal lengths.
I am only stating why Oly and Pana cannot agree to coordinate their lens development without raising antitrust laws issues with potentially large liability exposure for the two companies. The risk of large antitrust penalties is a rational business reason why Oly and Pana would not get together and agree to coordinate their development activities on u4/3 lenses.
Actually, Oly and Pana might could maximize revenues by dividing the market. Then u4/3 users could only choose a particular zoom focal length from one vendor instead of both Oly and Pana.
I still hope that the wide angle prime they will release next spring will be a 12mm and not a 14mm (at first the rumored f-number was 2.8 but Olympus patents down it to 3.5 while maintaining the 2.8 for the 14mm, so no one knows). Even slower than the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5, those 2 extra mm may attract people who already have the 20mm f/1.7, which is not that far from a 14mm.
A “cheap” 12mm and the Noktor 25mm f/0.95 seem a good combination. Meanwhile, I’ll just keep the Pana 20mm as my single lens.
*Of course I mean Nokton, not Noktor.
Mr Pany, Mr Oly,
Stop please doing nonsense products.
Read our forums, prosumers are opinion leaders, and so you will sell the right products to a lot of people.
1) WE NEED A VERY COMPACT CAMERA with built-in EVF or RF and silent shutter, because the ultimate tool is Leica M9 and we haven’t got the money to buy it.
2) WE NEED FAST PRIMES like 10mm/f4, 12mm/f2.8, 17mm/f1.4, 25mm/f0.95.
I hope you will read that post,
Regards
Well, video folk have sufficiently from Olympis now.
So i hope Olympus makes 12mm/f3.5, 14mm/f2.8 and 20mm/f2.8 next 2 year, so show as in new lens patents.
I don’t think we will EVER see the following lenses for m4/3 from Olympus:
* sealed (pro grade) lenses made with metal elements instead of (cheap) plastic
* fast(er) zoom lenses (the slow ones already cost up to $900 WTF?!)
I am hoping for a fast(er) standard prime lens at 25mm though. It doesn’t have to be a Pancake. There’s enough distinction to the 17mm Pancake lens to offer one. If it starts at f/2 or slower it will be an epic fail though. It should be f/1.4 or faster and offer fast auto-focus.
Only Panasonic seems to understand that people want a normal prime lens that’s fast enough for decent photography. They understood when they did the Panasonic Leica 25mm for 4/3 and they did a good Pancake for m4/3. The Olympus 17mm is just too damn slow with f/2.8. Sorry Olympus.
For any fast prime lenses with a long focal length, I can only recommend going for legacy gear, either Olympus OM or Minolta MD or Leica if you want to (waste)/spend real money. A Minolta MD 50mm, f/1.4 can be bought on Ebay for less than $50, a MD 50mm f/1.2 will come at around $200. The legendary MC 58mm f/1.2 goes at around $250. All three of those lenses are excellent in sharpness and the latter two have great bokeh. With a Novoflex adapter you get unbeatable cheap and good primes for long focal lengths.
Head over to http://www.rokkorfiles.com and check out the Minolta equipment, if you’re curious. I use it on my E-520 and it’s great. I have two different MD50 f/1.4 and the really good MD 50mm f/1.2.
Don’t think that Olympus is selling m4/3 as a system for real photographers. It’s a hobby and enthusiast system only. It’s clear when you look at their lens roadmap. I have accepted that I’ll need an SLR (4/3 for now) with really good lenses for the heavy work. I would love to combine my gear with a m4/3 body which I would use exclusively with (for example) Panasonic’s normal standard lens and my legacy lenses. My Zuiko 12-60mm will always be attached to a 4/3 body, never a m4/3.
NONE of the m4/3 Olympus lenses attracts me. None at all. They are all too slow. If I bought m4/3 gear, my shopping list would look like this:
* EP-2 (body only, black)
* EVF for EP-2
* Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 lens
* Novoflex MD to m4/3 adapter
I don’t like the Panasonic bodies as they don’t have in-body IS which is a must-have feature for anyone using legacy lenses.
I would use this gear only with the Panasonic lens and my legacy lenses. Since I already own the Zuiko 12-60mm I am also not interested in spending a lot of money on a m4/3 wide angle lens as 12mm is good enough for me when I need it.
well spoken! we dont want these rubbish standard lens stuff that have no impressive rendering and can be used only on sunshiny days.i was hoping for a fast 1.4 or better pancake. but instead panasonic and olympus go for the boredom. sucks!
Well, nothing from Olympus that wowed me this time. However they appear to be looking at global market research, not the enthusiast “forums”. Waiting for the Panasonic 100-300 (no slower then F4 to 5.6) and hope it won’t be a compromise. Some more fast primes are needed and definitely something equivalent to the 12-60 F2.8 would be very nice. Isn’t there a rumored Panasonic 12-75? A fast Tele would also be nice. either 300 or 400 F2.8.
The problem is Panasonic went for lens stabilization and Olympus went for sensor based stabilization. They should have picked one or the other. For all this tedious like-for-like duplication they may as well not have bothered sharing the lens mount standard at all.
The only lens I’m interested in buying is the rumoured Panasonic 12-75 f2.something.
The Zeiss Sonnar 50 mm f 1.5 works very well with the EP2 in my own experience (I bought it from new last week and love it).
The ZD 12-60 I have used for film recording on the EP2. Quite impressive I think.
From the m43 lens line up the 9-18 mm is actually very good and as far as I have seentests better than the 4/3 9-18 mm.
I also have to admit that the announcement is really so very boring to me. Although Oly has been aware the market want compact lenses (as from previous interviews), who would need all those long zooms (which is sooo slow) while the body is small?? If so, what’s the difference between m43 and NEXes? Why don’t I just get the NEX-5 and 18-200mm as it’s already in stores??
On top of the point mentioned earlier, while the C-AF performance of m43 bodies is not as responsive as traditional DSLRs, I don’t think there is a point to have all those long zooms (it’s reaching 300mm now – that’s equiv to 600mm in 35mm standard already!)… Is the combination capable enough to shoot e.g. flying birds??
I’m sufficiently invested in 4/3 that it would take something really special to get me to buy into micro 4/3. While these zooms are small for what they are, they don’t seem all that great and aren’t smaller by enough to even make me think of switching. What’s the practical advantage? I’m not going to be fitting a Pen with either of these new zooms in any kind of pocket. I can just as easily carry my E-600 around.
Now, if I put a kit together with an EPL-1, and pancake-sized 12 f2.8, 25 f1.4 or 1.7, and 40 f2.8… man, I’d be tempted to buy into that. It’s still not exactly pocketable, but in a jacket pocket it probably is. They could probably even make a case that would hold three pancake primes in something the size of one of these zooms. With a kit like that I can walk around a city the whole day without sticking out like a tourist, but still get excellent quality. Otherwise, I might as well just stay with a compact zoom camera and deal with the smaller sensor.
Very well said.
Unfortunately Olympus won’t do these lenses.
Let’s hope for Panasonic, that already has the (great) 20mm f/1.7. If they announce at photokina at least one of the 12mm or 40mm, I’ll stay in u4/3. Otherwise, we will need to look around, and we will walk away soon.
Do you think Nikon and Canon will be as dumb? They will do exactly what you said.
i dont care what oly makes anymore. all my hope is in panny. come on 12-75mm 2.5-3.3 HD OIS!!! i will buy it at any cost.
+1
Very well said.
Unfortunately Olympus won’t do these lenses.
Let’s hope for Panasonic, that already has the (great) 20mm f/1.7. If they announce at photokina at least one of the 12mm or 40mm, I’ll stay in u4/3. Otherwise, we will need to look around, and we will walk away soon.
Do you think Nikon and Canon will be as dumb? They will do exactly what you said.
Olympus and Panasonic is just trying to pave the road with their crap zooms, in anticipation for Canikon to come in and walk on. Next, both of them will create a throne for Canikon to sit on when they come in. Atleast Sony is putting up a fight in anticipation of the big 2. I think the best bet for EVIL cameras is going to be either Canon or Sony. Canon has proven a willingness to quickly develop lens, especially fast primes, but then again, they have publicly said EOS was their future strategy. With Sony, we gotta hope that they have a deal with Zeiss to produce AF NEX lenses. That’s currently unclear. Nikon is a good bet, but they take a lot longer with the primes. Olympus and Panasonic? Look at their small lens line in 43. Does anyone think it’ll get better with u43? I had hopes too, but we must use past history to project where these two are going. I will wait for the Panasonic announcement to decide whether to abandon the system or not.
Those of you who want fast zooms on the M43 system, I’d re-think your desire. Fast glass is heavy, and fast zooms are really heavy. A fast 12-75 zoom might even be heavier than the current 12-60 for regular 4/3.
I’d stick to asking for small fast primes, and if you want a fast zoom, use a dslr or the 4/3 adapter.
I do not understand, why do you complain about the dark and over priced m4/3 zooms, if the reason why you chose the system was the size and weight? Did you think that a 25mm 1.4 quality lens will be small and light? Try to use it fully opened to blur the background in a typical Mediterranean sunny day with limited speed of 1/4000s! if you need this kind of lenses you should buy a regular 4/3 camera and use all existing lenses.
For a 25mm there is no need to increase size noticeably, a 50mm is another story. And for shooting wide open during sunny days, just buy a ND-8 filter. 🙂
If they can make a 14-150 with the same apertures as an 18-200 and a fraction of the weight, they can certainly make a 12-50 or 12-60 that is both faster and lighter than the dslr equiv. just as they did with 4/3. A 12-75 has too much range and inevitably quality suffers; and this lens needs to be high quality because Olympus needs a high-quality standard zoom for the Pen. The other zoom they need to show their commitment to m4/3 is a 35-100, both fast and high quality. Frankly, the 17 pancake is a bit soft so I don’t have much hope re quality of Olympus m.zuiko primes. Let’s hope they step up with the 12mm and 50mm. Or Panasonic do with a Lumix or Leica. Until these high-quality lenses appear, I won’t be investing in m4/3.
DMS… while Pansonic’s 20mm f/1.7 is heavier than Olympus’s 17mm f/2.8, I still find its size and weight quite acceptable for micro four-thirds. Therefore, I don’t think there’d be much problem with a 25mm f/1.4. Fast zooms are another matter, of course.
perhaps the good olde days of one of these line-ups:
– 28/2.8 + 50/1.8 + 105/2.8
or the premium version
– 24/2.8 + 50/1.4 + 100/2
or the rich version:
– 24/2 + 50/1.2 + 85/1.4
is not going to repeat itself in m43, why should it?
But too right, we need some choice in the primes. The thing we don’t have access to is Canon or Nikon’s prime vs zoom sales data! While m43 is growing bit time, there are ‘some’ primes. And perhaps compared to the full Nikon/Canon full-frame line-up is the number of primes vs number of zooms ratio any worse in m43?
The Panasonic 20/1.7 is a super lens (and that means we have two pancakes), but considering that its a ~50mm f1.8 its a shocking high price. Of course, they popped some Aspherical glass in there! And cannot benefit from the olde worlde 50/1.8 volume! But the price is an insult. Its still the best lens we can have in mFourThirds, but there isn’t much competition for that claim.
One of the big claims for m43 is supposed to be the small size, then out come these two lumps of lens. Okay compared to FX versions those lenses are TINY! But, f6.7 makes me want to vomit.
mmm, its a good job that I’m happy with my E-P1 + 20/1.7 … and will wait and see what happens at the E-5 launch.
PS – I think Sony only has one prime? an equivalent 24/2.8 … they don’t have a “50/1.4” either.
But Sony make a fish eye and an ultra wide converter lens for the 16mm/2.8 prime. That make owning a fish eye and an ultra wide angle lens cheap for NEX.
Amazing how boring the lenses are after how Olympus originally introduced four-thirds with great lenses… Obviously small/fast primes are appropriate for micro-4/3 and olympus only has one which is mediocre right now… 🙁
I guess they’re relying on voigtlander – I certainly wouldn’t buy any of the existing olympus m43 lenses
One thing I did not understand about Voightlander lenses: is their project specific for m43, or are they old lenses with m43 mount? In the latter case they should not be that small or light.
In any case Olympus should serioulsy plan some good primes. After all, this is what many pros desire. Yes: Average Joe and Sport Mama are not going to care about them, but the amount of owners of DSLR willing to invest into a second smaller system is huge.
Couldn’t Oly and Pana try to differentiate their offerings, maybe producing three new primes each? That should be possible in one year, and would make the system unbeatable from the point of view of lenses
(then, next step: cameras with more features and better UI and controls…)
The new Voightlander was specifically designed for m43.
Olympus should quit making lenses. They clearly have no idea what their consumers want.
The new one was specifically designed for m43.
Sorry I answered to the wrong message.
why should olympus make good new lenses for m34 if they even don`t make good new lenses for 43?
this maybe will be the third time, i have to put olympus products into the waste just because they don`t inform the little men on the street.
(but till today there is no nikon camera i like and so my good old nikkor lenses will still stay in the box.)
Ofcourse, you are right
Makes you wonder how many fisheyes lenses they expect to sell with another one already on the market ?
the lens line up proves two things :
One Olympus is looking at Panasonic merely as the main rival , not a added force. It is one thing to want to rack the sales of a standard zoom lens, it is quite another to copy EACH lens already available from Panasonic
Olympus has decided that it still does not want to address anything else than the entry level market
the lens line is nothing short of ridiculous after almost 2 years
Harold
I am really sorry but Olympus can go to hell! This was the last straw. Overprized bad lenses, and nothing for the enthusiasts, or professionals.
I’ll wait for Panasonic or till Canon launches some proper fast lenses and compact system.
I have the E-PL1, best of all Olympus cameras in sharpness and resolution. I don’t waste it with Olympus or Panasonic AF lenses, except for UWA, and use superior manual focus lenses instead.
So, Olympus’ releases doesn’t worry me, I am no Olympus lens fan, don’t care also for the so-called SHG ones. And to someone spoiled with the best in DSLR AF, m4/3 AF is so slooowww anyway, one will get better results doing MF with the VF-2 EVF.
Anyway, Olympus has nothing to offer now, even their new E-5 is nothing new, only good for Olympus diehard cult.
Well, one should not be tied to brands. Others are coming soon with even better cameras.
Waiting eagerly to see how Voigtlander’s 25mm will fare, though. Fast lens of this kind that is not a CCTV lens is rare
The new fisheye m4/3 can’t compare optically to the Samyang 8mm though. Beautiful optics on the Samyang, although stupid design where one has to go calibrate focus by themselves. Not for amateurs.
Nailed it there. You have to wonder, is there any pride left in the Olympus lens design team? Designing and building run of the mill lenses, repeating stuff already done a few years ago but for a slightly shorter back focal length, and not doing one exceptional lens during that time? As an engineer or designer, that has got to drive you nuts, or to another company.
Seriously, did Olympus lose its lens team and start from scratch with what was left?
I seriously had that same thought a while ago. Maybe all of the real Zuiko designers were pissed off after they heard that 4/3 line is being shut down. Most of the main engineers quit their job and some summer vacation students and random replacements were all that was left.
And this is what we get from them.
Do you know how Oly market their m43 camera in Japan?
It is a camera for girl.
Panasonic also market their m43 camera for housewives. Do you know how they call the GF-1 in Japan? it’s “Fashion Single Lens” (Fashionable Single Lens Camera”
Having that said, I don’t think lens quality is top priority for both companies.
Really hope Pentax will join the m4/3
But it seems to Be also Aps-c mirrorless one.
The line-up of current Pentax primes
seems the Ideal type for m4/3.
But it seems the main players in M4/3
didn’t have the taste.
REThink about it.
Aps-C with the slim body and cute primes
is a top killer for m4/3.
Let’s wait and see, if the O P don’t face the music.
i want fast prime too… though i am not liking the slow zoom released by oly… i would think they are aiming at the camcorder market… yeah, they do not have a camcorder… but panny just launched one which helps the competition in the u4/3 … i am thinking oly does not want to lose in that battle…
I still wonder if at least some of you get the point that the guys who are talking about their equipment in forums etc. are not Average Joe.
The need of some enthusiats is not what’s going to sell and make money. Olympus tries to satisfy the mass market. The products are targeted at people that are currently using bridge cameras. Of course, Panasonic won’t produce any further DSLR, but Olympus does. I promise, the Oly 40-150 would sell more often and generate more gain than Cosina’s 25mm f/0.95.
I guess Olympus was the wrong decision if you guys really need those amazing fast lenses and annoy the world with portraits that show just some sharp lashes. If you really want a superb lens, try the 35-100 f/2.0.
The 35-100 f2 is the best lenses that I’ve ever had, and I’ve been into photography for a long long time.
I question whether you are right about the average joe being the target market for Olympus, though. Maybe for the m4/3 line it’s more obvious… Olympus has never tried creating a fast prime for any of their DSLR camera, so how do they know what will or won’t sell?
900 euro’s for a f/6.7 zoomlens without built-in stabilization. Really Olympus, don’t you want to _sell_ those lenses or what?
I completely agree with the 43rumors editor, this announcement is disappointing, and doesn’t convince me to buy into m43 (I would love to replace my Canon 20d setup with something smaller and lighter for travel).
A 80-200 f/4 lens that is smaller/lighter (and optically comparable) to my Canon 70-200 f/4 L), now _that_ would make me sit up! Add a decent 12-xx walkaround zoom and I would be hurrying to the shop 😉
Peter,
you are right, the price for the lens is crazy for what you get. 1 correction, though. You will not find any Olympus DSLR lens with build-in stablaization, cause stablization is built into the bodies of most of their modern SLR’s. That is one real advantage of the Olympus DSLR cameras that is often overlooked.
I know Olympus has IS in the camera body. That should allow a lens at a lower cost. If they had announced a 900 euro lens *with* IS (because “at long focal length in-lens IS performs better” (yet unproven)) I could at least somewhat understand the pricing.
Olympus just has a habit of pricing itself out of the market (remember the 4/3 300mm f/2.8?)
Maybe Fuijfilm Micro-S10 EXR is a surprise for us all?
As far as fast primes, I really would love to see olympus create 1 or 2 for either 4/3 or m4/3 (I don’t care which, just want to see some effort) but I don’t have conficence that it will happen ever. Look back at the history of their DSLR line of cameras. We’ve been asking for faster primes since the E1 days, and they just don’t seem interested. I don’t think that it is a goal of theirs to make fast lenses, and they don’t really care what kind of noise that we create around the topic.
I’m disappointed that Oly is leaving off 4/3 in favor of M4/3, because I’m totally into optical viewfinders (SLR’s are my No.1, TLR’s and rangefinders No.2).
Oly already have some really good 4/3 lenses:
25/2.8 … maybe not as sharp as it should be, but very good prime for kits (remember those days when 50/1.7 used to be standard?); it could be a bit faster, but f/2.8 is also fine – see Ai-P Nikkor 45/2.8, SMC Pentax M 40/2.8 etc.
50/2 Macro … very compact, very sharp, fast enough
9-18/4-5.6 … excellent budget wide-angle, very sharp wide-open, very lightweight and quite compact for such range
14-35/2 and 35-100/2 … wonderful pro-grade lenses (maybe a bit overpriced)
What I would really love to see is a successor to legendary OM-1 and OM-2:
– E-450 based body
– E-PL1 based sensor, electronics and stabilization
– bright viewfinder with 100 % coverage and 1.0× magnification (internal flash can be left out to make a room for it)
I am ready to replace my E-420 with such a wonderful body.
And as a replacement of my beloved Zuiko 9-18 mm, I would love to have a 12 mm f/2.8 (preferably pancake) prime. Of course 4/3, not M4/3.
Although I have an L1 and 25mm f/2.8, I see Pany or Oly’s m43 offerings as evolutionary dead ends. No fast normal primes, except for the Pany 20mm f/1.7, but that should be a $120 lens (just like Nikon, Canon and eveyone else’s 50mm normal lens), not $350-400. Canon and Nikon’s 50mm f/1.4 are cheaper in comparison. And it shouldn’t be so difficult to build a fast normal lens–even Canonets from the 1960’s and 1970’s had 40mm f/1.8 lenses.
And WTF are Pany and Oly thinking when releasing a FISHEYE lens–that is a very limited use lens–WHY????