UPDATE: You have a few hours left to add your lens selection. After that I will start the poll. Thanks!
A year ago we made a lens poll. We asked you what kind of Micro Four Thirds lenses Panasonic and Olympus should develop. The most requested lens was the 25mm f/1.4 and that lens is now coming from Panasonic.
We thought it would be good to create a new lens poll because we now have a much larger reader base that can participate the voting. We also know companies are constantly looking for new ideas and we may can give them a little help 😉
Comment this post to suggest your lenses (primes and zooms). It would be very useful if you could describe the characteristic of the lens you want…like price, wide open performance, size, video optimized lens, in-lens stabilization etc. Please try to give a realistic description. For example: if you want a 12mm f/1.4 lens you can expect a high price and a huge size. We will take into account all your suggestions and start the poll in a few days.
Reminder: The website Four-Thirds.org shows the complete Lens selection and a has nice matching simulation!
Thanks!
43rumors
P.S.: The new 100-300mm lens is in Stock at Amazon Deutschland
The 14mm lens is almost in Stock at Amazon Deutschland
265 Responses
Simple…
35-100 f2 zoom with Mega OIS
Whatever it weighs, whatever it costs.
😉
43hk, dont you think that F2.8 would be sufficient and would be MUCH smaller&lighter?
If that’s the case, the 43 lenses + E-5 would be your choice!!
Any new macro lens that does not cost an arm and a leg. I could easily opt out of lens stabilization and accept barrel length varying when focusing 😛 I want both a wide and a narrow lens though! Hmh! (right now I use a Canon FD 50mm macro with an adapter, I cannot control aperture though so it’s hard to use!)
17mm as fast as possible, 1.2 or 1.4
A voigtlander ultra wide (7 or 8mm), f/4.5 would be awesome!
12-60 f2.8-4 or even faster and about the size of the 14-140, and please sharper than the 14-140 🙂
Count me in on that one…
Me too.
count me too! I had eqv. 24-105 f/2,8-4,8 in my Sony R1 and it was simply marvelous! It was a little bit too short but 12-60 mm (eqv. 24-120 mm) would be perfect! Of course with video friendly aperture (it should be a standard in MFT cameras as they offer stills and video).
ups sorry there was actually 24-120 mm in Sony R1 🙂 so still a little bit too short but anyways
if new MFT 12-60mm be of same picture quality as present G Vario 14-45mm I’ll definitely buy it!
Yes. I doubt getting the same quality into a smaller build for MFT as the FT 12-60mm, but a 12-60 f2.8-4 would be a much needed improvement for MFT from Olympus.
mFT version of the 12-60mm is indeed much needed… if the sharpness is still good enough and the price is not exhorbitantly more than the original (like the 75-300mm)
We already have a macro lens, some fast primes and decent zooms but the system lacks of a good portrait lens. Even Samsumg is releasing one for the NX mount.
With any of the existing AF lenses is almost impossible to achieve a noticeable background blur when shooting portraits. It makes sense to put efforts on a lens that partially solves the sensor size limitation regarding OOF effect. So a 50mm f/1.4 or 70mm f/1.8 will be perfect for me.
As for the characteristics of that hypothetical lens, I wouldn’t care so much about video performance and that sort of things but just about bokeh and colour. OIS would be nice also but not mandatory if that increases size/price a lot.
+1
We need a superb, FAST, image-stabilized, “walk-around” zoom–Very wide to moderate telephoto:
11-44mm f/2 O.I.S.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE
mFT version of 14-35mm f2 from Olympus.
Micro 4/3 HG:
9mm f3.5 ~ 4.0
12-45mm f2.8-3.5
35-100 f2.8-3.5
optical quality rather than measurebator specs
high build quality and weather resistance of the 4/3 HG lenses
finally some m4/3 that are worthy of the Zuiko name 😉
Fast, reasonably affordable (under $600) portrait prime. Say, a 67mm f/2 or f/1.8.
af 14-50/2.8
14-50/2.8!
1. A medium telephoto prime with 1:1 magnification, perhaps 90mm f/2. Very good wide open. Won’t be cheap (probably ~1000$). Won’t be small (probably ~500g).
2. A non-macro fast portrait prime, Perhaps 50mm f/1.4. Small (though no pancake) and sharp with build quality similar to the Panasonic 20mm. Would cost ~500$ and weigh ~200g.
A fast wide angle, like a 10mm f/2, something similar to the Olympus OM 21mm f/2. The size is not “very” important, but it is a sharp and distortion “free” image.
1. 50/f1.4 – portrait, as small as possible with these specs
2. 10mm/f4.0 – pancake, small, ultrawide
3. 12-50/f2.8-3.5 – bright “pro” zoom
4. 35-100/f2.8-3.5 – bright “pro” short tele
-A conversion of the Zuiko 12-60mm f/2.8-4 would be ideal. Same philosophy : weather sealed, solid construction, ultrasonic drive (possibly mechanically coupled instead of focus by wire), just scaled down to the MFT flange distance. Sharp & contrasty.
Size: no bigger than panasonic’s 14-140.
or a panasonic equivalent with OIS.
~700-800€
-a 12mm f/1.8 or f/2 prime. It doesn’t have to be the smallest pancake ever. It doesn’t have to be a pancake. It could be as large as the 9-18 in collapsed position.
Ultrasonic drive(mechanically linked), weather sealed, robust. Sharp and contrasty. Or a manual focus from Voigtlander
~500€
-a 12mm f/4 tilt shift lens. Same build standard.
Should I still say “sharp and contrasty”?
~800€
Get out of my mind!
Those are exactly the 3 lenses I was thinking about. Really.
12-60mm f/4
12mm f/2
T/S 12mm f/4
We don’t agree is in the prices though: I would happily pay more than what you suggest, specially for the T/S lens.
And what I don’t want are big, heavy and expensive f/2 zooms, even if they are scaled down for m4/3. They didn’t make Olympus any favor back them, but f/2.8 high quality zooms could be another story.
12-50mm (or 14-45mm) F 2.2, in-lens stabilization, video optimized
My personal choice:
1. Olympus 50mm f/1.8 for portraits: no macro to keep price low, no OIS since I have an E-P1, f/2 ok if it is smaller.
2. Voigtlander 9-10mm f/3.5-4: I’ve no need of fast superwide primes, so slow aperture to keep it small and cheap; manual focus is not an issue with superwide: for my purposes it is even preferred since you can set it at hyperfocal and then forget about it.
A manual 20mm with the aim of being tiny – a true pancake lens.
It could, I assume, be much smaller than the existing f/1.7 thanks to the absence of motors. It’d have a proper damped manual focus ring with zone focusing detents a la the Olympus Trip 35. Aperture could be controlled by a manual ring or by electronics, whichever is smaller. But despite being a manually operated lens, it’d have a chip in it to make use of the MFT system’s software correction.
To me the combination of manual focus and integrated software correction is a great opportunity to make the smallest possible lenses (take a look at Pentax’s unmotored pancakes to see how flat they could be) with the massive added bonus that they’d be relatively cheap. And zone focusing would be great – much more usable than current MF-by-wire, especially with the increased DOF of the FT sensor.
Personally I think the biggest think limiting panasonic is their flash system. PERIOD.
Otherwise, some lens options I’d like might be:
40mm f1.4 macro 1:1
100mm f2
Fast zooms would be nice but not necessary for me. Bokeh isn’t really achieved until you get below f2.8, so I’m not interested in paying premium for this in a zoom. For general purpose I’d be much happier with the kit zooms plus off-camera flash. Unfortunately this does not exist for panny bodies yet (built in that is).
1.12-70mm f/2.8-3.5 (can be expansive, but short length!)
that would be good
12mm f/2.0
A cheaper version of the Leica 45mm, maybe something like a m43 version of the Olympus 35mm Macro (a cheap, shortish macro for general use, *not* a specialized expensive lens for insect fans).
A slightly faster 17mm (35mm-e ) lens, like a 17mm 1.8 or something.
The Olympus 17mm 2.8 is simply too slow. And if I had to choose only one lens, I would prefer 17mm to 20mm (otherwise the Pana pancake is fine).
A 14mm shift architecture lens (only half joking, actually I think this would kind of make sense if other gaps are filled). 14mm would be a good FL if there is only one shift lens in the system. Hey, Cosina could build one, as this would be manual. I don’t know if tilt is necessary on the small m43 format, except maybe for effects.
A fun and cheap shortish plastic soft-focus lens, that turns your GF2 or EP-L into an instant Holga, that m43 cameras offer square format helps 😉 Yes, there is the lensbaby, but it is too expensive, and a bit cumbersome to use.
F/2.8 is not fast enough for CF2, so I’d like to have a F/1.8-F/2 14-55 AND a F/1.8-F/2 50-200. (Shouldn’t cost too much to make such 4x zoom lenses.)
A 12-36mm mid-range zoom with an f/2.8 constant aperture, quality optics and Panasonic’s HD optimizations would be perfect!
My thoughts exactly!
I’d be happy with a fast stabilized 12-30.
+1 here
I need lenses that are designed to be usable without software corrections.
Oly & Pana can futher correct lens flaws to have zero problems, but uncorrected lenses should have no worse CA & distortion then current DSLR lenses.
They can larger if needed.
14/2.8
25/2
40/2
I need lenses that are designed to be usable without software corrections.
All m43 lenses can be used without software corrections if you use converters that don’t take advantage of correction instructions.
If you want lenses that are pre-corrected and don’t need software corrections you’re looking at the wrong camera system; the m43 standard was designed to facilitate small, high quality optics whose results utilize software corrections.
I need lenses that are designed to be usable without software corrections.</i?
Why? You can't (correct me if I'm wrong) mount them on a non-MFT body so they'll never be used with a system that doesn't support correction.
Quick-focusing, fast pancake primes. With stabilization if possible. (I.e. a 20/1.7 MkII.)
1. A pancake wide – no more than 12mm. Can be as slow as you like. No bigger than than the 20mm F1.7 but doesn’t need to be tiny.
2. Something around 40mm – 45mm and quick – F1.8 or faster. Small as possible please. (I’m thinking about the Konica 40mm pancake.)
I’d have to agree with the first post by 43hk: I could also use a 35-100mm (I assume he’s talking about equivalent focal lengths here) f/2.0 zoom. That would be the perfect lens for my event photography. I’d even gladly accept a 35-70 if 35-100 proves too cumbersome. But it has to be f/2.0. That’s the only way to achieve reasonable low light performance as well as subject isolation with the smaller 4/3 sensor. OIS would be nice, but not absolutely necessary. Optical performance should be good wide open at all focal lengths and improve to very good and excellent stopped down to f/2.8 and f/4.0.
This is not the only lens we need, but it would go a long way to establishing micro Four Thirds as an alternative to APS-C cameras with their f/2.8 zooms. The extra stop should make the low light playing field more equal.
I would like to see the following:
12mm f4 tilt shift lens
25mm f1.4 (I do hope it comes to reality)
35mm f2 macro 1:1
42mm f1.4
90mm f2 macro 1:1
300mm f4
i wished for a mft version of the excellent 50mm f/2.0, but decided not to wait and got the cv 50mm f/1.1 instead.
but still hoping for a fast 12 mm, f/2.0, compact build
a tele prime 100mm f/2.0 would make my wishlist complete
Right now my most used lenses are the 20mm f1.7, an fd 55mm F1.2 and a 50mm F3.5 OM macro.
I don’t care for macro because manual macros have everything I need.
25mm F1.4 is interesting, but maybe too close to the 20mm.
I want a 50-60mm f1.2 or f1.4.A 50mm f2 is fine if it is every bit as sharp as the 43 current.
12mm f/2 prime. Fast focus, good build quality.
Ideally I would like Voigtlaender to expand their native MFT offer.
One 35-100 fast big zoom from Panasonic.
That’s it.
YES
DREAM LENS
+——————————————————————-
| Shift-lens 12mm f/4 (tilt not really important but nice to have)
+——————————————————————-
Also nice to have:
12-75mm f/2.8
55mm f/1.4 (as good wide open as 20/1.7)
70mm f/2.8 macro (no distortion whatsoever)
I want
* 50mm f/1.4 (regular sized lens) or 50 f/2 (compact or pancake): good bokeh
* 10mm or 12mm f/2.8 or f/4 (pancake)
7mm F4 prime rectilinear. I’d go up to 500€.
An instant buy for me:
12-60 f2.8 OIS HD (Silent) You can make it as big as the 14-140 but have the price at the magical $999 or lower. They would sell like hotcakes..
I’ll accept f2.8-3.5 (drop the zoom end to 55mm) I really don’t want to see f4, Too easy to slack off and make it jump to f4 by 20mm..
If Oly makes it without OIS, then the price needs to be lower and it must be f2.8-3.5..
I’d really like a PL 14-50 f2.8-3.5 on m43, just start it at 12mm, I’ll take anything ending in 50mm or over..
PLEASE!!!
As for anything else.. a 100mm f2… something like the Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM… Price? Well if it’s super sharp… $700-800?
35-100mm f/1.8 or f/2.5
10mm f/3.5
40mm f/1.4
I think 35-100mm at F1.8 is very possible, but to reach that they would have to make it the same size as olys 35-100 F2. they would have to take advantage of the short distance to the sensor due to no mirror but It would definitely cost an arm and a leg,
more then the 2100 35-100mm from oly
14-50mm f2.8 OS
50-150mm f2.8 OS
100-300mm f4 OS
TC 1.4
12mm f2
25mm f1.4
50mm f2
All of them really good wide open, and excellent stopped down. Yes, I know, those wouldn’t be cheap and ultra compact. But we already have more than enough cheap and ultra compact m43 lenses. Give us some quality glass for the GH2!
One of my favorite Canon lenses was a 85mm f/1.8. The focal length helps a lot with producing really beautiful depth of field. Actually, I own the 85mm f/1.2 now, but let’s be realistic 🙂 … *However* there’s a much higher crop factor in play.
The equivalent for the dream Micro 4/3rds lens that could be reasonably good in that form factor would be something like a 40mm f/1.4 … though I’d take it as fast as I could get it. (And that only gets the depth of field of a f/2.8).
Anyway, I’m a depth of field junky who likes L-series Canon primes. Do something along that route.
To replicate the depth of field of an 85mm f/1.8, that lens would have to be a 42mm f/0.95.
Coming from a medium format background, I personally think shallow depth of field can be a pain in low-light situations. I do, however, see the need for a good portrait lens. I think having an autofocus 42mm f/0.95 would be big and expensive, though.
I think what is needed is image quality. None of this in-camera correction mess. I think both Olympus and Panasonic should go back the the 4/3 route and have tiers of lenses: one for compact size with good image quality and reasonable cost, and another where image quality is paramount.
An m43 version of the Olympus 12-60
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1 – with highest possible IQ
I belive we should benefit from the MFT format, replicating FT is not good enough for me
I would like to see either:
12-60 f2-2.8
12-70 f2.8
+1
+1, I’m hoping for this one too, but preferably from Panasonic, with OIS & optimized for video
+1 !
together with a new m4/3 body with 18mp or >20mp body:
12mm f/2.0, best quality
40mm f/1.4, best quality, no distortions
all with depth-of-field scale
Dear Panasonic,
14-70 f2.0 OIS £500
70-200 f2.8 OIS £800
Thanks,
Thomas
My dream lens for next year, by about April when damselflies and dragonflies are beginning to reappear would be a longer macro lens.
I blieve we are going to get one from Olympus, perhaps a version of the 4/3 50mm f2.0 macro, but I would like a longer focal length.
My preference would be for a 75 mm f3.5, to give longer working distance with moderate price, (say £400-500) weight and size. For my purposes faster apertures on macro lenses are pointless as depth of field is at a premium at close distances and I don’t want to use it as a quasi-portrait lens. The main requirement is to have pin sharp results at apertures of f4 to f8.
Why can’t we have a tilt and shift lens for architechtural photography? For me the ideal would be a wide angle about 12mm f2.8 or f3.5. This is the obvious thing missing from both the 4/3 and micro 4/3 range. The expectation would be that this would be very expensive, around £1000.
Another idea is for a high quality fixed focal lens with image stabilisation, i.e a 25mm f2.0, high IQ at full aperture and moderate price.
1) m.zuiko 50mm /f2 Macro. Size of the Panasonic 45mm and 1:1 magnification.
2) m.zuiko 100mm /f2 Macro. Stunning sharpness, good blur, tripod mount (!!!). Doesn’t need do be small.
The mFT-Sensor ist very good for Macros. I use a Sigma 150mm on a Pen for my Macros (see homepage). It works great if you have a tripod mount.
“Portrait lens”, not macro, stabilised 55 f/1,4 (or f/1,7 if too expensive / big) or alternatively 80 f/2.
There is something I do not understand : Why m43 manufacturers can’t provide same price tag and size lenses as Nikkor / Canon ?
Just suspect it’s :
– either an optical question linked with proximity of the sensor
– either something to do with the cost of CDAF collateral impact on the focusing engine ?
Many thanks for the feed back
I think it’s because they have to engineer the lenses from scratch, while Nikon and Canon can just tweak the same decades-old designs they have currently.
i think so also
A fast portrait prime would be nice, a 40mm f/1.4 like llamaresurgency above proposed, for example. Not too big, if possible, with smooth bokeh.
+1
I’ll include what I’m willing to pay for them, too, mainly because I think some of the M43 lens prices are reasonable, and some are most definitely not reasonable.
14-35/2.8, $600USD
40/1.8, $150USD
50/2.8 1:1 macro, $250USD
300/4, $1000USD
1.4x TC, $250USD
25mm extension tube, $100USD
I want Olympus Pro lens:
12mm f/2,8
17mm f/2
40mm f/2
Primes, primes, primes
Preferably a Panasonic one due to the fact of in-body correction.
10mm f/3.5
I don’t know how small that would be but with an f/3.5 it would be an OK size I think.
Price: not more than 500USD
Simple: high grade fixed focal length lenses with f1.4 and fast and quiet AF.
Personally, I would like to see these lenses come out:
-25mm f1.4 HD OIS for superb low light and video capability. I think $600 would be a nice asking price.
-42mm f1.6 at the size of the current PL macro but a little wider in diameter. $500 without OIS, $600 with.
-70mm f2 $450 Something a little shorter than the 90mm Summicron would be nice.
-12-54mm 2.8-3.5 HD OIS video zoom. $800 Size similar to the 14-140 though shorter at the long end.
-10-20mm f2.8-3.5 HD OIS wide video zoom $650.
-75mm f3.5 macro lens $500.
-14mm f2.8 T&S to round out the system.
I think lenses like these would make sense to release over the next two years.
And then adding a comprehensive flash system, and m43 would be well on its way to becoming a system capable of being considered by an entusiast.
very reasonable
I think it would be worth ensuring TOP IQ and pricing some of those same lenses above closer $1000
better lens IQ will win over more converts, even if it costs
If they can deliver 75% of the quality of Canon L lenses or high end Nikkors, I would be satisfied.
what would really be nice is some primes, preferably weather sealed equivalents to the SHG line that Olympus already offers but for m 4/3rds something like a 100mm f2.8, 35mm f2.0 and a 14-35mm f2.0 nice rugged body and silent AF for video..those woulds be fantastic
Ok I’ll play. I’ll suggest for:
1. Fast portrait lens (40mm-55mm)/(1.2-1.4)
2. Fast normal zoom 14-54mm f2.8-3.5, the size can be reduced.
3. 300mm f4 prime.
4. 10mm tilt shift prime.
Primes don’t need to be big an expensive. I still have my Minolta 50mm 1,7 Kit-Lense, good quality for moderate pricing.
Wishes:
Zoom 12 – 50 or 60mm 2.8
Portrait about 50mm 1.4
Dont forget to WEATHER-SEAL all those lens, Oly!
7mm f/2.8 or f/3.5
50mm f/2.0
No OIS, compact as possible in length.
For professionals there should be zoom lenses like Nikon’s:
14-35 f/2.8
35-100 f/2.8
I don’t have a m4/3 camera, but fixed 7mm F3.5 would be a nice alternative for 7-14mm F4. Something I would like to see for my E-3 too. Zuiko 7-14mm is damn pricey, and all I would need is an ultra ultra wide on those rare occations when 12-60mm doen’t do the effect for me.
50mm F2 sounds good too.
Just two:
12-60mm equiv, f/2.8-4ish
30mm f1.2 portraiture prime
I want the 12-60mm weather-sealed (in the hope that olympus comes out with a weather sealed m4/3 body)
I rather expect these lenses to be expensive
All for Panasonic (GH-2)
Tilt/shift around 12 mm, f/3.5
primes:
100 mm f/2.8
40 mm f/2.8
25 mm f/1.4
zoom:
7-14 mm f/2.8
14-42 mm f/2.8
35-100 mm f/2.8
For all lenses: far better C/A at f/4 and over, better sharpness. All lenses with lens shade.
Some lenses with f/32, as some new cameras simply forgot ISO 100… 🙁
All lenses with filter thread.
40 mm f/2.8 with “portrait bokeh”
Lenses with f/32 are pointless for MFT. In fact everything above 11 or maybe 16 is basically pointless for MFT. If you close the aperture further, your image will get more blurry, because of diffraction (the aperture is getting small compared to the wavelengt of light then).
A better idea is to buy a neutral density filter, if you want to use fast lenses in bright daylight. Actually future bodies might get one included in front of the sensor.
Yep, you’re right… Thanks for the idea!
7-14mm f4
20mm f1.7
45-200mm f4-5.6
Is all I need, (other than lots more photographic skill). Then again, a 35mm f1.7 pancake for £250 could be squeezed into my camera bag too……..
25mm f1.2 I would buy instant, pancake or not
I’d also like to point out that a lot of people have unrealistic price expectations here. Someone above wanted to pay $600 for a 14-35mm f/2.8 lens. That’s crazy cheap. It’s way cheaper than Canon or Nikon’s offering.
I also think people forget that making lenses smaller, though they use less glass, is MORE expensive. The cost of glass may go down, but miniturizing everything in a lens has to be more expensive.
+1 very true,
I expect and want lenses in the +1000 range, Then I can demand and expect top notch IQ and have a right to complain if its not
i still miss my nikkor 2,8/20mm the most.
i want a 2,5/10 or 2,5/9 to fit on e-system, a good quality like my 14-54 but not too expansive.
and a fast 25, but a real one, no pankace and no mft
50 or 60mm pancake, f2/2.8. Quality similar to Pentax DA pancakes would be good.
In a recent German magazine test of pancake lenses, the Pentax was by far the worst, the Panasonic 1.7/20mm the clear winner!
Great, so I’d like to see the quality of the 20mm translated into a 50-60mm. Or the Zuiko 25mm pancake translated into a 50-60mm pancake. Both Oly and Panasonic make great lenses. What I meant was that it be “decent” quality – not super expensive, not rubbish.
(The Pentax pancakes both have a pretty good review on Cameralabs, with them preferring the 70mm over the 40mm)
And a decent 12mm pancake would be nice too.
@thomas ashley
I think you mean 14-35 & 35-100, that would be equal to a 28-70 & 70-200 on a FF camera
I would like to see two lenses cover that range also.
f2 would be great, but if it makes them rise to over $1900 for each then I can live with f2.8 as long as there under $1500
fixed focal length is a must
canikons new wide/standard zooms have shifted from 28-70 to 24-70, so I would like to see them same for m43, a 12-35 would be good but don’t make the standard zoom longer then 35, if anything make it wider only and faster or better IQ.
Make a 35-100 for telephoto needs don’t try to make them “too” versatile when it comes to focal lengths. Stick to traditional focal lengths and focus on fast aperture, sharpness and vignetting
I will pay for a Good zoom lens
I will NOT pay for a OK zoom lens that is extremely versatile
We don’t need versatility, we need quality
size does not really matter to me since the vertical grip is coming.
DONT sacrifice Quality of the lens picture to make it small.
GF1/2 users aren’t in the market for these type of lenses, fast pancake primes make them happy.
anything as big or bigger then the 14-140 is “Too big” for a GF1/2
people in the market for this focal range get it because they know the constrained 24-200mm (in our case 12/14mm – 100mm)focal range means top notch IQ can be attained. If you fall short of this to make it smaller they wont accept it and, and after all that work of making it small GF1/2 users will say its too big anyways
standard zoom = same circumference as the 14-140, and a bit longer in the physical length of the lens if needed
tele zoom = fairly bigger then the 100-300 and give it a tripod mounting, not as big as the 35-100
with those boundaries and no mirror, IQ better or as good as canikons can be attained along side the size above and maybe faster aperture I think. If you can top the oly35-100mm that would be great but I am 100% sure you cant, its almost perfect in IQ even at f2
I know people want a 12-60 version but if that is made I don’t think a fixed focal length should be given to it. That would drive up the cost of it and IQ would probably suffer and it would be big
make a 12-60, sure, 2.8, not fixed focal length, 2.8-3.5?, give it great IQ and price it under or at $1000, and make a higher priced 12-35 with fixed F-value and best IQ
I really think it would be a bad Idea to merge those to type of lenses together and to make all happy. IQ, size, price would all suffer you can count on that. No one will be happy then
Make a good 12-60 type lens and dont give it fixed focal length and later once your base is bigger base or maybe a camera better then the GH2 is about to come out, make the pairing 12-35/35-100 type lenses prior to its release
I don’t mind waiting for them but DON’T try to merge them, they are 2 different classes, try to follow olys lens setup
a good 50-200mm like oly would be good for the 12-60 lovers but you already have the 45-200mm so I’m not sure how that would work
That is my request
I think its pretty reasonable and realistic
A prime somewhere from 35 mm to 50 mm, f2 or faster for portraits
Silent autofocus
I second that. (though I’d take it between 30 and 45mm, as I’d use it as a general lens as well as portrait)
f/2 or better and I’m buying one.
(f/2 f/1.8 $500, faster still, I’d pay $800, but only if its sharp wide open. if its soft, don’t bother) doesn’t have to pancake.
for zooms, there are so many 4/3 that aren’t on m4/3 yet. all those 2.8-3.5 ones. pretty much any of them. Things are now so slow in m4/3.. my s95 point and shoot matches my e-pl1 when they both are using a zoom lens at night!
hi,
i think the poll should be more abstrakt at first, like:
what do you want:
pancakes?
primes?
zooms?
of course not.. why would anyone want many lenses from the same category??
everybody would want combinations
First of all the things are not mutually exclusive.
> primes?
> zooms?
Some Oly zooms (e.g. 35-100) have quality of a prime lens. So separation is a moot IMO.
> pancakes?
There is very limited playing room what lens designers can put into the pancake form factor. And generally IQ is sacrificed first. 43 sensor is still too large for a compact designs to maintain the IQ.
* FAST primes (f/2 and faster – no more of this f/2.5 and f/2.8 nonsense)
* f/2 standard zoom (~12-35mm)
I didn’t switch to m4/3 to use a bunch of slow consumer zooms or disappointingly slow primes.
And for the love of God, can the supposed Micro Four Thirds Consortium have a little get-together and agree to stop releasing similar lenses across different brands? As much as I love having the option to choose between the Panasonic 14-45 and 14-42, and the Olympus 14-42 mk.I and the 14-42 mk.II, I’m not sure they’re all necessary additions to the lineup, despite the difference in approach to image stabilization between the two companies. The same goes for every other zoom, as well as the new 14mm, which should have been 2-4mm wider and 1/2 a stop faster, even if that would’ve required it to be a bit bigger and more expensive.
I’m waiting for a 12-50mm f2.8-4 OIS suitable for movies and high quality stills before I get a GH2 or similar.
Fast portrait prime.
Should have been their first lens out, not the last.
42-50mm range, f1.4. Pancake would be nice, though not necessary. Video enabled.
Between Oly and Panny the basics are reasonably well covered assuming the fast normal is on the way. What I need next are a few “pro” zooms that are faster and wider with video capability, such as a 12-60mm f2.8 and 35-100mm f2.8. I would also take a long, fast portrait prime such as an 80mm f2. Expect these to be a little larger and more costly, of course.
As a professional photo Journalist and Historical photographer for FEMA. I would really like to see a 12mm F2 Super High Grade lens. There is a reason why Nikon, Cannon and Carl Zeiss (For Sony) have released their own versions. It would really show that Olympus is committed to the pro 4/3 users.
24-150mm (equiv), f2.8
I would love 2 primes, one wide angle at 10~12mm or so, with at least f/3.5
And a prime tele around 250mm~300mm with a good aperture around f/2.8 or so …
A voigtlaender AF version of 25mm f/0.95 would be nice as well, but given the price of the current version that would become too expensive :[
My guess is that would all be too expensive for my wallet… :/
35mm f1.2 : )
i would love to get a real good portrait lens, something like 30-60 f2.0 or faster f1.4 would be an absolute dream, it doesn’t have to be extremely small but needs a good quality and a very good bokeh, maybe leica branded.
17mm/f1.2 – 1.4 (faster, better, equiv of 35mm, thats base lens for kinda everything)
No SW CA or distortion correction. Leica welcomed.
50mm/f2 and 100mm/f2 (f-stops doesnt matter in this case too much)
(true dedicated macro lens with at least 1:1) cause that 45mm Leica sux a bit..
67mm/f1 – f2 (equiv of true portrait lens – 135mm)
No SW correction, STF more than welcomed, though not sure if Panasonic is capable of something like that.. Leica should be. 🙂
12-35/f2 – f2.8 zoom (Olympus has one – its equiv of most used 24-70mm)
CA or distortion correction via SW, no problem, OIS needed.
35-100/f2 – f2.8 zoom (again equiv of most used 70-200mm)
CA and distortion correction via SW, OIS is must have..
100-300/f2 – f2.8 (yea we already have that in not so good version, so now maybe pro version? 🙂
7 or 8mm f4 lens, fixed wideangle.. (should be cheaper and lighter than 7-14 zoom)
12mm, 18mm, 30mm, 50mm, all F1.0. I need shallow depth of field, and F1.4 is not shallow enough on 4/3 sensors.
a wide angle prime. 10/12mm pancake – I appreciate that some people want 10/12mm f0.1 for £5.50 but…. I’d like it to be fast but realistically I’d be happy with f3.5 or f4 if the image quality was there and I don’t really want to pay more than the 20f1.7. Personally i’d use a 10/12mm outdoors so speed is not my big issue.
Given Nikon and Canon can make a cheap 50 f1.8 can Panny please make one of those or a 50 f1.4.
I don’t really need much else. the 14f2.5, 20f1.7 and 45f2.8macro do me rather well.
as a system I think Panny could do with a 40-150 both at a consumer level (think oly size) and an f2.8. And it definitely needs a 24-80 f2.8 equiv. Not that I’d buy it!
The problem I think Panny/Oly suffer from is that there are different buying types with different needs/wamts/
This is easy. First Panasonic needs to make a 300mm prime. A f2.8 would be outstanding but probably cost around $3K+ Also, they need to make the full line of teleconverters (1.4, 1.7, 2x) That lens would be a killer app for M4/3 as it would be a 600mm equivalent f/2.8. With a 2x teleconverter it would be a 1200mm f/5.6! The next lens to make would be the 35-100mm f/2 (70-200mm equivalent). If they could make this for $2k, then this system becomes king for event photography. My 70-200mm is my go to lens for weddings and other events). The next thing is not a lens but is a flash. Pani and Olympus flashes suck and cost too much. Make something like Nikon flashes and you have something. Put a radio wireless trigger system on it and you will stomp the competition. Finally, m4/3 needs a 12mm f/1.4 or faster. 14mm is a pretty worthless length and yet Pani has 5 lenses that have this length in them. A big reason people bye the LX3/5 is because it has a 24mm equivalent length. How m4/3 has missed this is beyond me but it needs to be fixed. These lenses would make the m4/3 the system to turn to for just about every pro need.
Dreaming about something similar to ED 14-35mm F2.0,
though not necessarily so bright (F2.0–2.4 or F2.0–2.8 would be enough) in order to keep price reasonable.
The lens I most want is an auto focus 45mm f/1.4 lens. I want great image quality wide open at portrait distances. It needs to have good bokeh and in general smoothness is more important than absolute sharpness. I would love it if it focused a bit closer than most 85/1.4 lenses on the market, but I don’t need a macro lens. Size and weight isn’t a big deal as long as it is closer to a typical 50/1.4 than say the Sigma 50/1.4.
The second lens I would like would be a small 10mm. Speed isn’t a big deal. 12mm might be ok, but I would prefer 10mm. I’d carry it in addition to the 14-45 so I want it significantly wider than 14 without being the size and weight of the wide angle zooms.
The third lens I’d like would be a 12mm to 60mm zoom. I don’t want something as big as the Olympus 12-60 so a slower lens like 3.5-5.6 or so would be better. Image quality similar to the Panasonic 14-45 would be great. Do not make this collapsible. The Olympus 14-42 is really lousy pointed into the sun from light leaks around the barrel.
I’m on the fence about image stabilization. I mostly use an Olympus E-PL1 so that my 20mm is stabilized, but I think I prefer the Panasonic cameras in general. The 10mm doesn’t need stabilization, but I guess I would prefer it in the other 2 lenses so that I could choose any camera.
I would be really curious to see any “anonymous” feed back from the various “sources” once they’ve seen these various requests. Hopefully a lot more “Yes. we have that coming” vs. “OH shoot, we’ve missed the market again.”
I think two portrait primes: 45mm f/1.2 and 65mm f/1.4 would be lovely (centre sharp wide open; edges may be softer for these lenses at max aperture).
Also, a reworked version of the 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 II. But should be smaller (at least ditch the need for adapter) and lighter (not weather sealed and use more plastics).
How about some really compact, bright and high quality MF pancakes (but with electrical contacts to trigger the MF assist and privide exif)? A set of 12, 25 and 42 would be nice…
25mm F1.4 IS
12-60mm F2.8-3.5 IS
35-100mm F2.8 IS
50mm F1.4 IS
100mm F1.8 IS
150mm F2 IS
That would be some killer lenses :-))
I prefer Lens IS because in camera IS crops the image.
I think by far the most important addition would be a versatile fast zoom lens with a true wide angle and decent portrait tele capabilities. The lens on my LX5 (with smaller sensor) has f/2.0, goes from 24mm to 90mm full frame equivalent, and as added bonus has macro capability down to 1 cm! I’m aware that an equally powerful zoom for micro four thirds would be much too expensive, but there HAS to be something starting at 24 mm (12 mm in m43) and at least a little faster to realize the capabilities of the sensor and allow low DOF.
To give an example of the flaw of the current lens, I recently was able to take low light indoor shots with both my LX5 and the NEX-5 (larger sensor than GH2), with the NEX-5 standard zoom lens. The LX5 destroyed the NEX-5 simply because it was able to take pics at much lower ISO because the lens is so much faster. Same is true for video where a zoom lens is particularly important and the Sony/Pana primes are not useful. At this time, without there being a faster and true wideangle zoom for the GH2, I have no reason to replace my LX5 with the GH2 for indoor photos and videos!
Brilliant. I couldn’t agree more.
If get a LX5 to replace my F30 and C7070, then how much better do the lenses need to be on the various G-series or Olys before I “upgrade”. Considering that I would have image stabilized lenses @ f2.0-3.3 from 24-90mm (equivalent). Yes, with an interchangeable lens camera, I can then buy brighter primes and longer zooms, but the LX5 has quickly become the swiss-army-knife of cameras.
No. The LX5 isn’t perfect, and I WANT an interchangeable lens camera, but I cannot by one until they improve the glass at an affordable/reasonable price.
In order of importance, this is what I’d buy.
20mm f1/1.7 (we already have it, right price when bought in a kit, right size/weight)
portrait lens:
40mm f/1.4 or faster, with very fast AF (and OIS if it’s panny). Fair quality at the center when fully opened, soft at the edges until f/5.6 or more is ok. Great bokeh, which means undercorrected spherical aberration (and thus not great quality in the center when fully opened) is highly desiderable.
Marginally heavier than this http://blog.javacorner.net/2009/08/cheap-50mm-f14-portrait-lent-for-micro.html – reasonable price (i.e. $300). They can just take the Cosmicar design, shorten it to 40mm and put a AF motor in it (but that would have a slow AF, so it must cost no more than $200).
40mm f/1 would be even better, but probably to expensive and heavy for me to buy.
40mm f/2 could be ok too, but only if lighter an cheaper.
Closer than f/2 is useless for portrait (like the current leica 45mm)
serious wide:
10mm f/2.8 (same weight/size of the 20mm f/1.7, at most a little larger/heavier), for about $400
10mm f/4 would be ok, but only at $300 and not larger/heavier than the 20mm
11mm f/2.8 would be ok, but only at $300 and not larger/heavier than the 20mm
11mm f/4 would be ok, but only at $200 and not larger/heavier than the 20mm
12mm f/2.8 would be ok, but only at $200 and not larger/heavier than the 20mm
12mm f/4 would be ok, but only at $150 and not larger/heavier than the 20mm
longer than 12mm (including the already released 14mm) are useless to me
A 50 mm f/2, which I believe is already on the way from Oly.
A 12 mm f/2.8, which I think is also on the way.
A high-aperture normal zoom, like the 14-35 mm f/2 for regular Four Thirds.
A high-aperture tele zoom, like a 35-100 mm f/2 or f/2.8.
For me 12-50 2,0-2.8 mega ois
A portrait lens. Fast short tele prime.
Somewhere around 40-60mm. F 1.4 or so. No IS or macro for less bulk and nicer out-of-focus areas. Soft edges and some distortion is ok. Good AF and good manual focus. Lighter and cheaper than the 45mm macro.
A line-up of 14mm 2.5, 20mm 1.7, 45mm macro and my suggested 40mm f1.4 portrait would be very very nice!
Easy. Make a 14-35 F2.0-3.5 and 35-100 F2.8-4.0.
This makes for a 28-70 and a 70-200, both very standard zoom lengths, and wider apertures than standard grade to erase the full-frame advantage.
Since 4/3 sensors are smaller, wider apertures will make them exactly equivalent to full-frame cameras, with faster shutter speeds.
The two would cover 90 percent of a photographer’s needs if they are of high quality.
Of course, Olympus already built those lenses in F2 constant zooms for four thirds… And they’re awesome. If they could do that at a reduced price, sacrificing the constant zoom a bit, it would make micro four thirds a serious contender for bang over buck.
I’d be willing to pay 900 apiece.
A lens that might spend even more time on my PEN body than the incredibly wonderful Panasonic 20mm f1.7. The only way to improve on the Panny would be with some zoom.
Something with a little wide angle to a slight telephoto. Faster than 3.5. Great optics. No need for IS. And silient focusing for movies would be an improvement also.
Oh wait, I just described a lens that already exists: The Olympus 12-60MM F2.8/4.0 SWD Zuiko. That’s 24-120mm equivalent in 35mm format! Why would you ever take that off in the 90% of everday shooting?
Because it’s for the 4/3 mount, not micro. With the converter, and and its already generous diminensions, it’s not so micro at all.
So I would like that same lens, optimized for the micro 4/3rds mount, incorporating the collapsing barrel that Olympus has executed quite well. Constant f2.8 would rock, but I realize that would be asking for too much.
$700 seems like a good street price. I don’t care if they have to make more of the components out of plastic to hit that price, so long as the optics remain excellent. They could even knock it back to 12-50mm if necessary.
Most reviewers seem to agree that Olympus created a true segment-buster with that lens, so now all they need to do is optimize it for their camera system that actually is popular.
what a great topic!
so, we have a fisheye, a pro wide zoom, and a ‘pro-ish’ standard, and a pro macro. the other lenses are consumer grame and with slow f stops. So there is a clear need for some fast glass.
::: PRIME :::
– the fast standard that pansonic hinted at: 25/1.4 … while I’d love to see this I think it is too close to the 20/1.7 and can’t see them having both, so does that mean the 20/1.7 gets discontinued? I hope not, I think there should be room for ’21/2′ and a ’21/1.4′ … but the price of the 20/1.7 is shockingly high looking at the numbers, but worth every penny. Pan were vague with the mention of the 25/1.4. I would suggest a:
::: 25mm f1.2 – expensive, not pancake (and the 20/1.7 gets a price drop)
– we have a 14/2.5, plenty fast enough really and that has ’28mm covered’, so we need:
::: 9 or 10mm f2.8 or f3.5 … no real need for speed … 25-30% more than the 14mm price
– portrait lens neglect fest … time to fill this gap:
::: 40mm f2 (as a pancake to go with the 14 + 20) … similar price to the 14 or 20
– gadget time … I think the 43 and m43 have been really open to adaptors and things, so I don’t see them getting involved in a T&S lens. But I think Pan or Oly should make a
::: Nikon F mount tilt/shift adaptor
::: ZOOM :::
– We have the wide zoom covered but its real pricey and only f4. I don’t think the system is mature enough to see another ultra-wide zoom, so ‘just a wide zoom’:
::: 10-20mm f4 consumer build at half the price of the 7-14mm
(this leaves the 7-14 for those who can afford it)
– the biggest badest gap: a fast standard zoom. This is the one lens that is begging to be made and would come out in bundles and be a big seller as a stand alone for those of us with a m43 body already (but they will offer it in a bundle with the GF2 and GF2Pro to tempt us to update the camera!).
::: 12-50 f2.8 … and NOT f2.8-4, the m43 can make this one smaller and f2.8 straight … not cheap! weather sealed?
– no more tele zooms, the 100-300 from Pan is already big, a faster f2 or f2.8 would make a mockery of the m43 size advantage
::: no tele zoom (very slim chance of a 50-150/2)
Hopefully Olympus will wake up and make some too, the above being all Panasonic offerings. Best match is an Oly PEN body with in camera IS, and a non-IS Pan lens. Embarrassing!
and good luck reading through all of the replies in what must be the longest post on this site?!
dCap, it looks like you and I are on the same page. Only real difference is you wanting weather sealed, and I’ll accept collapsing for size. Of course, both weather sealed and tiny would be the best, but without the likelihood of that happening (which I would definitely pay more for), I could forgoe the collapsing small size to have the weather seal. To sum up, I would be one of the first in line to buy the lens you describe.
I have to agree about “-no more telezooms” because if you mount 300mm-f2.8 on MFT body you might as well do it on Nikon/Canon SLR’s
Second, i would like to split the “standard fast zoom” into 2 lens.
1. 14-50 f2
2. 12-60 f2.8
or
3. 12-75 f28-3.5
and Panasonic, please take note from Olympus’s lens sizes and make yours at least as small,
we don’t want DSLR sized lens as 100-300! we bought MFT for its portability and comfort!
Panny lenses are larger because they have the OIS built into the lens instead of the body like Olympus. No excuse for non-OIS lenses, though 🙂
Agreed jammur, however I’d say that I wouldn’t mind if they built an expensive 12mm-45/50/55mm starting at f2.8 now and later lower the price. The truly ridiculous thing is that Panasonic has NO decent general use zoom lens for sale still. Make it $2,000, just to give people who can afford it an option. One has to really wonder what world the people making strategic decisions for companies like this live in, or how low their motivation to beat the competition are.
Wow! 140 comments, hopefully I’m not too late :). Here are my suggestions:
1. Olympus 12mm F1.4. I’ve said couple of days ago and I’ll repeat: for night street shooting and indoors. Don’t mind how long and expensive it is as long as it is top quality.
2. Panasonic 12-60mm F2-F3.5 HD OIS. Video optimized, also good for low light when zoom is needed. As long as current 14-140mm, but sharper.
3. Olympus 15-200mm F4-F6 collapsible MSC. Carry-everywhere daytime lens, as light as 14-150mm, but shorter and with larger diameter.
4. Olympus 40mm F1.4 portrait lens. I don’t care for it one bit, I rarely make portraits, but ever since I started reading m4/3 forums, people have been asking for it. So if anything, it would broaden user base and therefore lower the prices of other gear :).
5. 1.4x and 2x tele converters ( back mounting ) and a 0.8x wide converter ( front mounting ). Top quality, there are enough third party converters that make sharp lenses blurry. I don’t want to buy and carry every lens ever made for m4/3, but with first three + Nokton 25mm F0.95 and these converters, I’d be happy enough.
All should be sharp and without vignetting wide open, silent and fast focusing. All should have diameter of 65-70mm – that’s optimal m4/3 camera body height, but as short as possible. They should use similar filter sizes, 58mm for example, so users can carry less filters and other addons. That could make these compact cameras even more practical.
P.S. Unfortunately, matching simulation is couple of months late, it is not yet showing all the new stuff from Photokina.
Like other comments here, I’d ask for a bright prime lens in the 40 to 50mm range… at least a f1.4 with image stabilization built in.
Also a miniature version of the 12-60mm for m4/3 would be great. As bright as possible please!
I’d love Olympus to make a HG 70-300mm f/4(fixed aperture), and weather sealed for $600-700 USD.
10mm f4 pancake (it could be as small as the pinhole lens when mounted. glassed would need to be recessed almost 10mm into the body)
35mm f2.8
collapsible macro (1:2)
and not lens but…
collapsible extension tub with aperture control
Tilt-shift adapter for f-mount lens.
7mm prime (14mm FoV) f/2 or better
14-35mm (28-70mm FoV) f/2 constant
35-100mm (70-200mm FoV) f/2.8 constant
100-300mm (200-600mm FoV) f/2.8 constant
I’d probably ditch my D90 if I had access to pro-quality bright lenses like these for m4/3
the 14-35 f2 constant exists in four third, a 35-100 f2 constant too. Why do you not consider those already?
Gimme a 40mm, 45mm, F2 or F1.8 pankake prime for £100.
That’ll do.
I second the 100-300mm (200-600mm FoV) f/2.8 constant (Panasonic).
A teleconverter option to go along with it for that mega oomph would be nice 🙂
Speaking of which, AF/AE/etc compatible teleconverter and macro rings would be a very welcome addtion.
My vote is for a nice 12-60/2.8 (or f2.0 if I’m dreaming), with IS for the Panasonics. Should be shorter than the 14-140, and similar diamemter. I would probably never take this lens off, and you’d get 2x extension for stills on the G2/GF2/GH2 (and others?) at about 4MP, plus 3-4x in video at 1080. Sounds perfect to me!
What about a lens that does not use the full 4/3 sensor image circle, and therefore is smaller and cheaper and faster, possibly starting at wider angle? Some mix between real 4/3 and compact camera lens. 5 Mpix images really should be enough in most cases.
12-60mm
25mm F1.4 IS
50mm F1.4 IS
12-60mm F2.8-3.5 IS
+1
Top that with a 100mm f/2.8 macro.
A longer macro lens provides more workable range and is often more useful for macro work. The 50mm could lose it’s macro designation in favor of faster aperture (f1.4 as you suggest) and AF.
I would appreciate better optical and build quality.
Most desperately needed: A fifty-something f-one-point-anything.
I’d be equally happy with a compact 50/1.7 to go with my Pana 20/1.7, or some wild and humongous 58/1.2-ish concoction. (If Sigma would wire up their existing 50/1.4 for MFT, I’d be all over it, even though it’d be pretty big on an MFT camera.) I just need a fast medium tele for stage/theater, documentary, and informal portrait shooting.
I’ve gotten fairly resigned to manually focusing my 50/1.5 Nokton — but let’s face it, if I had an equally good lens with AF, I’d use the AF.
Yes, I know, scads of people already have commented about this gaping 50mm hole in the MFT lens lineup. That just proves how much it’s needed!
Another thing that would be useful would be a constant-aperture f/2.8 zoom or two. A 14-50 and a 50-150 should be feasible without being ridiculously large or outlandishly expensive.
Lately I’ve been using my Nikon-mount Tamron 17-50/2.8 on MFT via an adapter, and this combo actually is pretty manageable even though the lens looks about twice the size of the camera! But again, AF would be awfully nice to have, and presumably a lens designed natively for MFT could be a bit less bulky.
None of these suggestions are beyond the reach of mainstream optical technology. Come on, MFT alliance, before Canon, Nikon or Pentax walks into the mirrorless cafeteria and eats your lunch!
I wanted to suscribe this opinion, but replied to Ben instead…(Well, a 12-55 f2.8 is a good option too). I think the most obvious hole in the lineup is a compact and fast portrait prime (50mm 1.7 or 1.8) The PL 45mm 2.8 is too expensive and not fast enough IMHO. If Oly shows the macro 50mm reworked for M4/3 I’ll buy it, if the AF is responsive and the price doesn`t go overboard. (The 40-150mm for m4/3 came out pricier than the 4/3 version, and the price of the 75-300 is ridiculous, not to mention the worse aperture compared with the 4/3 70-300).
12-55mm f/2.8
+1
17mm f2.0
42 or 45mm f1.8
14-100 IS Pro grade bright zoom. i.e f2.8-4 or constant f4 The brighter the better.
My Konica-Minolta A2 had a 7-50mm f2.8-3.5 (35mm equivalent of 28-200mm)
Imagine a 7x zoom that only lost half a stop at the long end!
(Panasonic, I would pay up to 1700 usd for a lens like that. Hint hint…)
“My Konica-Minolta A2 had a 7-50mm f2.8-3.5 (35mm equivalent of 28-200mm)”
Hehe, my Minolta Z1 had a 38-380mm F2.8-F3.5 lens. If they added IS, a 3400×1920 sensor and HD video, I’d still be using it today :).
Agreed
I’d prefer a fast 14-100mm f2.8-f4 compared to the slow 14-140, make it same size!
also we need fast pro standard zoom
14-50 f2 (smaller then FT!)
And standard-wide-tele zoom
12-60 f2.8
or
12-75 f2.8-3.5
Most of the suggestions seem to cover this list (plus two outliers for fun)
super fisheye ~5.5 mm
wide prime ~10 mm
luxury short zoom (constant aperture) 13-50 mm
premium general zoom (video optimised) 12-75 mm
short portrait ~35-40 mm
short macro ~35-40 mm
luxury mid zoom (constant aperture) 50-150 mm
long macro ~50-60 mm
long portrait ~60-70 mm
mirror ~400-500 mm
But to be honest I’d only ever personally think of getting the wide prime, the “premium general zoom”, and a macro.
I’m with Ben
12-55mm f/2.8
Although I want it optimized for video… IS…. and also focus markers on the lens. The focus markers could even be a little LCD screen on the outside of the lens itself kind of like the ones in pocket calculators… or, make all the cameras have the option to turn on a meter that shows what distance you are focusing at.
I would also like to see a doubler and some extension tubes at some point.
That’s pretty much it. I with all lenses had IS for video, even the 7-14mm.
The Fuji X100 viewfinder will supposedly display the focus distance and DOF scale.
On a replaceable lens camera this should be more difficult, but probably doable with native focus-by-wire m43 lenses (as opposed to adapted lenses).
i would plan to live with three prime small size lens (pancake-small size)
now that i have the 20 1.7 this range is quite cover for normal perspective.
the panny 14 2.5 is quite nice, but i would rather have 12 2.5/2.8 in the relative pancake size could cover my wide
the tele/portrait len, i would wish for panny 50/60/65 1.4/1.8 with OIS, with this could be ideal for portrait (100-130mm equiv) hopefully the size would be quite the same as FF50 1.4 and price range of 400 US$
with those three prime, my small camera kit is set !!
2,8/12-60
2/35-100
2,8-3.5/70-300
This is all I need additional to existing lenses
A true 180° fisheye, which on a (micro) four third is a 4mm lens! Sigma has already a 4,5mm!
I checked the characteristics of the current sigma lens (which is unfortunately not available in (mcro-)four thirds: 900$, f2.8, 470grams
Why deprive (micro-)four third from the true fisheye experience?
50-60mm f2.0 or faster (not macro)
high quality, sharp wide open, size doesn’t matter
I mean a prime lens somewhere between 50 and 60 mm
12-60/2.8, or maybe 2.0-2.8
40/1.0 or at least 1.4
Indeed, we want ULTRA FAST AF LENS!
I’m sure that many people avoid Nokton’s and Noktor’s because of the MF (me for example)
12 mm f 2.8 (or 10mm, why not)
50 mm f 1.4 optimized for video
14-40 f 2 optimized for video
Wide prime 10 or 12mm
Portrait prime at f2 or faster 40-50mm
Long portrait prime, 70mm f2
100mm tele f2 to f2.8
I personally think 14-35 f2 and 35-100 f2 are unrealistic. Look at the sizes of the Oly 43rds lenses. F2.8 is more realistic given for standard zooms.
14-50 f2 $699. mega ois. parfocal. silent focusing.
A couple of short teles would be fun to have (once the major lineup gaps are covered, like the workhorse 12-60 mm zoom).
Classical lenses like 50/1.2 or 1.4, 100/2.0 or 2.8, 135/2.8, 180/2.8 are all compact and inexpensive designs.
They could (probably) be made small in m4/3 version, not so sure about cheap, he, he. However, taking the inherent 2x focal magnifier, these would be killer lenses, and very portable to boot (for my use, much more practical than say a huge 35-100 mm zoom). Imagine having a 200/2.8 tele (eqf) similar in size to the good old OM Zuiko 100/2.8… That would really mean playing the m4/3 card.
Add a teleconverter, and we are almost there!
(I am sure that fast telezooms and lenses like 150/2.0 or 300/2.8 would be very cool and much desired by the more professional user segment. The lenses I propose would be for the rest of us, mere mortals).
Wide compact prime 10mmF2.8
Light slim tele zoom with OIS 40-150mmF4
They should be compact and High Grade/Super High Grade lenses.
We already have very good but large/heavy lenses for 43rds and other systems.
3mm-600mm f/0.75 constant for $250.
Anything less and I’m going to be jumping ship to the Sony NEX =P
> 3mm-600mm f/0.75 constant for $250.
You forgot to mention: weather sealed, in pancake form factor!!
I second the “pancake” + O.I.S and HD rating
+ sharp as 25mm F1.4 4/3 Leica corner to corner on all apertures and focal lengths!
… or I’m back to film cameras!
You failed. Sony have f/0.5 2-1000 mm.
no way, that dream-spec is impossible to make!
Please, a nice portrait lens for the format!! I really miss my 50mm 1.4 I had on my canon 20D. Bring on a 35mm 1.4 or perhaps even 1.2 if possible in micro four thirds!, would be an excellent portrait lens with hopefully wonderful bokeh.. Yes!
12-60 for me please.
A premium designed fast 12-60 or 14-75 would be brilliant for all round quality work, especially in video. The article in Photographyblog really highlightes a point that gets missed in this discussion about lenses – form factor. Let’s not waste time lumping all discussions together, and put some context around
our views:
A. “Professional/pro-sumer” stills-centric
B. “Professional/pro-sumer” video-centric
C. Compact consumer “point and shoot” video/stills
What we might want for A or B is probably way too much weight and bulk for C.
What you say is in a way similar to Olys gradation of 43 lenses: SG, HG, SHG.
That said, I don’t see the point of making SHG and some big HG lenses for m4/3. They won’t be much smaller. Just make an adapter and body that will make them focus quickly.
Reading through everyones’ wishes the 12-60 comes up again and again. As everyone knows this exists for 4/3 already and so do two 4/3 to m4/3 adaptors, which I believe provide full functionality with at least some micro cameras. So is it just the inconvenience of having to use the adaptor the thing that is holding people back from this solution? Or that it isnt fully compatible with your camera? Or is it the desire for a stabilised (probably doable) or smaller (maybe marginally smaller is doable) or cheaper (probably not doable at comprable speed & quality) option that you are hoping out for?
Zuiko 12-60 doesn’t support CDAF – AF takes ~1.5-3 seconds.
M.Zuiko remake, properly supporting the CDAF, is needed.
Though as soon as the M.Zuiko 12-60 would appear, people will start demanding the remake of 50-200 which too has problems with CDAF and focuses slow on m43 bodies.
14-40f2.8
70-200f4IS or a 100-300f4IS. Maybe the new (but slower) panny is good enough here but there haven’t been many tests yet. If it reviews well I’ll end up buying it.
75mm true macro. If fast, would be great portrait too. Don’t mind manual focus here (Cosina, you listening??)
Fast 35mm equivalent. A voigtlander 17mmf1.4 would be nice…
A cheaper 7-14f4 !! I want it but it costs too much for a lens I will use sparingly…
I think a 12-60 would be good but not if its the same size as the current one. It would need to be significantly smaller and still retain the maximum 2.8 aperture, which would be difficult.
If there was to be a compromise needed for this lens to fit into the micro four-thirds system, then I would say make it a HG grade lens of 12-45mm constant f2.8 with weather proofing. It must be CDAF compatible, internal focusing and have a close focus. If it were close in size to the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 macro and matched the performance of the current 12-60 (or even slightly less), then it would be a killer kit lens for an enthusiest level camera.
If we’re dreaming, why not ask for a 24-90mm (35mm equivalent) f2-3.3 like the diminutive LX5’s? It is time they focused on truly fast zooms that are also small and light, otherwise what’s the point of the whole mFT exercise?
50 mm f1,2\f1,4 (portrait lens)
12 mm f2,0 (fast wide angle , for street and reportages)
9 mm f2,8 (ultra wide angle for architecture and landscapes)
35mm (70mm eq.) F2 AF macro lens – sharp and usable at F2 and on… I really miss my 70-75mm eq. field of view produced by my previous Nikon camera with it’s prime 50… Or a 35mm F2 AF without macro – for the small size and versatility for portraits. Fast and silent AF for both of course.
45mm 1.2 portraitlens with floating lensparts. superb
14-50 F 2.8 WEATHER SEALED 50-100 F 2.8 + 40 F 1.2 !!
…or F2 and 0.95 ,we can dream?????
+1 for what Federico (and others) said:
50 mm f1,2\f1,4 (portrait lens)
12 mm f2,0 (fast wide angle , for street and reportages)
9 mm f2,8 (ultra wide angle for architecture and landscapes)
12 – 60 2.8
50 mm 2.0 + macro
100 mm 2.8 + macro
12-75 (or 60, or 55, or something similar) f/2.8.
AF 12mm f1.4
&
AF 40mm f1.2
we just need faster lenses, with F2.8 or faster for both primes and zooms.
I would like olympus to build an 40mm F2 Pancake like there older om lens, For under $250USD. I would also like a 400mm F5.6 telephoto lens to be produced for under $1500USD. A 1000mm F5.6 mirror would also be nice for around $4000USD.
12mm 2.8
40mm f2
4/12-60 OIS
1,4/40
1,4/15
2,8/35-110
all with highest IQ please
50/1.2 portrait lens, 45/2.8 in not fast enough
100 (or even 200) 1:1 (2:1 eqiv.) macro lens with internal focusing
I forgot:
4-5,6/14-140mm with the IQ of the 4/3 Leica 14-150mm
14-35/2
35-100/2 (actually, I think a 35-75/2 would be good enough for m43)
67/1.8
150/3.5
First-
25mm f1.2
12-75?/f2.8-3.5
Second
14-35/f2
35-100/f2
any prime lens below 60mm with IQ of zuiko 50mm
I think thats a fair request
price is not a problem any more, affordable lens are covered from 7mm to 300mm, its time for quality lenses.
Cost savings should no longer be a priority, Quality should be the focus.
Fast $1000+ lenses with great IQ is what is needed right now. People will pay for the good stuff 🙂
They can come from oly or panny, fine with me.
a telephoto starting from 50-60mm ending at least 200mm with 1x magnification or higher (35mm equiv), with a reasonable price and good IQ (like the 70-300 4/3 lens). Size is not of utmost importance. f/4-5.6 or better.
30mm f0.95 AF, (no IS) 1400$
12mm F2 AF prime pancake, no IS
50mm F1.4 prime, IS
50mm f1.4 prime, IS, with AF of course
+1 (OIS must have please) 450$
(canon’s 1.4 sells for 349, although no IS)
IS on such fast prime would be a première on the market, let alone at f1.4, it is borderline irrelevant.
On second thought, i think your right
+50mm f1.4 prime, IS, with AF of course
30mm f0.95 AF, (WITH IS) 1400$
12-50mm, F2.2, IS, HD-branded, 1000$
and, maybe more importantly:
What about FAST FULL MANUAL BUDGET primes or zooms? On mirrorless cameras, manual focus is so pleasurable and aperture ring lenses work very well. I’d like to see lenses featuring aperture ring and direct focus ring:
7mm F3.5, 400$
150mm F2.2, 500$
300mm F2.8, 600$
14-45mm F2.8, 500$
Because I often wonder how much IS, AF and all the electronic stuff add to the price and bulk of Panasonic lenses, which are so expensive.
darrask, you can have any manual lens on the MFT format, and you have companies like Voigtlander and Noktor
“7mm F3.5, 400$”
If I have to bet, such lens would sell at about the price of the fisheye. If at all, even more.
Other suggested price are also quite unfortunately ….very optimistic.
How about rather than new lenses, make current ones in a range of colours and materials. Plastic being cheaper version and tungsten-carbide for someone with lots of money.
I just want a fast, and if possible pink, lens.
“I just want a fast, and if possible pink, lens.”
awesome!!
🙂
Why not? There is a market:
My girlfriend wants a red Pentax K-x, so I hope Panasonic and/or Olympus are going to make red DSLR-like body and kit lens and save me from having two systems in our home :).
12-75 f2.5-3.3 lens with HD and OIS
12-35-f2.2 (to balance the 0,6 EV in HIGH iso compared with APS
and a 35-90 f2.2
fast portrait and macro 50mm f1.8 or f1.4 (no bigger than a 50mm FD f1.4 Lens)
Consumer Zoom:
+1 for 12-75, but to cut costs/size i’d prefer to see “f2.8-3.5” – 750$
Pro Zoom:
Weather sealed PRO 14-50 f2 HD OIS – 900$
+1 12-75 f2.5-3.3, no OIS needed reduce size instead, SWD
grmlfz, it is better to reduce the lens to f2.8-f3.5 and keep OIS, otherwise you render the lens useless for handheld video
12-35mm F2.0 fixed aperture, metal body.
7-12mm F2.5 ” ” ” ”
45mm F1.2 metal body
17.5mm F2.0 metal body
10-30 f2.0
20-60 f2.0
10mm F2 prime pancake, no IS. At a reasonable price of course, no matter the size. We lack fast ultrawides!
Or maybe a 9mm, i want something that could replace the great 18,5 (in 35mm)
1.4/55 AF
If anyone is planing to introduce a weathersealed body, this lens is a good candidate to being sealed. Its not going to be miniature anyways.
fast zoom starting at 12mm, prerferably quicker than f/2.8 (HD * IS). 50mm 1.4 with IS
Yes a 7mm F4 would be nice.
Also a 12 mm f4 tilt/shift
Unusual suggestion: A 25mm f2.0 with a leaf shutter to give flash synchronisation to 1/500 or 1/1000 sec.
Voigtlander 50/1.4 1:1 macro (full manual, tripod collar) 1000USD
I need some thing like the 70-300 4/3 lens with tripod mount! and beter or same IQ, same size. or 100-400 f/5,6 with beter IQ then the 70-300 4/3 and price 1500-2000$
1.4/70mm, IS, AF
I would purchase immediately the following professional lens in order:
14-45 2.8
10 wide tilt shift
45 -100 2.8
85 2.8 macro
One lens is all I need 18-60mm F2.5 with IS. That would be perfect and they could charge whatever they wanted to charge for it.
Bright wider zoom 13(14)mm-40mm (it doesnt matter how long will be the longer end). f/2.8
best performance on wide end, IS.
Best possible price
compact 40/2
a little portrait lens would be great, and I have the Rokkor 45/2 in mind as far as making it small is concerned
i rather ask for a 14-85… f2.8-3.5 thats a good lens for me
I have read through the pages and have seen so many great lens suggestions. The sheer number of comments suggests there is an awful lot of interest in lenses for m43!
I would like to see Panasonic AF/OIS lenses with an aperture ring for m43. I would gladly pay more for this feature. Also, I would love to see a step up line of m43 lenses with an aperture ring, better build construction, and faster/better glass.
12mm f2.0 or f1.4 with close focusing capabilities
17mm f2.0 or f1.4
25mm f1.2 for portraits/street photography
42mm f1.2 or 1.4 or f2.0 for portraits
These lenses are most likely to come from Panasonic since Oly is making only slow lenses so far and only one prime.
I would love Olympus to remake a digital version of their OM Zuiko 90mm f2 macro lens
My choice of 4 “interesing m43 lens ideas”
Reason for the choices:
For me, the essence of m43 standard should be to enhance portability to the max yet leaving as little a loss in quality as possible. As I only own a GF-1, I would hope those lenses offered to be “tiny” compared to APS-C lenses! Of course, as Pana has also got the GH line, I believe they would have potential buyers for bulkier lenses (and HD lenses). But in my perspective, I would never choose those bulky pieces (e.g. 14-140 HD) for my GF-1 however good the lenses are, so priority has been given accordingly.
1) Top in the list: Mid-tele range prime lens in pancake form, something like “40mm f/2 or brighter”
While I won’t mind having a choice of 25mm f/1.4 from Pana, I would be most happy to see something like 40mm f/2 or brighter for portrait use. If you look at the lenses offered by Pentax, I would like the new m43 lens to be similar to the “FA 43mm F1.9 Limited” which is so compact!
2) Brighter zoom which is still kept small enough to carry around by most people e.g. 12-35mm f/2.8-3.5
There are now only “kit zooms” but no “premier zooms” in the m43 line. (All are with f/3.5-5.6…) I wonder if there could be chance for a slightly brighter zoom without putting up too much weight or length. A slight upgrade to e.g. f/2.8-3.5 is good enough, and I won’t mind the lens to have less reach, so a range from 12-35mm or even 14-35mm is fine.
3) Cheaper macro lens
Macro shooters can now have 3 choices:
a) The Leica DG but with a deadly price tag
b) Use an adapter with 43 lenses, but utterly slow and bulkier
c) Find a decent old macro lens and use MF
So a cheaper macro lens can fill the gap quite nicely. AFAIK this kind of lens is under development by Oly already.
4) Tele prime
For wildlife/concert/sports use. Maybe something like 200mm f/2.8?? But first, please make huge improvements on CDAF first!!
Ryo81, totally agree with your philosophy: “the essence of m43 standard should be to enhance portability to the max yet leaving as little a loss in quality as possible”
Big, heavy lenses don’t make sense for m4/3
Bright pancakes, including some of the type of a 40mm F1.2
An equivalent of the Zuiko 12-60mm, perhaps more compact and if possible a bit brighter
“Big heavy” very fast lenses make good sense for the high end professional m.zuiko lens line (not for the consumer market).
Ultimate performance in a lightweight design! (relatively to the competitors …)
Olympus lens wish list:
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 12-75 mm/F2.5-3,3 or faster
(EUR 1.000,00 – EUR 1.500,00)
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 75-300 mm /F2.8-4.0
(EUR 1.000,00 – EUR 1.500,00)
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 200-600 mm, very fast
sports and wildlife superzoom (EUR 3.500,00 – EUR 4.500,00)
– a high quality 2x tele-converter
(EUR 500,00)
all with
– motor zoom for video –
– dynamic autofocus for Full-HD-Video and
– additional zoom-controller on the
* new high end professional micro four thirds camera Olympus EM-1
(for all zooms: manual focus like the Zuiko 12-60mm /F2.8-4.0 too)
– the announced professional M.Zuiko 50 mm /F 2.0 Makro (same quality as 4/3)
– the announced professional M.Zuiko 8 mm/F 3.5 fisheye
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 17 mm/F 1.2 (super fast) pancake
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 11 mm/F 2.8 (prime)
– a high end professional M.Zuiko 90 or 100 mm/F 2.5 Macro (prime)
also optimized for hd-video (silent autofocus) and weather sealed!
super fast pancake lens
wide angle
12-60 f2.0 ~Perhaps this is only a dream
10-25mm 1.4 or f2 zoom
17mm 1.4
Because of the OIS/IBIS difference of oly/pana i have an idea that everyone would benefit from:
Olympus > To manufacture Prime’s!
Panasonic > To manufacture Zoom lens!
That way panasonic users would get more lens selection with OIS and Olympus users would enjoy IS for Video
Just what we had available in the OM line, fast, very compact and mechanically and optically excelent primes with aperture ring in front, being able to control aperture from lens and shutter from dial. The size, the minimum to be comfortable, the OM 50 f1.8 is an excellent balance of all qualities.
Dear Juavel!
“… primes with aperture ring in front, being able to control aperture from lens and shutter from dial….”
Top idea – not only for primes!
Congratulations Juavel!
Best regards
Paulus
Pancake M.Zuiko 14mm F2.8
Pancake M.Zuiko 20mm F2.8
pancake M.Zuiko 30mm F2.8
Zoom M.Zuiko 10-20mm F2.8(Pro Lens)
Zoom M.Zuiko 20-60mm F2.8(Pro Lens)
Macro M.Zuiko 50mm F2(Pro Lens)
Macro M.Zuiko 90mm F2.8(Pro Lens)
sameprice class as 20mm 1.7 pancake lens:
17mm 1.7 (better 1.4 or faster ) pancake
super wide prime:
9mm f 4 arround 300-400€
– 45/1.8 portrait lens with SWD and MSC
– 17/2 “wide normal” with SWD and MSC to replace the crappy 17/2.8 (horribly slow and noisy AF, too slow max aperture)
– compact and moderately fast 14-35/2.8-3.5 zoom with SWD and MSC (+OIS for Panasonic version!)
– a m4/3 version of the 11-22/2.8-3.5 with SWD and MSC (+OIS for Panasonic version)… might have to be 11-22/3.2-4 to make it compact enough
Not sure if SWD is compatible with CDAF, but the point is to have fast and quiet focusing preferably using an ultrasonic motor that is suitable for both movies and stills
I’d also prefer a 30/1.7 pancake instead of a 25/1.4, as it would be a lot easier to make it smaller, lighter, and cheaper than a 25/1.4, which would undoubtedly be bigger, heavier, and much more expensive than the 20/1.7.