Click on picture to enlarge the image!
Wow! What a day! Panasonic already shared some details about the upcoming NEXT X lenses. There will be a 12-35mm and a 35-100mm fast X zooms!!!! Panasonic said they will come in 2012 and have a “large” aperture. Those are focal lengths very close to the amazing constant f/2.0 aperture lenses from Oly, the [shoplink 25118 ebay]Olympus 14-35mm f/2.0[/shoplink] and the [shoplink 25119 ebay]35-100mm f/2.0[/shoplink]! But I do hops they are not that expensive!
The 14-35mm costs around $2100. Check: [shopcountry 25118].
The 35-100mm costs around $2500. Check: [shopcountry 25119].
Let’s assume the price is close to the Olympus lenses and the aperture f/2.0:
[poll id=”83″]
Preorder the current X lenses:
Black 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Silver 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Black 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Silver 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Black GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
Red GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
White GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
241 Responses
Oh – my – god. It really happened
“Sometime in 2012” means we are still more than 1 year away from actually seeing these lenses in the United States. A lot can happen in more than 1 year.
This is lenses to GH3, and GH3 coming maybe Q2 in 2012.
So i hope not over 1 year.
I guess you’re probably right!
No problem – it will take some time to sell the FT stuff…
Very good news! Now professionals like wedding photographers etc can move to m43! A whole ecosystem can grow around the whole system. People can ditch their huge SLR:s. A new time has come.
Some sensor manufacturer should take note (and they probably have) – there’s opportunity for an expensive (read high margin) body to go with these.
If you think this would have feather sized DoF, You’re wrong! This lens have equivalent of 70-200 f/4 which only cost $700 for canon version. This is ridiculous.
What Canon zoom can I use on a 7D to have the equivalent of an f/4 on Full Frame?
Shallow DoF is not everything. We need luminosity….
+1 I’m sick and tired of the dof argument. sometimes you’re *struggling* to have *more* dof, not less!
+100 to both “we need luminosity” and “to have more dof.”
Yes, I too wish at times to have shallow dof. But more often I struggle with OOF which is also a consequence of limited DOF. (Or from another POV: PhotoShop can blur – but it can’t sharpen out the details which are not there.)
i love the way they say its an f4 for $700 its not its F2 whichever way u cut it….
F2 dof is actualy quite nice/practical on 4/3… F1.4 ideal but any less i.e. f1.4 of FF is near usless except for very selective situations…. besides low dof can be photoshoped in… low light ability can not!
We dont actual know the price it might well be cheeper than the oly lenses… and just for the record anyone with the oly f2 lenses seems to say they r worth their price 🙂
i beg to differ,
when printed, you cant tell difference in ISO, while DOF is always apperant, even in 800X600 size
the 12-35 will give similiar image to the yesterday announced 16-50 of sony, that priced 600$
It all depends on each persons needs. And, on a personal level, even though a nice super thin dof shot here and there is nice, most of the time i feel people use it as a substitute for proper composition and subject to background distance relationship.
good point — wedding photographers are already using f2.8 zooms on APS-C, and f2 on m4t would have shallower dof than this. Even if it’s f2.8 — it’s close enough, besides one can always carry a second body with a fast prime attached since some of the m4t bodies are tiny.
2.1 M43
2.8 APS-C
4.2 FF
This is not super great but it’s ok. How many people use an FF camera nowadays?
You could have another M43 camera with the Nokton 25 mm 0.95, Leica 25 mm 1.4 or Panny 20 mm 1.7, maybe you’d still be lighter than a 5D Mk II 🙂
Geez, not this argument again…
The aperture is *constant* across all sensor dimensions.
2.0 on m43
is 2.0 on APS-C
is 2.0 on FF
What changes is the *crop* factor going from larger to smaller sensors.
So, a f2.0 m43 will still give you amazing low-light capability and compact size, whereas a similar lens on FF would have to be HUGE to accommodate all the glass required to fill such a large aperture mated with such a large sensor.
So, putting an f2.0 lens on a m43 lens means you have a lighter, smaller lens, impressive low-light capability and and 2x advantage in zoom for a given focal length over a FF camera.
Believe it or not, yes, there are actually *advantages* to going with m43rds vs APS-C or FF.
f2.0 is the ratio of aperture size versus the focal length of a lens and is expressed as such on the lens bezel or body. For example: f=50mm 1:2, which would make f2 = 25mm diameter, f=50mm 1:1 f1 = 50mm diameter. As you say, none of this has any bearing on the image coverage of the lens. For those still in doubt: Google ‘f number’ and read the detailed entry on Wikipedia. This is going to be a hard argument to win, I think, but time will tell… 🙂
Gravity loss is talking DoF here, and he’s correct. A 25mm f/2 shot on m43 has the same DoF as a 35mm f/2.8 shot on APS-C and a 50mm f/4 shot on FF. All will produce the same angle of view.
And FF lenses being HUGE, not so much. A Nikon 85 f/1.8 is 2.8×2.3 inches, the new Oly 45 (90equiv) f/1.8 is 2.2×1.8 inches. Bigger by .5in on either dimension really isn’t massive. The bodies on the other hand…
since when has wedding photography been all about feather sized DoF?
On FF I often shoot my telephotos at f/4 anyway, even for portraits. It helps work around the poor focus accuracy on my FF Canon bodies, and subject movement between the point of AF and the shot.
Writing off these lenses because they can’t pull off Stupid Bokeh Tricks like an 85/1.2 is pure fanboy hyperbole.
+1 again on poor AF accuracy. I have a 7d, and I can’t tell you how much i suffer because of that. And i’m talking static objects, good light, good contrast, etc, etc. Not like i’m taking photos of UFOs flying at blazing speed at dawn. I’ve completely lost confidence of my canon gear due to that. I’ll be shooting the same thing 2 or 3 times to make sure at least one shot *more or less* nails it…
Yeah, really. An f/2 zoom is badass; makes up for the high ISO woes of the smaller sensor.
DoF trolls be damned. If for some reason you need a (literally) feather-thin depth of field, then god help you and pick up the Nokton.
But man, what did they expect, a 0.95 zoom? How the hell much would *that* cost?!
Question: do these new lenses feature real zoom rings or a “powerzoom rocker”? I don’t see many professionals wanting to deal with a “powerzoom rocker”…I don’t see myself wanting to deal with that and i’m an “enthusiast photographer”…
ahhh, now these are news. great stuff.
Amaizng lenses. I am now in touch with sources to hear when they are coming.
Admin, why those lens are amazing?
Sony 16-50 f2.8 costs 600$, i’m much cheaper then the suggested “1500$” price,
the size is in the same “ballpark”
The Panasonic 7-14mm f/4.0 costs $1000. Do you think a faster 12-35mm X lens will cost less???
I can imagine they will price it similarly.
Because 12 mm is a true wide angle (24 mm equivalent), whereas 16 mm is 32 mm – i.e. not a wide angle at all. It’s much cheaper to make lenses like that don’t go so wide.
16mm on sony cameras is 24mm equivalent, so the comparison is more or less fair, at least in terms of actual usage of the lenses
Now we are talking! 😉
FINALLY!!!
Forget those power zooms, these are interesting, especially the 12-35. Wonder if they will have OIS?
Another good move by Panasonic.
Is 12-35mm the “bright zoom” from https://rumors.limboint.dev/wp-content/uploads-legacy/43rumors/2010/09/25mm.jpg ?
Still waiting for “bright wide angle”…
I guess with bride wide angle they referred to the inital 12mm from the 12-35mm zoom.
Um..basically that is a fast kit zoom…not a wide angle…..duh.
Yeah it’s a wide-angle kit lens since it starts at 12 instead of 14. I hope the more limited range will mean a constant bright aperture. Doesn’t have to be f2. F2 to F2.8 would also be ok though.
And I expect the 35-100 to be similar. It looks about as big as the 45-200 I’d say.
I’d rather have it in f/2.8 and a reasonable size instead of f/2.0 and bazooka sized
Agreed. We’ll have to wait and see the aperture specs on these beasts. Their size seems ok too. They look like the 14-45 and 45-200 respectively. Exactly what is needed size-wise. And the basic kit zooms are getting it smaller.
that’s what I was expecting
wow indeed 😀
Yeah, now we’re talking! All that’s missing is a 10-12 MP high DR/Colour Depth sensor to couple them with.
Oh yeahhhh. That excites me a lot more than these 14-42 and 45-175 powered zooms !
This makes me very very happy! Finally!
Maybe time to sell my 35-100 f/2…
Hell yes!
A 12-35 fast zoom? Make it f2.0 or better and I will have my ideal carry everywhere lens!
Nobody other then Olympus can make faster zoom then F2.8!!!!
I highly doubt it will be F2. Might be 2.5.
ONE VERY IMPORTANT THING:
PLEASE MAKE IT SO IT KEEPS FOCUS AND APERTURE WHILE ZOOMING so I can use it for VIDEO!!
Really!
Better not tell any other camera manufacturers, just in case they have them.
Apparently you’ve not used any Panasonic zooms. Both the 7-14mm and 14-140mm stay focusses when zooming. Granted, they’re currently Panasonic’s most expensive zooms, so one would expect as much. I own both. they do.
Wow! Panasonic and Sony are on fire these days!!
Sorry Mr. Reeee, but that is just incorrect. The 14-140 is Parfocal, however it looses focus during the zoom and locks in again once you stop. The only time it doesn’t do this is if you zoom VERY slowly. Well known issue with this lens for video. Makes it a great variable prime but the hunt for a good video zoom goes on! I’m considering picking up the 7-14 this weekend. Would you recommend it?
I’ve got the 14-140 as well, but i understand from a post by MPGXSVCD that didn’t always refocus.
The lenses are very very tempting. This could be the trigger for me to finally sell my canon gear.
WOOOOOOHOOOOO!!!! Fantastic news.
(Provided that August 26 is not the Japanese equivalent of April 1)
This will be a real boost to m4/3 system, of course if those lens will also be delivered (not only announced) before other manufacturers react. Though I can’t really imagine the size of such zooms in Sony NEX incarnation.
Panasonic!!! you really make my day with this announcement!!!!
THANK YOU PANASONIC !!!
I’ll buy 35-100
Sure…make it at $200 and we’re talking ;))
lol @ (Provided that August 26 is not the Japanese equivalent of April 1)
From looking at the pictures I’d say they are considerably smaller than the Oly SHGs, so probably f/2.8 rather than f/2.0? But they could have left out some glass and rely on software correction, or made use of the shorter register distance (especially at the 12mm end of the 12-35) in order to make smaller lenses. The image circle of mFT is also smaller than that of FT. Any thougts on that?
These are X lenses so probably same basic construction idea as the 14-42 and 45-175.
Therefore also smaller than Oly 43rds.
The image circle of mFT is *not* smaller than that of FT. They share the same sensor size.
F2 of 100 mm could very, very roughfly speaking lead to front element of around minimum 50 mm. So I think f2 could be possible in those Lenses with preasumebly 67 mm Filter size.
> The image circle of mFT is *not* smaller than that of FT. They share the same sensor size.
Sure! I confused the image circle with the diameter of the lens mount, which is smaller for the mFT mount.
i thought it was identical both 43 and m43 use exactly same sensor
So finally high grade lenses from Panasonic.
Still enough time to upgrade body/sensor capabilities to be on par with these lenses!
Also enough time for me to save money…
Are you out of your mind????
Almost all Panasonic lenses are High Grade.
Even the 45-200 is a pretty good lens.
When did high grade change to include need for heavy software corrections?
Pretty much all m4/3 lenses and especially Panasonics are based to them, with uncorrected barrel distortion at wide angle (including even Oly 12mm prime) and heavier vignetting and Panasonic also seems to leave correcting chromatic aberration entirely for processing.
Neither is mechanical design up to high level as even expensive 7-14mm has some of that sticky plastickness of Pana m4/3 lenses in zoom action. (power zoom of coming pancake zoom might be actually better than in current 14-42mm)
hmmm…now where is that promised GF7 body to go with these lenses????????????
NEX 7 will be in November, Panasonic has time for announcement, so people can cancel their preorders.
+100 🙂
Not GF7, we need E-PX1* :)!
*E-PX1 = E-PL2 + EVF on the right + GH1 sensor + E-P3 articulated screen + larger grip + 1080p video
I like definitely your idea. Did you mean that the EVF would be on the left like the X100 and most rangefinders or are you left-eye-dominant? I’d also be OK with G/GH style articulated screen. Finally, a few more direct (manual) controls. I like Panasonic’s push to switch functions jog dial, but there are a few things like focus type, drive mode (single, burst, bracket), etc., that I like to be able to just set directly.
Yeah, I meant EVF on the left… Should have read the comment once more.
I don’t think your poll makes sense.
From the size of the lenses on the PowerPoint I would be amazed if they were f2 (f2 zooms are very big and very heavy, and would continue to be so even for m43). I suspect max aperture of f2.8 (and who knows whether they will be constant or variable) and therefore the prices on your poll are also completely out of line.
I think the reality is that if people are going to drop in excess of $2000 on a lens, m43 does not yet have a body worth putting them on. But c$1000 for an f2.8 lens is a rather different matter, and I think much more the market that Panasonic need to aim for. If your poll included an option to buy f2.8 lenses for that kind of money, I’d vote yes.
I heard that it will be faster than f/2.8!
Being an X design perhaps the 12-35 will be a bit faster than 2.8 but I’m sure the 35-100 won’t be as fast.
Are you sure they are constant aperture?
Did you read they are X design?
So where do you base your assumptions on. The are just guess.
If admin heard from release they are faster than F2.8, I’am not doubting that. They are new design so why not F2.0.
Please calm down, we are talking about rumors. Of course I’m guessing, but please don’t say I didn’t read.
Never in the original post did Admin say what the aperture was on either lens, all he said is that they were going to be “large”.
Given the format, the wider 12-35 can much easily be made faster than the 35-100 where m43 doesn’t bring so much of size savings. Have you already seen the size of the 45-175 X tele?
I can also remind you that Admin isn’t very clear when he says that “it will be faster than f/2.8”. The word “IT” (as I read it) cannot be directly extrapolated to “BOTH” lenses as you do when you use the word “THEY” so I hope you understand what you are saying is not the same that Admin has said.
The only thing I’m saying is that the 35-100mm will hardly be a f/2.8, and I believe people reading the post are assuming it because there’s a reference to the 4/3 Olympus monsters.
They already copied the 7-14/f4 specs, so why not with the 35-100mm :-)?
Because size gains with m43 are much easier on wide angles, not much on teles!
“Did you read they are X design?
So where do you base your assumptions on. The are just guess.”
How about having a look at the image that shows the lenses 🙂
Firstly, I guess the specs are not final yet – the announcement is almost half a year away. Secondly, 12-35mm can start at F2 ( if not end ). Compare it with 14-42 X and you’ll see it’s three times larger with smaller zoom range.
Thank you lord!
I’ll throw my entire bank account after a 12-35 f2 with O.I.S
are they for 43?
4/3 pana is dead/….
Now we are talking! The 35-100 would complete my current 12, 20, 25 range provided it delivers from short to long end.
And as Bob B. states above, now we want that m4/3 flagship camera on the same level as NEX-7. Then I will be m4/3 for ever!
+1000
35-100 will be great next to mine 12/25/45.
+1 me thinks is constant 2.8.
Now let’s see how the Oly 14-35 and 35-100 will fare at the used market.
We still need good sensor behind these lenses – whenever they will *really* show up.
Definitly! We nneed a sensor similar as the Sony sensor in Nikon D7000/D5100 with 14 T-Stops dynamic range and low noise at higher ISO. (Panasonic & Olympus do have max. 10 T-Stops dynamic range at presant, according to DXO:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/684%7C0/(appareil2)/724%7C0/(appareil3)/698%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Panasonic/(brand2)/Olympus/(brand3)/Nikonhttp://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/684%7C0/(appareil2)/724%7C0/(appareil3)/698%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Panasonic/(brand2)/Olympus/(brand3)/Nikon#measuretabs-3 )
‘According to DXO’, and there’s the rub. The m43 system is designed to team up optics, sensor and processing more than other systems. Trying to isolate one aspect of that is bound to give misleading results. According to Dpreview, the DR of the EP3 matches the DR of the NEX 3 when using their respective range-extending settings, and has a similar amount of range to the D7000.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep3/page15.asp
No need to take DXO marks seroiusly. No way the D7000 has DR 14 steps! That is what Phase One IQ180 has, and that at a totally different cost level.
A m4/3 sensor for a flagship camera need to be close to NEX-7 in DR. And that should not be according to DXO but according to serious revieiwers with a methodology worth trust.
But yes three to four steps would be sufficient.
Remember NEX series lenses remain a difficult task for Sony designers: Neither small, nor HQ, nor cheap. It seems a lot easier to develop HQ lenses for m4/3 – and at resonable prices.
14-35 is fine but the lack of stabilization in 35-100mm kinda sucks. Also you need an adapter.
14-35 is the finest zoom ever made.
If Panasonic come close to that quality with OIS I will pay $1500,,,
really too expensive 0_0
Bloody Hell!
This is starting to look like a badass lens system!
Indeed. The only lens system having nice and fast lenses (both primes and the newly announced Panasonic lenses) especially designed for a “small” sensor.
Good luck finding a fast normal lens for APS-C (ok, there is the Nikkor 35/1.8 and maybe some Sigmas), or a fast wide angle prime!
That’s the reason I did not buy into APS-C. Kind of promises you to have a “pro” system, but when you actually get serious (and “upgrade” to full frame, as you hear many APS-C users say) you have to ditch your DX/EF-S lenses and get some FF lenses, effectively buying into another system.
Now if only they made a “pro” mFT body…
all we need is good iso 3200 ~20mpix and 2 stops more DR…. from there on any advance will just be on paper and not realy change the way u do photography…. we r close …. GH3 maybe GH4….
if sony were pany 🙂
After these announcements from Panasonic the Sony system increasingly looks like a wonderful brain with no limbs -unless you go for large/heavy glass to defeat its whole purpose. MFT now looks like a wicked octopus 🙂 loads of possibilities waiting for the next gen bodies.
At least for me, lenses drive the value of a system, and my long-term investment choice. I.e. they can keep their 24 Mpix sensor, if *all* I get is MF gimmicks.
BTW: what happened to Nikon’s marketing? Were they about to announce something?
I also see why they are turning FF mirrorless!
Well I hope they introduce a really Pro body before introducing these lenses, and consider weather sealing them (and also the body). As Jon S said there is no body in m43 worthy enough (in terms of build) to put expensive lenses on them. I would be more interested in similar lenses from Olympus and I won’t mind paying a premium for them. Imagine the Top Pro lenses from Olympus but in smaller size for m43. That would really give Sony a tough time. I just love Olympus glass. Any word on such lenses from Olympus, ADMIN?
Two are coming 😉
Wow! 🙂
You mean the 12mm f2 and the 45mm f1.8?
They have already been announced, and started shipping, so he probably means new lenses. One could be the 50mm macro, and the other is probably a (boring) zoom. I hope Pana or Olympus bring a fast prime beyond 50mm sometime in the future.
yer probably a 14-42mm f3.5 – 5.6 again 🙂
Just forget olympus for anything but wide to standard lens. Oly does not have stabilization.
Won’t be a problem on Olympus PEN Pro! 🙂
My goodness! Well, it’s not the 12-50 we were hoping for, but I’ll gladly take 12-35 and 35-100 instead.
Now I’m going to need to start working two jobs to afford all these Lumix lenses I want.
It’s Christmas in August! 🙂
– Olympius
i might just have to insight more riots in the uk so i can get my mits on these bad boys when they are in the shops…. will be worth the bird 🙂
Here’s to hoping that the nest step from f2.8 is f2.0 and that there is nothing in-between :p
this looks interesting, but just with at least f2.8 and OIS, and not that expensive… who do they think they are?
Super News!!
Looks like all the X lenses would match PERFECTLY with the NEX7 pro design.
Maybe SAR should post Panasonic X lenses announcements at their page, like Admin says.. maybe they should also know about the competitors news.. no? 😉
Yup.. pity Sony indeed..
Look…I am a big fan of MFT…and I show that with the camera and all the glass I have bought from Pany.
..BUT….I would NEVER spend $2000 on an MFT lens. The sensor capture & dynamic range just isn’t there to justify that.
Until the capture is SIGNIFICANTLY improved…that postulation is out of the question for this photographer.
Fully agree with your comment. Similar DSLR lenses can also be found for a more attractive price.
Olympus have sold a lot of expensive ZUIKO lenses.
And the EP3 have better IQ then E-3, E-5….
Whats the problem???
Yeah…and the drug cartels have sold LOTs of drugs…and the cigarette companies have sold LOTs of cigarettes…so just because people buy something doesn’t mean it is a good idea. LOL! What is your point….to be herded?
If I am going to spend that much money on a lens..I am using it on a 20MB+ capture with full dynamic range…and great high ISO performance. I love my MFT camera…but (at this time) it has it limitations..and that is diminishing return in my world. ..but to each his own…live and let live. 🙂
“If I am going to spend that much money on a lens..I am using it on a 20MB+ capture with full dynamic range…and great high ISO performance.”
One day there will be an eletronic global shutter and I guess that will be the day all these miseries will be put to rest… 🙂
And it might come as a surprise but the 24MP Sony is no resolution monster… SAR is going crazy because locals are coming to realize the 16MP sensor on the NEX-5N is better, and I must say they are right.
You HAVE to admit…the dynamic range on the current MFT sensor just doesn’t have enough to justify spending $2000 on a lens. It ain’t there…not yet…no matter how you slice it. The dynamic range on my Canon 5DMark II blows it away…(I do not care that much about the pixel count..) If you go past a certain range with ANY of the MFT sensors and the highlights are blown …pull it back to save the highlights and you have crude oil for shadow detail. (I am talking about reasonable contrast ranges that other sensors can handle quite well….
And I can buy a LOT of “L” series lenses for a whole lot less than $2000!
Too bad its Panasonic making this announcement, and not Olympus. Panasonic have shown a distinct lack of interest in actually delivering product to the consumer, whereas Olympus actually seems to not only able to announce cameras and lenses, but actually ship them when promised.
When you sell ONE camera with nine different skins, it’s easy to deliver. 😉
Yep. This announcement also explains the vagueness of the previous Panasonic lens roadmap. They had this “project Manhattan” that they were not sure turned out to be good enough for production, so they kept their lens roadmap quite.. At least this is my supposition..
I got my G3 fairily quickly as well as the 25mm. The Olympus 12mm I bought from US. Two months later they turn up in Europe as well. May be Panasonic sell better…… Olympus seem to priortize US and Panasonic Europe – of course behing Japan market which is no1 and no2 for booth.
12-35 looks sweet! But I really doubt it being F/2. Rather F/2.8-4. Constant 2.8 would be really great!
F/2.8-4.0 would not be fast 🙁
For CANON, SONY , Nikkon, Panasonic F/2.8would be fastest.
Nope, in that case I’d rather use my 12-60.
Based on the size of these lenses on the image, there is no way they are below f/2.8, and they will not have constant aperture.
I can’t imagine buying another zoom, no matter how good it is. Primes make me feel so much more creative.
Agree about primes. When I shoot photos I use primes. But for Video Zooms are better.
Same here, primes allow for a better discipline, and they force you to previsualize before taking the shot. On the other hand, there are situations where a zoom might make more sense. It really depends on your subject.
You can have your primes.
Now in turn allow those who need flexibility to have good quality zooms.
+1 though i am a fixed focal user, i can dig fast zoomlenses too…
Big fat chunky zooms? Thought at first I’d come to the NEX page by mistake.
Finally! We want f 2 !!!!
A 35-100/2.8 doesn´t make sense to me. I ever hoped, Panasonic would announce a lens like the Olympus 35-100/2 (http://www.olympus.de/digitalkamera/digital_slr_ed_35-100mm_1_2_0_5067.htm).
For portraits you must have aperture f2 on mFT.
But when it costs around 600/700 € i will buy it 🙂
Can you explain your logic about F2 on MFT?????
F2 is F2 on whatever camera you put it on….
Maybe Sven C. is talking about dept of field? Smaller sensor give larger DOF. And to get a smaller DOF you need a larger aperture…
Yup!
No, it isn´t.
f2 is f2 in relation to the light that falls through the lens, but it´s not the same in depth of field.
In relation to a 35mm camera, you have the same light, but the depth of field is like aperture f4 on a mFT camera!
EDIT: @Gylles: Yes, that´s what i mean…..
“In relation to a 35mm camera, you have the same light”
Actually you gather just one quarter the amount of photons on a 43 sensor, because the FX sensor is four times as large. So if the intensity is the same (at the same f-stop), you have four times as much light on an FX sensor.
Yes, that’s why you get less noise at the same iso on a full-frame, and you can get a brighter image with less noise.
I use a GH2 for video and when there is less available light f:4.0-5.6 just doesn’t work…
So I’m really hoping for a (stabilized) f:2.0, but this is still just a rumor, and we don’t have any info on the aperture yet. So that’s pure speculation and wishful thinking at this point.
I am hoping for OIS as well.
Thank you very much, Panny!
This was the proper signal for me: As I recently suffered a herniated disc and arguably will have to live with back pains for the rest of my life, this means that I can sell the mothership (the E-5) and all my FT lenses to purchase the E-PL3 plus a limited lens range (14-42, 40-50 and 45 1.8 and maybe 9-18) and wait for these gems and an µFT pro body to hit the market.
Yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!
No more Sherpa needed.
the zd 35-100 seems to be one of the finest zooms ever built, i doubt that panasonic can match that one.
It funny the 2 X lens is directly compatible to Canon L lens, the Canon 24-70mm F2.8 L (RRP $1340) and 70-200mm F2.8 IS (RRP $2000), I hope those two Lumix X lens should be cheaper than Canon L lens..
They won’t be cheaper than the Canons most likely – the Canon’s don’t have AF, in addition, the canon wide 2.8 doesn’t have IS. The Canon wide lens isn’t that great sharpness wise, where I do think Panasonic excels even in kit lenses for the most part. That and there’s still the small possibility they’re faster than 2.8. Doubt it because I’m not sure if it’s even financially possible for them to put OIS on a 2.0 zoom without pricing out their customer base, but who knows.
What??? both canons have AF. Not sure what you’re talking about…
my dream come true!!!!!!!
I think a 35-100 f2.8 would be a great addition to the system, especially if the performance is at a high level at f2.8 to f4. High performance at full aperture and effective O.I.S. would make it a useful lens if the price was not too exorbitant (i.e. below £1000).
I think the MFT range would benefit from having lenses that are a step up from the lenses like the 45-200, with better construction and faster aperture.
I tend to agree with comments above that there is little point having big, heavy £2000+ lenses for the MFT system. If I was prepared to spend thousands on gear for sports or wildlife photography and lug several kg of equipment around, then I’d probably have a 35mm camera.
It’s truly amazing how much information is contained in one blurry photo taken ofF a computer monitor at a funny angle!
Even more amazing are the the incredible array of fantasies put forth based on said images.
There be wizards, warlocks and oracles here! 😉
I guess there’s a LOT more waiting before we get any concrete info on these lenses. They ARE much more interesting the than the little power zooms!
they had BETTER be more interesting at the prices Admin is suggesting.
The prices seem to be as much conjecture as the rest.
There’s no point worrying about it until prices and shipping dates are announced.
A 12-50mm would have been more interesting, but probably much larger.
Well dreaming and fantasizing is FREE 🙂 🙂
Haha soccer moms will soon shoot technically better photos with everything auto than the few dinosaurs who took 30 years to learn to do them manually and are damn jealous…
Actually, my young (?) friend good photography takes a lot more than technique, manual or auto. Are you criteria for a good photo focus someware and decent exposure?
Interesting… but since those lenses are coming only in six months, they will be compatible only with GH3 and GX1.
All the people owning older bodies will have to upgrade, right?
😀
Good job by Panasonic on making some quality lenses. I would’ve killed for the 12-35mm not too long ago but at the moment, I’m kinda thinking of just getting the 25mm f1.4. So I have to decide what’s more important to me and I happen to love being stuck in a single focal length plus sub f2 apertures. If it was 12-50mm then it might be an easier decision but now? I don’t know. I’ll have to see what the image quality is like.
As for the 35-100mm, I have my eyes set on that. I love how you now have a lot of options for lens combinations. I’m currently using the 7-14mm, 14-140mm & 20mm when I go on trips but now I can do:
– 7-14mm, 20mm or 25mm, 35-100mm
– 12mm or 14mm, 20mm or 25mm, 35-100mm
– 12-35mm, 20mm or 25mm, 35-100mm (and possibly the 8mm fisheye)
– 8mm, 12mm or 14mm, 20mm or 25mm, 45mm (all primes!)
I have a feeling though that I’ll still be sticking to the 7-14mm & 14-140mm combo for daytime outdoor shooting and using primes indoors. But if the image quality is superb then I might have to consider giving up the awesome 14-140mm.
By the way, I’m basing all this on prices being less than $1000. I’m not buying any of it if it’s more than $1000.
Apart from the fact that the new X 14-42 and these two lenses look like being what many of us want: I like the “X” branding. Neat concept from Panasonic.
I am feeling better all the time about backing the m43 horse, it really does look like a stayer. Fuji should jump in the saddle, they would gain a lot from the momentum, and add an alternative sensor as well (with luck). Doesn’t matter if they don’t tho, as Olly and Panny can carry it alone.
I’m a bit overwhelmed as to my next lens choice, but the Olly 45/1.8 looks like a “must have” at the moment. Can’t wait to use that as a party lens!
Finally some good news! Let´s hope that price will not be a deal-breaker..
This should be roughly correct…
http://i.imgur.com/83kuH.jpg
Not a pretty sight.
Looks perfectly well to me 🙂
Alternatively you can have the super compact lenses announced today.
You have the choice!
Looks as bad as the NEX… Lenses are too large for the bodies, and they won’t be f/2 judging by the scaled size.
To each his own.
I think they will be the perfect fit for my GH2.
Video lenses for a stills body.
Not your typical use.
Any lens faster than what is currently out there….at a reasonable price point…..interests me
35-100 is really great lens, but too large for daily use.
Still no affordable travel-zoom lens !!!
I am waiting for some time now for an affordable travel-zoom-lens, like the sigma/tamron 18-200 zooms.
But still no sign of this. I really hate panny for ignoring this segment. The overly expensive lenses make me angry.
What´s about the 14-140 OIS? That´s the best superzoom lens overall ever build!!! In 35mm it´s a 28-280mm Zoom Lens….
OMG, how i wish panasonic had better sensors now…
Those would be great lenses indeed, but I would not want to spend $2100-2500 euro for a lens. For that money, I can get the 12/2, 25/1.4, 45/1.8mm *and* a nice camera, in the Netherlands or Germany. They will even be faster, but of course less “easy” to use. The 35-100 f/2 would be great, but the lenses are just too expensive for me; In addition to the 12, 25 and 45, I’d prefer a 100mm f/2 prime.
100% agree.
I can even be happy with 14mm f2.5, 20mm f1.7 and 45 f1.8
A fast tele prime would be nice…
speed cost money. How fast do you wanna go?
These won’t be f/2 constant – the shorter might (just might) be 2.8 – the front element (I take it’s size from comparision with lens mount size) is too small for 2.0@35…I think we might get a 12-35/2.5-2.8 or something like that. As for the longer lens – a 2.8-3.3 is likely. I know the new zoom pancake is small, but it’s only 5.6 at the long end and probarly already a 5.6 at the hal of the zoom range…
well, the japanese site said,
Pana will work hard, and the two lens would be the same DOF in F2.8 with the Fullframe camera.
And the two would be constant aperture.
And the mount and barrel both would be metal.
Can you show me the Japanese website that you are browsing? Cuz I can’t find dc.watch.impress.co.jp mentioning anything like that…
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20110826_473211.html
It does’t say they will match with 35mm equiv. DOF of F2.8 though.
“Both mockups are smaller than 35mm-zooms with same angles” could have been mistranslated.
同様の画角が得られる全域F2.8の35mm判対応ズームレンズに比べると、いずれのモックアップもコンパクト。鏡筒はどちらも金属製になる見込みという。
It says: “Both mockups are small when compared to constant f2.8 35mm zoom lenses that have the same angle of view. It is forecast that both lenses will be made of metal.”
OK, does that mean we aren’t going to have long waiting 12-50mm f2.5-3.5?
Though I Will probably never get one of these 2, I can express my enthoutiasm at this new : Panasonic is no foolish enough to announce these lenses without having cameras upgrade in it’s drawers.
For me, the question is now :
– Is (pro) video targeted market enough to justify such investment from Panny ?
– Or does that mean that still photography market has to be also in Panny’s mind ?
Many thanks to anybody’s answers and anyway congratulations to Pnasonic and Admin !
There’s a reason I sold all my Nikon equipment more than a year ago. I could see the HUGE potential of Micro Four Thirds!!! I will probably never return to Nikon and their historical dinosaur ways! Haha. What would be cool is if Nikon joined Micro 4/3 though! :))
This, I like! This may just be the ticket to move me to m.4/3 and lose all my legacy 4/3 gear. It may even get me to move from Olympus, unless Oly gets some major glass out their door.
Best. News. Ever.
Ok, after being very excitied about that news, because they seem great lenses… well I think that any lens for 2100€ or 2500€ or rahter over 1000€ is too expensive for what I’m using my camera for. But that will be a lure for profesionals. That’s a +1 for M4/3 against competition!
Now m4/3 has pro lenses and it needs a pro camera like NEX-7, whose caracteristics should be allowed for next Pana and Olympus cameras… Then NEX-7 won’t be a winning horse because it’s lenses are not as good as m4/3 and even had tehm, they would be inconsistent with NEX bodies as now.
+1.
$2,000 is too expensive for these lenses.
If you’re a Canikon user, you can get a Tokina 17-50/2.8 for $340, which performs very close to nikon’s 17-55/2.8 ($1,000). A Sony user can pick up the new 17-50/2.8 for $700.
m43 users have been paying a price premium for far too long. I might go as high as $1000 f0r the 12-35, but any more and I’m opting out.
The prices mentioned are way too high given the fact that Pana has one camera for the pro segment (GH2). The rest are increasingly Mickey Mouse like – for goodness sake: You have the best dslr video cameras on this planet, and only ONE!!! with manual video.
Yes I would have to buy the lenses, but all the owners of the none-GH2 cameras, who do not have deliver sell-able results, can easily live without overpriced lenses.
Or stated differently: There are a few (hundred?) Pana-pros on this planet + a few thousand “rich “geeks””, who would be willing to spend that much on something that can be manufactured much cheaper. And a lot of people who would like one for a fair amount.
Argh.
PS f/2.8 is not enough for serious purposes. f/2.0 is a must for a lot of photographic reasons!
It may be that lenses faster than F2.8 are sometimes needed, but the fact is that there are only two zoom lenses available anywhere for DSLR cameras that are faster than that — Oly 12-35 and Oly 35-100. Professionals on every other system get by perfectly fine with F2.8 lenses, used for “serious purposes” — if they need faster, they’ll switch to a prime.
I agree with Andrew. If you need faster than F2.8, you can always use a prime. Once you start compromising the size of the lens unduly, you lose the main advantage of the m43 format – portability.
Going to F2 might give videographers an extra stop of leeway with shutter speeds, but an F2.8 zoom would only be 1 stop behind the APS-C crowd in DOF control and be much more portable (many of my Canon friends prefer the 70-200/4L over the 70-200/2.8L for this very reason).
While I love the idea of an F2 zoom; given the choice, I’d probably opt for an F2.8 specimen for the cost and weight savings.
Argh!
I just want to point out that those prices are for the old (and huge) 4/3 Olympus lenses and in no way relate to these upcoming Panasonic lenses…
the price is a joke for a m43 lens.
if i have 2000$ and want the best image quality im buying a FF camera.
im also unsure if pros will buy a 2000$ lens for a m43 camera.
some will but you will not see these lenses often outside a camerstore….
Oh goodness sake Panny…just announce a decent rangefinder style camera ala GF1!
Now, Panny needs to bring a great new body to the table (GF7?). No silver crap, let it be minimalistic, black, magnesium alloy if possible, with a handful of tactile controls – feel free to copy as much as possible from NEX7 :). Most m43 users are not expecting FF performance out of it, and we can live with that, so something like the GH2 sensor would be a good starting point with regards to IQ. We have a much better lens lineup than NEX, and there are more to come, we have quite an advantage there.
And! Last but not least…please, actually deliver the goods…a lens or camera body in a powerpoint presentation somewhere is no good for anyone to actually take pictures 🙂
I really would like to see this as 2.8-4. I don’t doubt that they’ll make the mistake of making it 2.0 or something, but it WILL be a mistake. It’ll be big and expensive and pany simply can’t compete with canikon on big and expensive. I’ve never heard of anyone complain about zuiko 12-60 being 2.8-4 (except people who had never used one, but refused to pick one up because 2.8 is far too banal for their art). If it is 2.8 and GOOD wide open, like the 12-60, no one needs more. There is very little room for $1,000+ lenses in micro43. This could be an amazing $500-600 lens of if could be a $1500 lens that no one ever uses. Also, a quick note to all of you begging for FAST ultrawides: it is pointless attribute. Ultrawides will never have narrow depth of field and ultrawides are almost never going to need a very fast shutter (oh and if need ois on an ultrawide, you probably need to see a doctor about a neurological condition). 50mm 1.2 = niche lens with real artistic potential. 12mm f2 = stupid marketing ploy.
Hey Tom, people use camera’s for different purposes. You’re just commenting from your own perspective.
Have you even considered people who use M4/3 for video…?
You really want stabilization for video, even if you have a wide lens. And if you’re shooting video 1/50th shutter at 25fps and 1/60th shutter at 30 fps, and if there isn’t a lot of available light you really need a faster (stabilized) lens.
Have you even thought of the AF100/AF101…? Yes a lot of people who have one of those camera’s would be willing to pay more for a fast stabilized zoom lens.
So just think about what you’re saying before you start to say that people need to see a doctor about a neurological condition!
The admin of this site does great work on providing us with info on these products, so don’t go insulting people on this site about something you clearly don’t know enough about…
hmmm, but as m43 high iso isn’t the best of the system, I think f2 on a 12mm can be useful for low light photography no ? as not everybody wants to carry a big tripod everywhere…??
I agree some points of what you said. I don’t think that a US$1000+ will be a good thing for m4/3, some said that these kind of lenses could bring PROs to m4/3, which is pointless, there is no need for that, you have to understand the people that buy your stuff, and the vast majority of m4/3 users wouldn’t buy a US$1000+ lens. That’s not the point of m4/3, at least not now. I think it will be more like Sony’s new 16-50mm constant f/2.8 that will cost US$700. So maybe you could make those two lenses constant f/2.8 and sell it around the same price range.
But 12mm on a m4/3 is not really a ultrawide, it’s a 24mm and a f/2 on a m4/3 has the same DOF as a f/4, which is not that pointless, although I still think that f/2.8 would be more reasonable.
I have a EX1, and i use 24mm f1.8 a lot for city night landscape or in subway. It’s helps a lot to keep iso low and speed high enough for sharp pictures.
Not sure of course, but to me, the price clearly points to video applications. More than 2000 USD is something only few photographers will be willing to pay for a system that starts to run in its difractive limits pretty soon. But cinematographers are completely painless 😉 in this price range and will get narrower focus ranges. A Zeiss ultraprime is at about 10000 USD.
Why so high prices anyway?
They are not so revolutionary in design? Not any smaller to.
People justify the high prices of 24-70mm, f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 FF lenses by offering high cost of the optical material needed to produce them.
These uses way less glass. What is their justification…???
Things are hardly ever priced in that way. (Material+work)*profit margin %. They are always priced “how high can we sell this at”. Have you ever wondered that smartphones with cheap ARM-based CPUs cost as much as laptops with hard drives, keyboards and 17″ screens?
No, I think Panasonic bean-counters and marketers know they will sell every one of these at those prices.
My suspicion is that they will release a “pro” G/GF to accommodate them.
Bear in mind, the cost of the material in a smartphone is only a small part of the overall cost. People cost to develop the phone, the cost of machines to make the phones, and shipping all add to the final price. Development costs must be paid for before the phone can be shipped, so it is always a gamble of whether the phone, laptop, etc. will return the investment. Granted, there is always, pricing for what it will sell at, but the manufacturer’s cost does include more than just the cost of the components.
“Have you ever wondered that smartphones with cheap ARM-based CPUs cost as much as laptops with hard drives, keyboards and 17″ screens?”
No. Shrinking things down costs more, especially in the beginning of the technology.
I can build a desktop with the specs of a MacBook Air for next to nothing, but it ain’t gonna fit in my briefcase.
man, you don’t know shit about what you are talking about. do you know how to make a high quality lens with constant wide aperture? no, you don’t. less glass should cost less? your ability and knowledge to think through is as good as a door.
less doesn’t always mean cheaper. one high quality glass can cost 100x a bad quality glass. and for good lenses you need high quality material and construction, if not you will have a useless lens, full of distortion, color aberration, vignetting, etc.
why would they “invent” that lens like that should cost more? does that even make any sense?
please, make a favor to the world and think a little bit more before say BS like that and if you have any doubts if you are saying stupid things, just don’t say, ’cause it will certainly be stupid.
I think this video can help you understand how much “rubbish” you said… hahaha… DigiRev is more for entertaining purposes, but it helps illustrate.
http://youtu.be/hk5IMmEDWH4
I would buy the 35-100 for video if it has F/2 or better.
Right now I’m using a set of primes to do that, like the Nikkor 85/2.
(1) Note in the slide the barrels seem diff sizes on the two, so relative to each other the 35-100 is actually a bit smaller (or 12-50 bigger).
(2) They seem massively smaller than the 4/3 14-35 f2 and 35-100 f2. You can tell based on the barrel. So either its the technology of the Power Zoom or they are not f2.
I hope these lenses are stabilized. I need that for video.
The price does not bother me for video.
+1 These lenses were shown without Stabilization. I need it for video.
Yuppers. Unless Olly comes out with 24p and I bolt it on the “EP5”–assuming they skip 4. But Panny would be nuts not to use their new IS tech evident in the pancake zoom. Ack.
It looks like they do include Power O.I.S – if you look close at the front of the lens in this picture:
http://cdn0.digiphoto.techbang.com.tw/system/images/16642/medium/ef0edf480476ad017a43f7667c00ed86.jpg?1314362079
…anything else would also be completely silly.
最短撮影距離は0.25m。低周波のブレにも対応した手ブレ補正機構「POWER O.I.S」を備えるほか、ナノサーフェスコーティングも施される予定。
The Japanese report says: “The lenses are scheduled to have OIS built in, as well as nano-surface coating and a shortest focus distance of 0.25m.”
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20110826_473211.html
Nanoka or Nonaka?
Looks like 43 rumors got rumor pwned..
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1314334915.html
GF3X mentioned, though the only difference is the bundled lens?
So? I don’t recall any claims here that GF3X was anything else than a new kit.
i can hear the lens motor in the video on that link. doesnt seem right for a video lens.
not that i care about video :/
First congraduations to Pany engineers for their new lenses! Only hope management and marketing takes advantage to deliver sooner than later and for reasonable price.
From all the previous rumors seems very plausible that the new 12-35 will be a F2.5-3.3 and just about the same size of the existing kit zoom only a little larger diameter. This lens is needed as an option for existing G3 and GH2 and kit lens for new GF7 and GH3 for wanting faster lens speed and not power zoom. While I would have liked it range to be original 12-50, with extended optical zoom of 1.3X with little or no lose in resolution this lens will get there anyway and enable it to be both smaller and faster. I would expect this lens would be about $500-600 in price.
I don’t think Pany needs to hurry on delivery on the second 35-100 lens and again I think Pany will aim for getting a f2.5-3.3 just to claim it is both faster and smaller than the competition. Again this lens appears slightly larger diameter than the 45-175 or closer to existing 45-200. This lower volume and likely expensive lens no doubt aimed at the professional crowd and to match APS-C or FF offerings.
I think Pany is wiser to concentrate on these lenses then the earlier rumored reworking of excellent 7-14mm or a 75-300mm which would bring nothing new in either zoom range or lens speed to the table.
They better be at least 2.8. If they are then I would pay 1500 t0 2000 for them. Most professionals dont question the price on good lenses. I am looking forward to the day when I can shoot a whole wedding with an ep3. To do that I need better lenses than what they have now. The primes are good for cool shots but at weddings you cant use a prime the whole time, and if you do you will miss a bunch of awesome shots just because you cant compose.
Judging by the dimensions in the photo based on the mount size the filter thread will be either 49mm or 52mm and this pretty much rules out F2.0 across. I’d say these are to be F2.8 lenses and that will be a nice addition to the system.
Rather 58 or 62mm filter size, IMO.
Admin, I would put 2 choices – “too expensive” and “not interested” as it is hard now to figure out, which one is more important for m43 users
admin
please, see this link!!!
there are the pictures of real 12-35mm and 35-100mm!!!
http://digiphoto.techbang.com.tw/posts/1493-panasonc-struck-the-first-blow-notice-the-2012-series-of-two-constant-aperture-lens-lumix-gx
Thanks!
I did a rough mount-match in photoshop to give an idea of the size of the 12-35mm. Didn’t have much to work with, so this is just for a general idea.
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/1720/matchor.jpg
Cool!
It would be hard to justify that money for an f2, though for a 35-100 I might consider it. But these don’t look near large enough for f2. What I would buy is a 35-100 f4 or faster in the same price range as the Olympus 4/3 50-200 — if it had the same optical quality.
Now for the GL3.
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k77/ntsan/size.jpg
12-35 and 30-100 is only slightly longer than 14-45 and 14-140, I am pretty impressed by the size!
Something looks to be off scale in the depiction of relative sizes by photobucket? Just take a look at actual photo depiction in prior post from imaeshack and you will find that the new 12-35 lens is about 13% longer and wider than the 14-45 lens. Looks like Pany is limiting the diameter of its new lenses for m4/3 to about 2.7-2.8″ which matches the outer mount ring shown on the GF2 and GF3 and to limit the length of all but the 100-300 lens to about that of the 14-140 lens?
I searched the pictures but could not find any clues about maximum aperature which I assume from rumors and diameters shown will be f2.5-3.3? Also no markings to designate OIS but I assume from X series that is the case.
Considering size, its f2.8 or at max f2.5 zooms. But it has excellent choice of focal lengths and combined with being fast, it should be great lens. What about some pro grade body?
And what will Olympus do? Redo their 4/3 lens to m4/3 and realease finaly some m4/3 pro camera?
The new fast Panasonic X-lenses are a hard strike for Olympus.
It is a diabolical strategy to defeat Olympus with its own arguments – the Super High Grade Zuiko lenses 14-35mm/f2.0 and 35-100mm/f2.0 and transfer it more quickly from Four Thirds to Micro Four Thirds. Probably they will even have an electric-powered zoom button for HD-video – God grant that Olympus will find a competitive answer soon!
The answer is Sony. Oly better run like hell over to the Sony fab and get a new sensor!!!
This is what I’ve been advocating for a while: a more modest zoom range in exchange for a (hopefully) brighter and more compact zoom lens. I’m hoping for f/2; Micro Four Thirds needs faster lenses to compensate for the smaller sensor and to allow for DOF control similar to that of APS-C sensor cameras with their f/2.8 zooms. If Panasonic can design a 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 the size of a pancake, then Panasonic may be able to make a 12-35mm of this size (thanks for the size comparison, Monodrift) that has a maximum aperture of f/2 throughout its zoom range. An 12-35mm f/2 zoom would be a strong argument for me to stick with MFT. But not if it’s f/2.8.
Admin, you don’t have any info how fast these 2 zooms will actually be?
if they are f2 constant through the zoom, i’ll buy them both, doesnt matter the price.
Going by the image of the prototypes, the 35-100 cannot be faster than f2.8 at the long end, IMO.
uhmm…as for 12-35mm,
35mm is short. 12mm is good. I want 12-60mm (like Olypmus 4/3 fast zoom).
+100%!
I think people have kind of missed the point – the prices posted are pure speculation from Admin based on more speculation that these lenses *might* be f2, which is unlikely in itself…
Great news! Given the shrinking of the PL25 to mPL25, sub f2.8 is possible.
As Thom Hogan has said m43 is one great sensor away from changing the game. These two fast zooms, a wide zoom, 25/1.4, and 45/1.8 or PL45 covers most needs, even many pros.
This is getting serious!
I wonder if the lens have an F 2 constant aperture as the Oly SHG 4/3 version,.. What was Oly thinking, that their pride legacy glass had slipped into panasonic member,.. Oly must answer this by making more SHG glass,.. Or better version of 12-35 & 35-100,.. This batle of super glass is getting more interesting,.. More great choice for m4/3 user
I would be very tempted by a 12-35mm f/2.8 with Power IS for less than 700 euro (streetprice). Given the current prices on f/2.8 zooms for APS-C 700 euro should be feasible methinks.
Would be a nice travel combo with the recently announced 45-175mm lens IMO
Now that’s more like it! Those pancakes were really getting me worried, these however, these are going to be great. 12-35 is going to be such a nice range for the GH2. I imagine that this lens will rarely leave my gh2 body once I get my hands on it.