–
Egami spotted a new Olympus patent describing two new Micro Four Thirds macro lenses: The 70mm f/2.8 and 100mm f/4.5. DOn’t know you but I would prefer they would work on a 17mm f/1.2 lens 🙂
–
Egami spotted a new Olympus patent describing two new Micro Four Thirds macro lenses: The 70mm f/2.8 and 100mm f/4.5. DOn’t know you but I would prefer they would work on a 17mm f/1.2 lens 🙂
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
91 Responses
OM, please dont waste your time doing some lenses like these.
All we need is,
– 9mm/f2
– 14mm/f1.2
– 17mm/f1.2
– 25mm/f1.2
– 100mm/f2 macro
– 300mm/f3.5
in m43 HG or SHG standard.
Launch some new lenses to WOW us please !
+ 150mm/f2 macro
… 100mm f/4.5 is crap.
Why would you need anything larger (in aperture) than f/2.8 for macro? My internal focussing Sigma 150mm F/2.8 for 4/3’s is a bit of a monster (although it covers a larger area for other brands) & it’s pretty standard from most manufacturers to stick with f/2.8 for macro.
Just because it’s a macro lens, I wouldn’t want to use the lens only as a macro lens. A 100 mm f/2.0 would be good for upper body portraits and full length body shots, offering reasonably shallow DOF. I use my Oly 60 mm Macro all the time as a portrait lens, but rarely do I shoot macro images.
For shallow DOF, micro four thirds is the wrong system.
That depends on how shallow DOF you need.
The lens AND the aperture, too!
Exactly! 100mm f4.5 is a joke.
I have a Nikon 105mm f2.8 AI-S macro that’s much more than just an amazingly sharp macro. I use it as a telephoto and walkabout nature lens. For close-up and macro shooting I rarely set the aperture below f5.6, usually at f8 or f11.
If it’s compact & produces sharp macro images, then it’s worthwhile for its purpose. The 60mm is more versatile with its shorter focal length & larger aperture for some portrait use as well as macro.
A 60mm macro is perfect for static objects.I found trying to shoot flying bugs and other twitchy critters next to impossible with my Nikon 60mm f2.8D macro lens. I tried my Nikon TC-201 2x teleconverter with it, but lost 2 stops. The 105mm in these situations, is much more versatile than a 60mm.
The 105mm macro, while not particularly compact, makes shooting these sorts of things MUCH easier. It’s always part of my standard “nature kit”: 7-14mm, 25mm, 105mm and 100-300mm.
If portrait is important for you and you rarely shoot macro, then why do you choose the 60/2.8 at all? The 45/1.8 is the better lens for the purpose.
And while f/4.5 does sound somewhat slow even for a dedicated macro lens, at 100mm (200mm equiv.) the focal length is already too long to make a sensible portrait lens.
Longer dedicated macro lenses are something that has been missing in the Olympus portfolio since the invention of FT, something macro enthusiasts have been longing for all the time. The two patents are just what these people are looking for, even if 100mm would only come at f/4.5.
“Longer dedicated macro lenses are something that has been missing in the Olympus portfolio since the invention of FT […]”
Poor man’s (with unorthodox definition of “poor”) 4.0/100mm macro on FT: 2.0/50mm + EC-20.
Haven’t seen detailed reviews of the combo (though EC-20’s effects on IQ is wildly known) but a number of users swore by it.
I shoot headshots and upper body portraits usually with a longer than 45 mm lens. I also use the 60 mm lens for copy work, for which the 45 mm would be unsuitable.
I bought the 60mm macro lens for macro use & also the possibility of portrait use too, since I couldn’t justify (to my wife) a 45 & 75 as well. 🙂
Sorry! I mean 150/f2.8, just forgot to type the .8
I have the Sigma 150mm/f2.8 too. But f2 could be really great for a stack.
Well i have 150mm F2 by EX25, is very nice.
I bought it for the E30 (as well as the EC14), but the only way I can use it on the E-M5 is in MF. It tries to AF, gets in focus & then it does a recheck (or whatever) at the end which puts it out of focus. Quite frustrating. Using a flash (like FL50R in TTL) the lens aperture blades causes some delay as well, but the images are nice (when in focus).
Yes we talk the good thing. 😉
One of the related threads that came up was this.
http://www.43rumors.com/patent-olympus-is-working-on-a-new-150mm-macro-for-43-and-m43/
These patents come & go without us seeing it in reality. While it is interesting to see specs in these patents, we can just hope the best of what we see might actually come soon.
Well, some people just KNOW what ALL OF US need. Nice. So we others do not need to think about it.
😀
+1
Oh no , we do need other lenses then these!!! Put ISO one step higher and uns the released lenses. We need a really good, fast zoom 14-50 (12-60)and a 2,8/9mm and a 2,8/150
+1 for the 14mm and the teles. There are more than enough 17mms and 25mms, no more needed.
Speak for yourself… _none_ of the lenses you mention would interest me. Lenses that fast would be big, expensive and optically subpar.
If you want shallow depth of field, go buy a full-frame camera.
A 70mm f/2.8 or 100mm f/4.5 macro makes a lot of sense to me. Would be a nice compact and versatile travel combo: 12mm f/2 + 17mm f/1.8 + 70mm f/2.8 macro
A 100/2 macro would be a monstrously expensive lens. It would have to be optimized for macro usage and also designed to give good to great results at infinity.
Where’s a 9 or 10 mm f/2.8 prime?
+1
I agree a 9mm or 10mm rectilinear leans (non-fisheye) would be good, f2 would be nice.
+1
Yes, it’s a long wait, hoping for a 9mm, 2.8 is fast enough.
Maybe we like differemt lenses because some of us wokr hard for a litte money, others work hard for much more money and, finally we take different pictures? 😀
I am disappointed, that Voigtländer won’t do AF lenses and sigma and all the other’s won’t give us lenses olympus and pana do not build. Very strange situation.
One of the great advantages of the Voigtländer lenses… beyond the high level of image and build quality… IS the manual focus! It’s incredibly smooth, accurate and fast.
Don’t forget the real aperture ring and their close focus ability is a nice addition, too!
As you can see Olympus really hates (ultra)bright lenses.
yeah, i agree with you admin, a 17mm f1.2 would be very nice. it would be ok if it will not be metal, but being weather-sealed would be a good feature. 🙂
In my opinion it’s too early to see another 17mm from Olympus,
A 100mm macro is nice, but f4.5 is quite dark: I usually keep ISOs low when taking macros.
Given the upcoming new “hybrid” OMD I would expect a nice/fast zoom à la 43s SHG, but Oly does not care about our logic.
Not really big deal imo, if it will be small, lightweight and cheap, but still sharp f4.5 makes a lot of sense for a macro.
same here: having the PL 45/2.8, a longer macro, such as a 100/4.5 would surely appeal to me.
I don’t know what’s with all the “must have fastest possible aperture – if its not less then 2.8 it’s crap” fuzz.
Most of the time I want more in focus, rather than less – especially so for macro.
I’ll usually go for f8 as a starting point. (often m43 lenses’ sharpness peaks at f8)
I’m more interested in overall optical quality than largest aperture – and if 4.5 keeps the cost down, without sacrificing quality – I’m all for it.
Yes, in bright light I stop down 60mm to f3.5, but on evening I prefer to have a faster choice. Summing up: I already own the good 60mm f2.8 and I don’t need another macro lens (I’m not addicted to macros).
I’m using a panagor 90mm f2.8 and actually, i’m almost never using 2.8 or even 4 for macro near 1:1 because of the dof.
So if that 100mm is light, as sharp as my bulky panagor, and not too pricy, it will interest me.
(sry for bad eng :)!
I have justified my opinion writing that a faster aperture is more useful when lights fall (evening).
In daylight, on a summer sunny day I don’t go wider than f3.5 because of the thin DOF.
I live in a mountain area, and bright sunny days are limited to summer (in winter the sun hides behind a mountain in front of my village at 1:45 pm!)
If we are lucky the 100mm 4.5 will be similarly priced and sized the same as t the 60mm
I own the 43 50f2 macro and also the 60f2.8. The 60 is ultra Light and has 1:1
Magnification so it’s differentiates itself from the 50f2 which had l:2 magnification but a large f2 aperture.
70 f2.8? Were they going with this focal length that’s not far from the 60f2.8?
100mm focal length gives 200mm equivalent
perhaps it could be better for hose requiring more distance when shooting subjects such as bugs and the like and f4.5 may be to keep size and weight down.
I don’t need another macro lens but if they want to build me one make with insane magnification like 5:1 and Olympus will have my money.
Msyip a 17f1.2 with af I would buy in a heart beat and would stop me considering that beautiful voigtlander 17f0.95.
A 17.5mm f/1.2 would be right up the alley of Panasonic-Leica once they finish releasing the 42.5 f/1.2 Nocticron lens. Another Nocticron, released one year after the other–It would finally give m43 users an optically superb offering at a classic 35mm focal length! I really hope both of these happen and both be WEATHER SEALED!
I started day dreaming for a moment after reading that comment Sqweezy.
What a system m43 would be with all these choices. Voigtlanders, nocitcrons, zuikos and lumix….
Don’t forget Schneider Kreuznach will release three new lenses next year. Too bad their production lines are limited. Those lenses might be really expensive for most people, but i bet they will be awesome performers, making owners of nex zeiss glass cry even more 😀
Another thing I want to start seeing is weathersealed primes and a couple HG weather sealed Zooms.
I think there’s also a market for primes with build quality and iq like the 45 f1.8.
These are the type of lenses that would most likey be the ones that uograders from p&s would buy as an additional lens to the kit lenses and not a 12f2 or 75f1.8 which may be perceived as excess or too Pro for them.
These seem like odd choices, there’s still a ton of room on the wide end for a prime between 8 and 11 or even a slower, cheaper 12mm. For concerts and such it would be nice to see a 67mm/2 or faster.
In concerts I use 75mm f1.8: it seems built for that purpose.
I was at a Jazz festival over the weekend, was crying out for a 75, it is next on my shopping list.
70mm is too close to 60mm to really make a difference. They should release a 100 f/2.8 or if it’s too big a 100 f/3.5. A 100 f/4.5 is too slow IMHO.
On patent images they mention 4/3″, actually not m4/3.
4/3″ is the sensor size. Lenses are for m4/3, because they’re marked as M.Zuiko.
ok!
Oly ZD may be regarding the 70/2.8 as a replacement for the super sharp 60/2.8. If that is the case, I would sure hope they produce a design at least as sharper if not even sharper than the 60/2.8. A 70/2.8 macro seems a little more natural to me in that it easily doubles as a full face portrait lenses—much like a 35mm equivalent 135/2.8 macro lens would.
Yes 17mm 1.2f or better with only 0.2f
Those patents are unlikely to materialize. Probably just leftovers from the 60/2.8 development project which Olympus thought worthy of patents.
As opposed to many, I do not need any more lenses. Sure, a fastish ultra-wide prime would be welcome but we can all live with the existing zooms. Once the 4/3 lens portfolio joins in (hopefully soon), m4/3 will become as strong as any system on the market including the most established ones. Alas, when it happens many will whinge about the prices, the “slow” apertures, the size or the marks at DXO.
Listed as 43?….a last act of redemption from Olympus? I own a few HG 43 zuiko’s and while I love using these things I’m astounded with their peerless quality I won’t be putting a cent further into this format while m43 is offering amazing alternatives that are much lighter and smaller and that’s become so important for travel photography.
There are some good zooms in m43 but it’s gold when it comes to primes so why would I bother buying a 43 lens anymore?
Just my humble opinion.
4/3″ refers to the sensor type those lenses are designed to cover. In that respect 4/3=m4/3.
Yes you’re most likely correct Sneye but in case Oly release a classic 43 version I’ll definitely pass and rely on 43 solely for zooms, primes are great on the m43 front.
I just remembered that SChneider is releasing a 60mm macro lens 60mm, a 30 f1.4 and if I recall correctly a 14 f2.
These are HG lenses.
Schneider Kreuznach, are supposed to be bringing three u43 lens’s to the table, these should be
Super-Angulon f2,0 / 14
Xenon f1,4 / 30
Makro-Symmar f2,4 / 60
they were said to be available early this year. so far they are a no show and just remember these will not be remotely budget items.
I keep reading about a desire for a fast rectilinear prime. f2.8 / 9 is the latest one posted, precisely on this thread.
So speaking about “not being budget items” I hope no one is being delusional about the price of that one, be it Panasonic or Olympus signature…
I would like a new 9 -18, 7-14 f2.8 even f4 but make is constant with a stronger build( weather sealed if possible). Some GOOD constant f-stop zooms and tele zooms. prefer f2.8 or less but I would settle for a constant f4
7-14mm refresh is sorely needed and hopefully Panasonic is working on it now. 2.8 would be nice, but honestly all I want is a thread for filters.
Where m4/3 is really weak is in the 14-42mm variable aperture zooms. We need some more of those in the 5.6-8.0 range.
Is this really a NEW patent? I mean, why should they make a 70/2.8 when they already have a 60/2.8 ….? A 100 mm macro, however, would be a nice addition. But I don’t see that f/4.5 really is such a good idea, even if you tend to stop down in macro photography. It rather should be a 100/2.8 instead. Or a 150/4.5 🙂
whats the point of a 70mm and 100mm seems like a waste! if they we’re really smart they would make super fast wide open aperture lens like a 17, 25 and 34 f/1 lens. no one wants a f/2.8 or f/4.5 on a m43 camera. Itll be like shooting f/5.6 and f/9 with those apertures. what a waste olympus. make something people actually want.
70 f/2.8 – waste of time and resources, there is good and cheap Sigma 60 f/2.8
100 f/4.5 macro – could be good idea if it will be realy cheap (dedicated only for macro)
17/1.2 – very good idea
An king lens for my Pen`s hadd be 25mm F1.2.
4.5/100mm macro might be interesting.
Better: 5.6/150mm – light and compact and weather sealed (and cheap!). Something for outdoors.
I agree. In the old film days when I had a Nikon system I had a Sigma 180mm f5.6 macro lens. It was a lovely compact lens, not at all like the faster 180mm lenses. It was a very good performer too. A 150mm f5.6 macro would be perfect for m4/3.
“I had a Sigma 180mm f5.6 macro lens.”
Naughty thoughts are swarming my mind: there are two of the lenses on eBay.de… Hm… 200€ and 300€… Must. Control. GAS.
I would like to see a high quality 200mm f2.8 with 1.4 and 2.0 converters. With the right lenses the E-M5 could be a really good nature/travel set up. Much easier to get through airports and a lot lighter to carry round in the bush. Your arms don’t get as tired carrying a 1-1.5kg setup as they would a 4+kg setup; particularly if you are going to have it with you all day. the real weight advantage is in smaller lenses at the telephoto end.
Alternatively bring the current 50-200mm to M43rds with the current converters and reasonable focusing speed. (I will be very happy if this happens with the E-M1)
100mm f/4.5?? What is this? The dark ages?
Keep releasing those Primes, Olympus. Your system screams out to amateurs and first buys, and the lenses don’t speak to that audience. Get to work on strong ranges of zooms. That’s people look for when buying into a system. Pros and serious hobbyists look for primes. And they are busy buying primes for cameras that shoot circles around m4/3 offerings.
Ok, I fan understand the 100mm macro, but the 70mm f2.8 doesn’t seem far enough from the 60mm.
What we NEED in the system:
9mm or 10mm with at least f3.5
Native TS/PC lens for perspective corrections (might be a bit large, but would be nice to have, could even be shift only)
150mm f4 or faster
12-50mm or 14-45mm f2.8-4 with high quality glass
The whole thing is Not only fast enough, but shallow enough to give adequate subject pop and separatiom !
That’s what m43 in need to replace 135FF in daily work.
Wake me when a patent is released for a 300mm f4 or something close to that.
100mm f4.5 seems a good addition if they can keep the price down to around $299 or $399 a which point I think they will fly of the shelves. Remember the focus mechanism has to travel a long way for Macro lenses, and keeping the speed of the lens down around f4.5 will mean faster CDAF.
Good Idea, and you have one confirmed customer right here. If you can squeeze it at F4 even better, but no need to go faster. SMall size and high IQ are all I want.
Correct me if I’m wrong but if you’re doing macro and want 100mm f2 you’ll be focused on an ant’s boogers? That’s going to be kind of tight guys =). I’m learning with my 12-50 going macro I need to stop down constantly to get a useful macro. Also it being ‘dark’ you need to use light / flash to do macro well imo. If 100mm comes in cheaper than the current macro options it’s nice that i can keep my distance from my subject with 100mm. Sometimes I’m finding myself setting up my tripod etc on a subject for it only to fly or crawl away. I’m guessing 100mm will help me there.
Since we have an Olympus 75mm 1.8 why do we need a 70mm 2.8? Is it supposed to be a cheaper alternative?
Pancake lenses similar to the Pentax Limited Series 40mm f2.8, 43mm f1.9 and 70mm f2.8 lenses would be a great addition to the M4/3 system.
Is it a pancake?! If so I agree! I don’t see anywhere in the article stating it is.
It says nothing about what the lens is.
I was just saying it would be great if it were a pancake like most of the Pentax Limited series lenses.
“Pancake lenses similar to the Pentax Limited Series 40mm f2.8, 43mm f1.9 and 70mm f2.8 lenses would be a great addition to the M4/3 system.”
Everyone always talks about the limitations of the size of lenses and the physics behind it, but how is it that Pentax can make lenses for APS-C sized sensor that are sooo small??? If m4/3 had this range of pancake lenses available in a similar size they would be EXTREMELY popular. More than once I’ve contemplated leaving m4/3 for Pentax and getting this line of lenses. If those f2.8 lenses were a stop faster I probably would have.
For me look the so Olympus not have hurry by high end zoom lens for micro 43!…?
Or maybe come soon?
Macro lens again?
We already have PanaLeica 45, oly 60, sigma 60…
Ok, so we are wishing for more lenses in this thread?
I’d like to see something like a 9mm f/4.5, compact, priced at around $300. That would be a game changer lens, a reason to switch to the M4/3 format for a lot of people.
We also miss some long lenses. 400mm f/4.5 with OIS, priced at around $5-600 would be good.
Finally, some more zoom lenses which start at 12mm would be nice. Say, 12-42mm f/3.5-4.5 with OIS.
why not! zoom starting by 12mm but problem is, there is already too many zoom standard. But i agree with you about 9mm/4.5 or something like that because 7-14mm or 12mm are too expensive for me. For landscapes, im using a 14mm with wide converter by panasonic.
Check out the SLR Magic Hyperprime 12mm T1.6 (f1.4±).
It’s an excellent alternative to the Oly 12mm and a great compliment to the 7-14mm. And quite a bit cheaper than both.
A nice lens from the reviews I read, but not exactly a pancake. I really would prefer a night quality 9mm rectilinear pancake if possible. Am saving my pennies for a 7-14mm but it will not balance well on my smaller m4/3rds body.