Egami spotted a new Olympus patent describing a 15mm f/2.0 lens. It’s quite an “unusual” focal length and I don’t think this lens will make it into mass production. Anyway, you never know…GX7 and Olympus 12-40mm patents now became…real products 🙂
Egami spotted a new Olympus patent describing a 15mm f/2.0 lens. It’s quite an “unusual” focal length and I don’t think this lens will make it into mass production. Anyway, you never know…GX7 and Olympus 12-40mm patents now became…real products 🙂
*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.
106 Responses
yep, agree that this is unlikely to make it to production, too close in focal length and aperture to the 17/1.8 … unless a 15/2.0 could be ‘significantly’ smaller to be marketed as a pancake?
(Oly are clearing the 17/2.8 on give away (free claim) deals with the PM2/PL5)
I could dig a compact/pancake 15mm in f/2.0, also very usefull for behind the screen style documentary video.
Why not? The 17mm f/1.8 is so average. So, is the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5. This is hopefully the PRO lens, the answer to all those praying for a fast and high performance standard wide lens. Make it weatherproof and internal focusing, and it will be a great addition to the high-end lens lineup.
The PRO lens line will be like the SHG lenses in 4/3.
Yes, I will buy one if it really is super high grade. This won’t be duplicating anything in M43.
I think the 4/3 lenses will gradually be replaced with these new PRO lenses, which are smaller and importantly works better with the OM-D cameras, with fast AF and also silent operation for video.
I just wish Olympus start making a faster lens for the prime rather than just F2 or F1.8,,.
F1.4 will be great,..btw ,.Fuji just announced their 23mm F1.4 xf mount,.its 1/3 faster than 17mm f1.8 and also can create more shallow Dof for the subject separation
I like the 1.8 compromise-for size reason. Don’t need that extra 2/3 step of fastness if it add to the size & prize.
So I hope for a pancake 25/1.8 and a tele 100/1.8
anyway- let’s hope that pana/Leica will bring a 1.4 wide angle lens to complete the 25&42.5 set on the lower end.
I need quality much more than very wide apertures for wide angles. The current 14mm is too basic. Even the 17mm lenses are pretty poor. This 15mm will be fine, not too close to the 12mm f/2.
Let’s also have a 10mm f/2.0 PRO next.
There’s still something more interesting, like KonicaMinolta 9-18mm F3.5-4.5 patent.
PRO lens body cap. ;P
It looks like an impressively telecentric Planar-type design. Should be small (pancake?) with very high quality. I hope it materializes some day.
Is (1) the sensorplane? I thought Olympus sacrificed telecentric design for the sake of compactness, but if you are right…yeah looks very promising.
Yes, it is a true retrofocus design with a typical double gauss in the middle. It´s not a pancake and size should be about the same as Olympus 17mm f/1.8. I would guess focal length (maybe closer to 16mm than 14mm but named as 15) was not the starting point. It is (hopefully) just where they ended at moderate wide-angle range when making things right.
-p-
I is more intereted in an 25mm F1.8.
Whats wrong with the summilux 25mm 1.4?
As an owner I can state: pretty much nothing. Size and cost weren’t ideal, but you rarely get great lenses cheap (the 45mm/1.8 being a big exception – I got mine free!).
But some people are never happy if it doesn’t have their favourite brand blazened across it. I’ve never understood that.
can not say 45 f1,8 a big exception, it’s bokeh matchs its price, just other lenses are overpriced.
I mean only 17mm F2.8 pancake have been over priced not other lens from Olympus actually.
Bokeh: last (overrated) defence before a total failed picture.
nothin wrong with the 25mm 1.4 but a 25mm 1.8 would prob cost 50% less, for the ones who dont need 1.4, thats a nobrainer.
That, I doubt. But maybe you are right and it would follow the 45mm route. I believe that it would rather follow the 12mm track.
Not mouch, but metal finish and manual direct focus ring, just as 12mm F2 and 17mm F1.8.
With a size slightly bigger than 20/1.7 and a lot smaller than 25/1.4! Have been waiting for a good Oly 25mm (either f1.8 or f2.0 will do) since the launch of M43…
I’d love to replace my 20mm 1.7 with a smaller, wider high quality Olympus prime one day, a 15mm 2.0 pancake would be perfect for me
The 20mm is already a pancake…. still isn’t small enough?
I’ve got the Panasonic 14mm, haven’t had it long but am kinda already wishing for something which isn’t so wide and is a bit faster.
The Panasonic 20mm is the only other pancake option, but is also a fair bit more pricey.
If you want a quality fast lens you have to expect to pay for it.
nope….still won’t fit in my pocket on my ep5 🙂
but I should add there isn’t anything significantly smaller that is anywhere near it’s quality 🙂
Buy bigger trousers?
haha, I did, cargo shorts work well 🙂
useless focal IMO, we already have 12, 14 and 17. what we need now is a 8 or 9 mm f2 or f2.8 prime !!!!
Ummm
If my eyes not lie to me, this is the diagram of the 15mm f/2.0 lens FOR 4/3″ system. Not Micro 4/3. Right?
150mm 2.0. That would be interesting
I think we have to settle for the Panasonic 150 2.8. If we want more we can chose for the SHG 150 f/2.0. I think a MFT 100mm f/2.0 is more realistic.
Fair call
I suppose Olympus felt they needed their own version of the 14/f2.5. Which leads to the obvious conclusion – they want a really small pancake to ship as a kit lens with the PENs.
I can’t image this lens selling many by itself – there’s already a tiny 14/2.5 by Panasonic which existing m4/3 users would already own if they want a tiny wide pancake. But I can see Olympus providing this as a kit lens – may also as the prime in a double-kit with the standard zoom (as Panasonic did with their 14mm).
If you look at the patent though you can see it’s not going to be a really small pancake.
Would be a good lens to introduce with the E-M1. Perhaps it won’t take that long until we see it in physical form.
Similar Optic design to 17mm f/1.8
OH NO!
Are you sure? The 17mm/1.8 is a dog.
Mine is a well trained dog..
My Oly 17mm f/1.8 is a fast, happy dawg, with great character. Very good MFT lens…fit the whole idea of the MFT system. Love mine.
I don’t see the need for another 17mm or 25mm which a lot here desperately want from Oly.
They should bring UWA stuff or some longer macros. The highend Tele range will be covered by FT in the future, I guess? (I believe that we will see the E-M1 sensor in the E-M6 and the furture Pens and that high quality m43 Tele lenses would not be significantly smaller or cheaper than those 43 lenses.) A pair of cheaper and more compact 200mm F4 and 300mm F4 primes where useful?
For me I would rather invest in the 12-40-150 combo (or the 12-35-100 if the Olys turn out to be slouches in some way) and in the 75-300mm since zooms are more convenient to me. I would just add the 45mm as a portrait lens and the 14mm as a walk around lens. Afterwards the Pana 7-14 (or a Oly 6-12?) or that cheaper 300mm F4 would be kind of interesting. But that is just me (beginnig amateur non-pro non-serious photographer) and maybe I will see that I would want primes over zooms some day?
But that is a very, very long way to go. 😀 This fall the E-M5 and 12-40/12-35 and the 45mm are going to make the start if my finances allow that combo. Otherwise I would have to stick to the 12-50 kit + 45 for the beginning. 😉
17mm f/1.2 please…
The best set for micro43:
– 12-40/2.8 (Sep 2013)
– 40-150/2.8 (2014)
– 17/1.2 (no announcement)
– 45/1.2 (2014)
Do you really need this much speed? Personally I would prefer optically corrected f/2 primes and f/2.8-3.5 zooms. Size should be about right.
voitlander 17 f0.95?
autofocus?
Where?
I would like that to. Some times it’s a bit to dark for the 1.7/20mm. I could increase ISO, but than there is this ugly banding…
Well 17mm is close to the 35mm classic focal length on 35mm film in equivalence (34mm). The preceding ‘classic’ focal length was 28mm, so this lens would be close to being equivalent to that. I am surprised they didn’t go for 14mm.
14mm would be too close to their 12mm.
No it wouldn’t be. The ‘classic’ focal lengths in the OM 35mm system were: 8, 16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 40, 50, so that’s 4, 8, 9, 10.5, 12, 14, 17.5, 20 and 25.
This is yet another reason I wish the M4/3 system would seize the bull by the horns and dump focal length as a lens metric and substitute it with field of view in º degrees. Olympus is probably the only company bold enough to actually do this.
+1 needs a bit to get used too, but much more useful indeed
Focal length is a useful metric way beyond ‘field of view’, for example together with distance, it gives you reproduction size for macro. Also it lets you do calculate hyperfocal distance and dof, of course also depending on the size of the medium and magnification between capture medium and presentation.
Replacing focal length by angle of view as a metric for lenses serves no purpose other then making it easier for the uneducated to just remain uneducated, and it will not at all solve the ‘confusion’ about ‘equivalent focal length’, it merely makes the false argumentation a little bit more difficult at the expense of also making useful things more difficult.
Focal length will still be needed, whether FOV is added or not to the description of a lens.
You see, focal length is a fundamental measurement of a lens. FOV is a function of FL and sensor size.
Well first of all read the post I (the same anonymous as above) replied to, as that is not what the real stig is suggesting, he explicitly suggests to DUMP focal length as a metric, obviously from the specifications as mentioned to the consumer, and not as a physical property of the lens (which would mean it would no longer be a lens)
Removing focal length as a metric from lenses is of course nonsense, and is really not what anyone is even remotely trying to suggest. This is EXCLUSIVELY about the information given to the customer and user, not about the actual physical properties of a lens, it would be really silly to suggest otherwise, please assume people here have a basic understanding of such things.
So, the point is if focal length or field of view should be specified TO THE USER as the prominent specification for a lens.
While I understand the motivation behind suggesting this should be field of view, I think its actually a bad and misconceived idea to facilitate those who never really need it because of not working with multiple systems, while making things more difficult for those who do work with multiple systems and may for example share lenses between those systems. More difficult, not impossible, because just like angle of view can be calculated from media size and focal length, so can focal length be calculated from angle of view and media size, or media size from focal length and angle of view.
okay write both on the barrel then, so everybody is happy.
This might be for a high end compact camera, to compete with the Nikon Coolpix A and Ricoh GR. Or, hopefully, with the Fuji X100s (i.e, by having an integrated VF).
If it has stellar IQ, then it is worth it. Otherwise, the 14mm is much cheaper at $190. So, no point releasing it if not a high quality one.
Highly recommend to Olympus the two following numbers:
1.4 and 1.2
Just let them think about. Panasonic (Leica) already has done! 😀
I am sure the Panasonics are superb (at least i know from the 25mm), so there is missing, unless you only want to use Olympus lenses. But in that case its unlikely Oly will release such high speed types.
I remember an interview where some white collar from Olympus stated that they would never go wider than f1.8.
Scheinder will make a 14 f2.0 weather sealded…
i think is a better option for E-MX body.
The only problem is the Schneider will cost more than the E-Mx.
Yes .
A 100mm F2.0 or F1.8 again if possible is welcome consider we already experienced the very great 75mm F1.8 .
This would be my next purchase lens if available after the Leica Nocticron .
Did they patent the cheapy build quality? Another cheap nasty lens from Olympus. Oh how the mighty has fallen? Micro four thirds? Give me a break! What were you thinking Olympus???? What???
Dinasaurs were kings too. There is something called evolution, a process that ensures continuous improvement and survival.
Thank God I sold all my Olympus equipment years ago: they are the joke of the camera business now – get outclassed by a TV manufacturer now. Oh dear….
… a TV manufacturer with access to Leica optics and that co-developed the AVCHD video standard. Panasonic makes very good video cameras so not surprising that they have done well in the camera space – they are not *just* a camera maker. The Olympus 5 axis in-body stabilization is quite amazing – no wonder Nikon entered into an agreement with Olympus to share technology.
Agreed. Olympus should just stick to designing 5 axis vibrators
So why are you still here? Go to a “full frame” site, and stay there!
But I enjoy pointing out your inferior endowment!
FULL LAME IS STINK
More than taking photos with your camera?
Says a lot about the FF experience.
Somehow I have a strong feeling that all the FF minions here don’t even own or shot one themselves. We know their aim is just to get attention.
Yes. Typical profile of a troll: teen boy, prepubescent, still virgin, seeking attention and/or power affirmation by anonymously harassing others. Actual age may vary. The anonymous aspect also signifies their deeper problem communicating with other openly. That, in conjunction with the need of power affirmation and imagined possession of larger objects (FF cam), suggests… well what we all knew well: problems getting it up.
“they are the joke of the camera business now – get outclassed by a TV manufacturer now.”
Thank goodness I am a photographer and can find value in my Olympus gear based on those needs – – – not a camera salesman, collector, or financial specialist who’s criteria is as you have suggested, and so are disappointed. 🙂
Olympus has never been King – or the best at everything. It has always been heavily criticized from the earliest I can remember.
What appealed to me when I rejected other brands of 35mm cameras in favour of Olympus – starting in the mid-1980’s – was their innovation and smaller form factor. Thankfully their focus has continued to be on those things instead of trying to adapt to some standard of the forerunners or pressure from consumers to be the same as everyone else.
+1 agree with you
Q U E S T I O N : -> DOF…
Yesterday I was on the Airport in Amsterdam. I made 2 shots with a Siny NEX5.
I made a picture with 50mm/ 1,8 & with the zoom lens 100mm/3.5.
In my eyes the DOF was the same, compared on the small display.
Now my question:
so why shold I buy an Oly 45mm/1.8 and not just use the 14-1500mmzoom (e.g. on 75mm) for portraits?
depending on your imagination, you can can use all FL for a portrait 🙂
Personally, most of the time I prefer standard 25 mm or short tele 45mm for portraits in comparison with wide and long tele lenses, because i like their natural rendering of transition from focus to blur, and the natural perspective. Tele is great for extreme compression of depth, while wide gives more fun or crazy addition in mood.
thanks !
you are welcome. I forgot to add that i always prefer to shoot with the aperture fully open when doing portraits.
I guess Oly will make primes faster than 1.8 eventually. The 12-40 is the first in a line of “PRO” lenses, and I guess after the 40-150 we will see pro primes, too. A stellar 35 equivalent is still something the system should have, although this could be the next PanaLeica. On the other hand, Oly might focus on lenses like the 45mm. Honestly, I am surprised neither Pana nor Oly have follow-ups to 20mm respectively 45mm, probably the most sold primes in the system. 25mm 1.8 ist something I would definitely consider.
Also: WIDE PRIME!
Also also: where is that mysterious Pana 12-50 / 2.5-3.3? It was all over the place in 2011, even FT4, but has since vanished. That would have been a lens …
If this 15mm iq is top and his size pancake I could sell my 14mm and 20mm
μ = micro = tiny
In all seriousness the smallest I could contemplate is an asp-c sized sensor (and that’s pushing it) – it’s called micro for a reason. You guys should save yourself some money and get an IXUS point and shoot
lol !! why buy an IXUS ? I have a camera on my phone !! and why full frame ? Medium format has even a bigger sensor !
It’s what’s known as price in proportion to sensor size. Add to that the ludicrous outrageous price of nano four third lenses, asp-c/full frame is an absolute no brainer!
Thank you for the advice. I will consider it with all seriousness. Now, if you don’t mind please give us a reference to your work and specifically to examples which would not be possible to achieve with my lesser gear.
we already saw his “portfolio”.
I’m curious. Do you have a link?
Sneye i did not use “”” without reason. Actually it was not a port, but just a dirty image link :-O
“You guys should save yourself some money and get an IXUS point and shoot”
FF, your advises are as always impeccable! This forum wouldn’t be the same without you.
you’re welcome
We’re all so lucky that you’re here to share your unique perspective with us.
Of course, most people would be out taking photos with their wonderful full frame camera, but for some reason you don’t want to do that. Too heavy for you?
Having a full frame camera system requires big muscles. You should stick to your puny four thirds…
That’s why your big ff is laying somewhere unused.. You should sell it and buy some por n magazines, and build up your muscles. Change hand sometimes, ok? 🙂 k
I can tell you emphatically that I alternate hands every time. You being puny four thirds need a magnifying glass and your little finger!
You are just a pathetic little stooge, you fail even to reinforce your arguments or opinions, with your scatalogical, textual diarrhea. I suspect you’d have a hard time fighting your way out of a wet paper bag. If you are the spokesperson of Full Frame, they are far worse off than I ever suspected.
Slight O/T. GX7 in Germany. http://shop.panasonic.de/ finally lists the GX7. But as I was afraid, there is no black GX7+20mm kit – all kits are silver. Kind’a disappointing.
P.S. Black leather bag, apparently opening one, for GX7 with pancake mounted:
http://shop.panasonic.de/DMW-CGK22/DMW-CGK22XEK,de_DE,pd.html
Sadly, asking price is 100€.
Oh and yes, the stated delivery time: in 8-10 days.
They mixed up the numbers.
It should read: 8mm f/2.8
Clearly this is the new body cap lens 😉
I used to be genuinely fat.
I hated lifeblood and didnt lack to to outside with friends.
Trendy I have the impression in point of fact meet! Im potent, and girls be thrilled by me Now 🙂
dean be awsum
http://deansawsumdmain.com
I adapted to to be really fat.
I hated life-force and didnt lack to be done with outside with friends.
Again I feel in point of fact kind! Im busy, and girls love me Any longer 🙂
dean be awsum
http://deansawsumdmain.com
First ever super zoom digital camera with 2.8f and lens stabilization. Was a bargain and a great product for its time: 2100UZ.