An australian friend sent me the pricing info for the soon to be announced 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO zoom. It will cost $1,500 AUSD. The lens will ship in very early 2015. In US the lens is “rumored” to cost around $1200-1300.
Official Olympus M.Zuiko 40-150mm f2.8 PRO description (via http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/em1_brochure)
Incorporating the same powerful optical and digital technologies developed for the top-of-the-line Zuiko Digital lenses, M.Zuiko PRO series lenses are designed to bring the highest level of professional imaging performance to our line of compact Micro Four Thirds system cameras. The second model in this series is a telephoto zoom lens with 35mm camera-equivalent zoom range from 80mm to 300mm. Built tough to stand up to the harsh demands of professional use, this high-grade lens boasts optical performance with f2.8 brightness throughout the zoom range and a durable dust-/splash-proof structure. Together with the 12-40mm f2.8 PRO standard zoom lens, this new lens enables the PRO series to cover the widest possible range of photographic requirements.
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
95 Responses
Like how the old Zuiko 50-200 f2.8-3.5 was a few 100 bucks pricier than the 12-60.
Oh noooo… let the complaining begin 😀 200 dollars more. Dont really care. If first tests wont show any problems, I am getting this lens! Missed my 30-100mm f2…
AUD prices include tax (10% GST), USD prices don’t.
I sure this is the lens everyone is waiting especially for Oly holders .
You asked for it !
Finally .
I quit waiting about 6 months ago and got the 50-200SWD instead. No regrets absolutely.
^ This. As far as optics are concerned, the SWD is one of the best zooms for any system. The micro contrast, sharpness and tonal response are really something to see.
If the above pricing will be correct then both lenses will be similarly priced (more or less) & I’m leaning towards the 50-200 for a more useful range for indoor events etc., where I think it may get more use & maybe for visiting birds at home too, but also I would be able to use the EC14 with it as well.
I can’t do anything till next year anyhow, so we shall see.
Too bad they are not making OIS on these Pro lenses. Guess they won’t be selling very many to Panasonic body users.
Why should they? Panasonic needs to do in body stabilization, not the other way around.
Yup, just like the GX7
Except that OIS is more efficient in longer lenses, especially since it’s optimized for the lens.
Well, this is only a myth. I use the P 2.8/35-100mm on my E-M1 and cannot tell any significant difference between IBIS and OIS. Therefore I just leave IBIS always on.
100mm is not long, that’s why you can’t see a difference.
OK, another try. I have used the P 45-175mm with both IBIS and OIS – no significant difference. I have used the P 100-300mm with both: the 5 axis IBIS is noticeably better. Enough said?
I’ve tested it on my Panasonic 100-300 (IBIS vs OIS on E-M5) but even on 300mm it very hard to notice a difference in the picture result.
If I compare the 100-300mm on the EM1 against the same lens on the GH4, I like to use it on the EM1 because it stabilizes what you see in the viewfinder much better. Seems like that lens on the GH4 does not show the stabilization very well in the viewfinder, although the captured frame is about the same as far as I can see.
This only applies if the OIS is optimized for the lens and the lens has more gyra-scopes and optics can move more, but generally no one ever buys a lens based on the grading of OIS, imagine if people compared lens based on number of stops of stabilisation (unfortunately the general camera buying public don’t know or don’t want to know as it may make their investment in lens a bad investment). Also different variants of optical stabilisation use more electricity which eats up battery faster, but no one ever measures these things, there are just so many attributes to a lens, which go completely unnoticed until the person buys it, my pet peeve is why Panasonic lens zoom barrel rotation direction are the opposite of Olympus.
Generally Panasonic seem to use a general OIS which they only adjust minutely. Canon has invested in OIS which is designed for super tele photo and also macro OIS which is significantly better than most, but then they have got to the stage where the only way to differentiate lens is by OIS whilst still being profitable, as they have lens in every range.
Not neccessary Jeff. Although using the OIS on Panasonic’s f2.8 35-100mm is superb for photos, the OIS on Panasonic’s f2.8 35-100mm is horribly flawed when using it for video. Micro jitters are clearly visible in the footage & the issue is well documented.
thats interesting to read…always wondered if all OIS lenses perform well or not during video.
I keep hearing this, and hey… maybe it is absolutely true. From my own experiences testing the Panny 100-300 on my EM-10 (let alone EM-1), I was able to handhold it better with the IBIS than with the OIS at 300mm.
I have an EM1 so I might buy this lens anyway, to get more reach than the Pana 35-100, but it would be much more attractive if I could use it on the GH4 as well. I know I can use it, just probably not hand held.
I just tried a Sigma 150-500mm (Nikon Mount) on a SpeedBooster on the EM1. Not sure if I am missing something, but id does not seem to be stabilizing it at all. I tried all 4 of the stabilization settings and all were the same. When I use the Panasonic 100-300 on the EM1, I can hear it wizzing away and it is really good., but no joy on this adapted lens combo.
The camera doesn’t know the correct focal length, so you need to give it manually. Check page 66 in the manual and see if that helps.
Exactly. Using a non 4/3 zoom lens on an EM1 is a bit of a pain as you need to change the IS designated focal length each time you change the focal length of the lens. It would be nice if Oly added a feature to the firmware so you could dial in the focal length using the rear thumb dial when the camera senses no 4/3 lens is mounted.
@Jimmy:
OIS would make them thicker, heavier and more expensive. This is why Oly invented in-body stabilization… and why Panasonic started to copy it. 😉
Time for Panasonic to get its Act together and implement IBIS in all its camera bodies.
I don’t see that happening soon on the GH serie and I’d be terribly surprised that the GX7 replacement did not have it.
Now, for whatever my opinion is worth, it the GF/GM series that needs it most.
Panasonic is firmly behind OIS in it’s lenses, and I don’t expect this will change any time soon. So far IBIS hasn’t been very useful for pro video, which is where Panasonic is staking it’s GHx territory.
I’ll guess that Panasonic will implement IBIS in the future as well. They already tried it a it in their GX7 and it would just make sense with the video capabilities in their GH cameras.
As you say they already have in in the GX7 so they have the tech.
As I understand it (and I can’t remember where I read it, but I think it was a video site) the reason the GH4 did not have in body stab was heat.
Continuously running sensor and continuously running IBIS equals a metric ass load of heat.
I’ll be using this lens with my GH4. I guess the community isn’t quite as monolithic as you thought!
For most uses a 600mm effective AOV with no image stabilization is pretty useless , unless you intend to bolt it to a tripod constantly. Though it is too large/heavy for my interests anyway , the 35-100 will do for me
Trying to use a 600mm lens WITHOUT a tripod is what is pretty useless, regardless of the format.
Converting $1500 AUSD to GBP and adding 20% VAT yields £1000.
Wouldn’t it be nice to think this is the price in the UK (rather than an overpriced £1200 which I expect Oly UK will choose).
IMHO, Consider a 70-200 F2.8 equivalent, AUS $1500 is a steal~!!!
Time to start my saving~
No it is an 80-300mm F5.6 equivalent still a steal ? That is unless you are a flat earther who thinks physics do not apply to them in which case the Panasonic FZ200 with its same effective view as a 12.5-300mm FT lens. The reason why the Panasonic is not equivalent to the imaginary FT lens is the exact same reason an FT 40-150mm F2.8 is not equivalent to a FF lens
Gee~ Einstein, thank you so much for your explanation~
As a Sony A850 (FF), A77 (APS-C) and a EM5 user, of course I know what I’m talking about.
The reason I invest in m43 is that I what deeper DOF at a wider aperture. You know it is a pain in the ass whereby you want to shot with FF while stopping down to F8~F11 in low light situation? m43 allows me to do that in wide aperture while maintaining reasonable deep DOF~=)
A weather sealed 80-300mm at this price, is indeed a very good deal. I’d argue (and many agree) that telephoto is an area where crop sensor formats gain advantage to FF.
The weather sealed Nikon 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR costs $550US { $600 AUD } . The simplest way to get equivalent lenses on FF is to mount the lens of your choice on a 2XTC. You end up with the same DOF, the same effective AOV, and the same total light gathering. Now I am not suggesting for a minute that the cheap Nikon lens will have the build quality of the Olympus. The problem is that there seems to be little demands for slower FF glass
You are wrong. Teleconverters and focal reducers (speed booster) actually change the focal length of the lens, which will affect the aperture. Crop factor simply narrows the field of view, so the focal length remains the same and thus the aperture doesn’t change. You are confusing field of view with focal length, a common mistake.
As a Sony A850 (FF), A77 (APS-C) and a EM5 user, of course I know what I’m talking about.
The reason I invest in m43 is that I what deeper DOF at a wider aperture. You know it is a pain in the ass whereby you want to shot with FF while stopping down to F8~F11 in low light situation? m43 allows me to do that in wide aperture while maintaining reasonable deep DOF~=)
40-150mm f/2.8 is identical to 35mm format 40-150mm f/2.8,but because image circle is cropped, you get same angle of view as 80-300mm would give on 35mm format.
So equivalence is 80-300mm with light gathering of f/2.8 but depth of field of 40-150mm f/2.8.
AUSD? You mean AUD?
One of them comes without elapids or any other venomous critters native to Australia 😉
Close enough to the same price as the Panasonic 35-100/2.8. Leaving aside relative performance differences, which we won’t know for a while, it breaks the choice down to extra reach at the long end vs. compactness.
I’ll be interested to see if the street price of the 35-100 drops, especially when Olympus has its introductory deals.
I would be really surprised if this didn’t perform better than the Panasonic version, particularly at the long end, where the Panasonic’s performance is weakest. Olympus has a history of creating very high performing telephoto zooms.
If you need a compact/lighter zoom with IS, you will go for the Panasonic. If you need the longer reach and slightly better performance, at a cost of weight and size, you will go for the Olympus.
Not a bad price. Assuming that the Panasonic and Olympus will both have similar performance it will a 12-35mm vs 12-40mm again: Extra reach at the trade of OS (useful if for any reason you have to switch to Panasonic bodies) and size.
“useful if for any reason you have to switch to Panasonic bodies” as if for any reason the rule was to have an olympus one…
I didn’t mean it like that. I meant for Olympus users that due to Panasonic lack of IBIS (other than the GX7), getting a lens with IS maybe a wiser choice in the really long term. If Olympus for any reasons stops producing cameras, converting to Panasonic will be easier or if you want one backup camera like the amazing GX7.
Interesting, let’s see if I will need it 🙂
40 to 150 zoom or 75 and 150 primes, your choice Marco…..
Yes. I would use it in few weeks, at the Venice Film Festival, just to try it out. But it will be available next year and many things can happen in the meanwhile.
Very true Marco, I went to a concert given by Burt Bacharach last week, took 75mm with my E-M1 still to far away for any decent shots.
The 75mm is my choice when taking pictures at concerts, but luckily I am usually in a good position 🙂
Bacharach was in Venice some weeks ago, but I skipped it: it was too hot and I ran to my mountains!
Too big and bulky, don’t need 300mm, 200mm is good enough…I’ll be sticking with the ‘just as “Pro”‘ Panasonic 35-100mm. P.S. you can find the panasonic 35-100mm for more reasonable pricing…I got it new for $1100 on ebay….and that was 6 months ago.
I wonder why people have to let us know what they dont need,..
But 35-100 I used for a while on FT and for my needs it was a great lens. You might dont like its dimensions and weigth I have a feeling 🙂
I know. I keep saying if you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Whatever, you know? There are tons of cameras, all formats, lenses of all prices and levels. Buy the stuff you like.
..but your panny won’t reach 300mm equiv. ???? What is your point????
oh..wait…you really do want the extra reach of the pro Oly for about the same price…but you bought the panny instead and now you have buyers remorse, so you come here and make a post to try to convince yourself that you are not upset. 🙂
By adding the extra 100mm you have reduced the versitility of the lens by making it bulky and heavy. The pani 35-100 is only slightly larger than the 12-35…thats incredible!! There is plenty of sharp, faster, and smaller glass with the same reach as the oly zoom that i can slap onto my m4/3 cameras that will be cheaper in the end. I bought a 70-210mm tamron for $30 on ebay in mint condition…thats 420mm on the long end…and u can find much better than that for under $500. And i agree with the other posters as well with the lack of IS…losing a lot of potential buyers. Just facts.
It’s give and take. You see having that extra 100mm as less versatility. Someone who needs that extra 100mm sees that as more versatility.
Oooo… price creep… but I will still buy it for that price
Hey…it is more reasonably priced for what it is compared to the Nocticron, no?
The Nocticron is a 42.5 mm f/1.2 prime. IT is a completely different animal.
Like blue sky said, they are different lenses, and to be honest I have no idea how lenses are priced… I simply ask myself, can I make enough use of it to justify the pricepoint asked? If not, I dont buy it.
The faster they are, the more expensive they are. A constant aperature zoom is always pricy. As for the specific price, well, within brands you can typically estimate based the price of existing currently lens. In the case of the Noctricon, which I happily own, although the build quality is superior, the Leica association does add to it’s price as well.
Who cares, it won’t even have IS, so sales will be half what they could have been.
Well you don’t need IS in the lens when the camera has a very nice built in IS 😉
Only problem is: the longer the vocal range, the less effective the built in IS.
This is for pros, not soccer moms. Pros don’t need IS, because we know how to set up a shot.
So, that sea of Canon IS lenses you see shooting every major sporting event around the world are used by whom exactly?
That being said, I never expected this lens to have IS and it will be a day 1 purchase for me.
Canon got the jump on most others, closely following Nikon, by introducing some of the first batch of long, fast (and expensive) lenses.
Off this “story”, it sold millions of bodies to many who would never even remove the standard 50mm/f1.8 lens 🙂 Good marketing though.
There is absolutely nö evidence for this. The OIS of the P 100-300mm is certainly not on par with E-M5 / E-M1 5-axis stabilization.
So everything depends on the generation of the image stabilisator generation. A three year old OIS does not beat 5-axis IBIS.
With IBIS your stabilization technology gets updated, when you update the body, which usually happens more often than updating your lenses. Also, you only need to update one part and not your whole lens portfolio (which no vendor will do anyway).
Thus, OIS is either outdated technology or a compromise for video centric cameras, which something, as a stills photographer, I dislike with Panasonic’s product strategy.
No need for IS for Olympus shooters. ( I’m a Panasonic shooter )
Panasonic IS slowly catching up in their otherwise excellent cameras.
If you own an Olympus camera you don’t need IS in the lens
You think? Even with 5 axis.
What is the length and weight of this thing?
That’s what she said?
The slower olympus equivalent gets great reviews and is just over $100. How much will the speed of this lens offer in terms of real world capability? In other words, what will be the usable DOF at 2.8 compared to the larger DOF of the current model? Too shallow is not good if you have to stop down to get a subject in focus. I’ve been considering the cheaper version for filming my son’s football games.
You’ll probably be able to shoot wide open in most situations (except maybe up very close), certainly if your subject is just one person.
Thanks for the comments.
If your son plays his games at night, the 2.8 will give you two to three stops better performance. if you want to stop action without blur that could be the difference between ISO 800-1600 and ISO 64000. Take two test pictures at each of those ISOs and compare. However, that is not be the only advantage to the pro lens. Another advantage is weather sealing, and probably: sharper in focus details, better quality to the out-of focus blur, and faster focusing.
That’s the great part of micro 4/3s. When you are at f2.8, you only have an equivalent DoF of f5.6 on a FF camera yet you have the light capturing speed of f2.8 aperture. That lets you capture low ISO, high shutter speed shots without the super narrow DoF that plagues FF cameras when they use telephoto lens.
Yeah, because it the ISO setting that causes noise, not the lack of photons per (screen/viewing) pixel. Or because noise is proportional to sensor area and thus photon (aka light)/(sensor) area matters. Not.
When did I talk about noise? For football, you probably want to use f5.6 to f11. For Micro 4/3rds, you can keep the lens wide open and get that depth of field. For a FF camera, you need to stop the camera down and use a higher ISO. ISO is basically sensor gain and does cause noise in the final result even though it is not the soruce. Higher gain means higher amplification of existing noise. You can have a medium format sensor that is super clean, but once you pump up the ISO, noise will increase.
Agree. on crappy says, I look forward to reasonable depth of field wide open, fast(ish) shutter speeds and never having to go over about 400ISO. Not just for footy shoots, for general use.
THAT and the comparatively light weight is almost like having your cake and eating it too. The $200 4.2x converter option is very well priced.
The hood looks like the one on my Macro lens. It slides so you can change/adjust filters easily and protects the lens when stored. It is a very clever design.
It’s a win. win, win proposition if it is tack sharp. Portable HQ tele picture taking. I’ve waited a LONG time for something like this.
It’s the super narrow DOF on FF that gives the creamy backgrounds with telephoto lenses that make photo look higher quality and a more pro look. (I’m a m43 user.) The real question is, is 300mm f5.6 equivalence enough to get a nice blurred background, or not. I think it’s borderline.
300mm F5.6 is actually too narrow DoF for filming a football game (which is what the original poster was asking about). Most NFL photographers use f8-f11 and go down to f4 to f5.6 when they want extreme subject isolation.
Why not mention in the front-page text the equivalent price in USD and EUR (incl. the disclaimer that because of taxes etc. the prices may differ somewhat)?
Why not spend 3 seconds googling? Must everything be spoon-fed?
That’s a stupid argument. We come to sites like this so that we don’t have to google. If I spend “3 seconds googling” for this information, I’m going to find another site that presents more complete information, and if I have to do that repeatedly, then I’m going to start following that other site instead of this one.
It is not necessary to mention it in the front-page, the price will be the same in USD is as in EUR($1300 == 1300 € this was and is the unwritten Olympus exchange rate) 🙂
It’s a shame that there’s no OIS on the 40-150mm f/2.8. I would have bought one for my GH4. 40-150 is a much more useful range than 35-100 (which does have OIS).
Panasonic really needs to get its act together and release a GH camera with build in IS for both still and video. The still-only IS on the GX7 is a good start, but they have to fall through!
I wonder what is the price of Panasonic 150mm f/2.8…..guess it will be sub 1000 USD
You know, now that I think about it- I’m kinda warming up to this lens. I ALWAYS need to step down on my FF at 300mm to get anything in focus. This bad boy gives me 2.8 speed but at a much more preferable DOF. Price is a little bit up there- but maybe I’ll swing it.