Image courtesy: ePhotozine
Got a small update about the soon to be announced new Panasonic 35-100mm lens. The aperture is f/3.5-5.6. Price is unclear but it’s “rumored” to be just under $500.
—
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
The 35-100 lens has an aperture of 3.5-5.6. Unknow price. Pprice would be 390 or 490 €.
82 Responses
Where’s the point fir such a lens?
It looks tiny, to match the GMx.
…Or did you know that already?
It complements the 12-32mm on the GM1. It’s small so the lens circumference does go beyond the bottom and top of the GM1.
Honestly, unless that’s non-telescoping and all metal construction, I don’t see the advantage over the $150 (or less) Oly 40-150mm.
It’s compactness an advantage? I’m sure some will put that feature in their “pros” column.
Oly RRP is more than that, like all ‘kit’ lenses. This too will be a ‘kit’ lens for the GM1 series and will be cheaper to buy than the RRP. Plus it has OIS which the Oly kit doesn’t have.
Yow. That’s a crazy MSRP. But yeah, given that it’s a kit lens, I’m sure it’ll immediately be available for at least $100 less, possibly more. Still, for a slow kit zoom, that’s a big ask.
Not if it’s a high quality lens.
Many of us don’t need a constant F2.8 aperture but still want the best quality in a lighter, smaller package.
Too many people equate large aperture lenses with high quality and we badly need small aperture lenses which are built to the same standards with the same (or better ) IQ as the ‘Pro lenses’.
$500? Oly 40-150/4-5.6 can be had as low as $99, $119 almost always, is less than 200g and easily pocketable.
It does seem expensive, but I’d get it included in a double lens kit when the price drops. That will be pretty soon considering internal competition from the new Panasonic compact.
Don’t complain. There is a price to pay for OIS. For me, IBIS camera s only.
I see no reason why it should be more expensive than Lumix 45-150mm f4-5.6.
There’s a size advantage, and a range inconvenient. Aperture is about the same, and build quality seems to be about the same. 45-150mm list price is US$ 300, and its regular street price is $256 as of today. I don’t believe the $500 estimate.
Based on the aperture, we now know why it manages to be so small… Yet, we can’t figure out why the price is still so damn HIGH!
Perhaps the IQ is also so damn HIGH!
Back in the day the German manufacturers sometimes used to produce smaller aperture lenses with the same IQ and build standards as the larger aperture lenses, for those that wanted to save size and weight.
Not bad better than f4. I’ve been waiting for the GM1 to drop in price, but its been holding its own for a while. I think in 2-3 years when prices come down the GM5 + 12-32, 35-100 kit will be killer. Its exactly what micro four thirds promised to be, micro. The perfect complement is the Pana 20mm, and Olympus 45mm but the autofocus is terrible on the 20mm. Overall very well done with the GM line.
The 20mm’s AF is pretty damn good on Panasonic bodies, not lightning fast like some lenses, but more than acceptable. I used my 20mm II and GX7 quite a bit on a recent trip to Costa Rica walking around San Jose at night and it did quite well. We were in a dodgy neighborhood, so I left the 17.5mm in the hotel.
most m43 lenses are over priced; this one should worth only 300 USD
I think even $300 is overprice, $200 should be more reasonable lol
You guys are a bunch of cheapskates. All talk and no buy.
And this lens should be F4 (constant aperture)
just turn up the iso 1 or 2 stops… only native wide open shooters need a bit more
Why? It’s a very compact zoom. very useful on a light and small camera en excellent companion with the Pana 12-32 for example. In this case you’ll pay for compactness.
It has to be very high quality, else I would agree with you that it’s to expensive.
Crazy expensive for such a slow lens.
No one here is allowing for expected image quality. The 12-32 compact lens for the GM1 is unusually good and also very compact. If this comes out second only to the fast and expensive zooms, then it justifies its mid-range price. If not, then I would agree it’s a little expensive.
As always, comparisons to sales, closeouts, clearances and used equipment is not too relevant to the MSRP of a new product introduction.
OIS is a minor factor in the cost, as demonstrated by numerous other Panasonic lenses.
an image stabilizer would be good though
I guess this is kit lens for so called DMC GM5 . Let’s see if my guess is right .
Well, in a twin lens kit that is.
Just toss in the 15mm f1.7 for a small, light and versatile little kit!
That seems pricey for such a basic lens. No wonder camera makers are having such a hard time selling stuff.
Were they too embarassed to print the aperture numbers on the prototype lens? This would be the slowest 100mm (M)FT lens ever, and probably one of the slowest 100mm lenses ever made for any mount.
Ok, I see the point in having a really small 200mm equivalent telezoom even though it may be really slow. This is a real advantage of the Four Thirds format; for full frame there simply are no such options, and a 70-200mm would probably still be somewhat larger even if it was made with f/7-11.
A good thing would be if the lens was really sharp. Nowadays, most slow lenses tend to come with cheap optics, which is sad. A lens that slow for “just under $500” should at least deliver really good image quality. If it does, it may well have its right to exist, but if not, its just another overpriced piece of equipment designed to maximize profits, not to produce any value in use.
Personally, though, I still wouldn’t buy such a lens. If I want it compact, although not getting that compact, I use my Panasonic/Leica 14-150 on my Olympus DSLR with the real advantage of not having to change lenses between wixe-angle and telephoto. I plan to continue to do that in the Micro FT world, too.
“Nowadays, most slow lenses tend to come with cheap optics, which is sad.”
Yes, that really is sad. Why can’t those of us who want to save weight by compromising on maximum aperture also enjoy high quality glass? I don’t need every one of my lenses to be large, light sucking ones since I don’t use them equally, but I would expect not to be forced to put up with consumer grade image quality.
Let’s hope the new mini 35-100 breaks with this tradition.
Requoted quote: “Nowadays, most slow lenses tend to come with cheap optics, which is sad.”
Don’t find that the case on m43. Even the cheap lenses perform pretty solid. No real bad ones.
hope so too, small but slow, but radiant rendering glass
Magical?
Gently washed with unicorn tears.
What a slew of bad comments again.
Man it’s a SMALL 35-100mm smaller pobably than any existing teles. And to Hubertus it is F3.5-5.6 light gathering it is not F7-11, if I recall correctly all the consumer grade 70-200mm for 35mm are that aperture range too. And I don’t care about DOF equivalence. I’ts the FOV and shutterspeed I’m concerned with in this format, I well know the limitations of this system so stop the DOF comparisons already.
Some people just dont get that the DOF is exactly what the focal length printed on lens say it is.
The DOF from that is what you get from 35-100mm f/3.5-4 in any system. Only angle of view gets changed based format. If you take shot two times further or two times narrower focal length, you get two times narrower depth of field too.
Some people should just get that the aperture will not be multiplied as neither the s focal length. Only angle of view needs to be equivalent.
Some kids don’t get that they must learn before throwing their money – or their mom’s money, right Mk82?
When Hubertus talked about F7.1 to F11 he was referring to a 70-200mm equivalent lens in FF.
As he was doubling the focal length he was also (correctly) doubling the aperture.
Unless you believe a tiny sensor compact gathers the same light with a F3.5 -F5.6 lens as well ?
Agree completely. But you can see why they don’t produce this sort of lens by the comments of many on here.
Give me a set of very high quality, small aperture zoom lenses and I’ll be delighted. Perfect for landscapes when hiking.
Most of the people in forums like this complain about things they’re never going to buy anyway, me included. 😉
Mehh.
Hope it is waaaaay under $500! Otherwise no way I’m getting this.
Good.
I already have the 45-150mm which is pretty small (52mm filter) and light with very good image quality, considering the price. (I paid $205 including tax & shipping) Surprisingly, the 14-140mm II is only a few mm wider diameter!
So, the 35-100mm will have to be markedly better to warrant spending much more on it. Of course, if it’s really tiny, that’s another story and would be a great companion to the 12-32mm. It looks like the filter threads are 46mm, like most of the other small lenses like the 14mm and 20mm.
Yesterday a friend of mine went to my home, he used to be a Fuji user, with 2 XT1, an x100s. He sold everything. Bought a couple of DSLR for work, a new 70-200.
He came to me to buy my 45mm, because he bought also a GM1 with 20mm and the kit lens. This is his complete set up. (And he is very happy about the quality of the system)
did he say why he did not like the XT1?
Interested to know that too. As there is no APS DSLR that beats X-T1 or E-M1. And E-M1 even is draw with cameras like D800e/D810/D4/A7r etc when doing large prints (over meter) and in smaller no visible difference ever).
Well, X-T1 has bad controls and it has limited lens offering but….
Oooooh man you are really sick. Please take some medicine Mk.82.
He drinks from the same well as you.
Who is your pusher again wild boy?
http://www.thewanderinglensman.com/2014/02/the-practical-difference-part-2-between.html
http://www.pekkapotka.com/journal/2013/5/3/nikon-d800e-and-olympus-om-d.html
Skilled photographers and people know how to get large prints from m4/3 camera that doesn’t need to shy at all next to DSLR top dogs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up8K_xd_iwU
Just learn the camera characteristics and you get awesome results.
Throw there the only factor of photography and you don’t have any differences (and that factor is the subject….).
Great video. Interesting about the mirrorless camera AF seems to be a toss-up, except for specific things. M4/3 is the top of the heap, though.
Exactly. See above the print size from an Em5 and 75mm.
Actually he told me that he didn’t realize how m43 system grew up in these last two years. IQ is really good, and the system portability is great. Now with a 20mm f1.7 and 45mm f1.8 in hispocket he has a great little combo.
A bigger than usual (for my standards) print. It stood next to some “FF” prints and nobody asked or noticed anything.
That’s a cool picture.
Two reasons: the wrong perception of customers thinking that a pro photog is not a pro without a big DSLR (he carries an Hasselblad MF but shoots NEX sometimes..) and the silly choice of Fuji of releasing a new model every six months. The only thing he regrets are the great lenses and the x100s, but I bet he will buy the x100t.
You sold the very nice 45mm ?
How can ?
That lens will never in my selling list at least in this moment cause it produced many many great portraits in my collection .
I might get the Nocticron once I recover my financial difficulties but still no sell for the 45mm lens . I prefer to retain it with my GX1 .
I own the Nocticron and the 45mm was sitting in its box since then. 🙂 A nice deal for me and a happy friend.
Thats funny because yesterday a friend came also over and told me that he sold all his M43 stuff for a couple of APSC and FF camera’s. Het told me that he could not be more happy about his choice.
Nah, what’s funny is the idea you have any ‘friends’ at all. xD
That was mean! 🙂
Ah don’t worry Marco, it’s not like he has a soul or feelings or anything – water on a ducks back 🙂
Really? The other day a friend told me he had sold all his M43 stuff. He was very happy and bought me drinks.
Well of course he did – no camera system on earth will save a terrible photographer. I’ll wager drinking would be a more suitable hobby for both you.
Big surprise…everyone wants the lens to be smaller, faster f/stop, made of titanium with emerald glass and they want it to cost $99!
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……
PAY for it?
Sheesh, I want it to come as a prize in a box of Sugar Frosted Flakes!
The GM1 has very good high ISO qualities and an electronic shutter. So a low aperture is not that important (for me). Size matters. Hope that “under 500” doesn’t mean “499”. If you want a faster 35-100mm, buy the Vario 35-100 2.8 – and also live with the bigger size.
This is a very good lens for m43. Small cheap en good enough for that sensor size.
Kinda like the condoms that you buy.
Sid you are a very sad person.
Pitcher or catcher, Seizure?
I’d guess the latter.
Cool answer. By the way, happy 9/11 feast, to you and all the other American experts who educate and entertain us.
They say “just under 500 USD”, which is way too much for a slow lens for a crippled format. 200 USD would be more like it, 300 tops.
Why would someone get this over the Oly 40-150 or the current Panny equivalent (with OIS)? At more than twice the cost, but without a faster aperture, I don’t see who this is intended for.
Excellent question. I truly don’t get this one. Maybe it’s so that the lens fits the GM1 without the barrel hanging off the bottom edge?
Ding ding ding! We have a winner! They need something that is physically (and cosmetically!) a match to the GM1. If they want to have a GM line, it makes sense to have more than one dedicated lens. That photo shows the color, markings, etc. to be just like the 12-32. I imagine that increasing the attachment rate for additional lenses to the GM platform is a big part of the profitability analysis for Pany.
I’m not in the market for this, personally, even though I have a GM1, but I will be curious to see if it manages to perform as well as the highly-regarded 12-32. That lens is surprisingly impressive for its size (kind of like the GM1, itself). Not the be-all end-all of photography, but it has a niche.
Fantastic, a 70-200 F7-11.2. 99 BUX?
Expected, but still disappointing. Well, even Panasonic engineers have to obey the laws of physics. 🙂