Image on top shows the current 14-150mm lens.
A highly trusted source told me the rumors and specs we shared about the E-M5MarkII are correct. And he also said there will be a new version of the current 14-150mm lens which will be updated to become a 14-150mm R lens.
—
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
136 Responses
What I really want from Olympus is a weather sealed M.Zuiko 25mm f/1.2 (or faster) for my E-M1. I wouldn’t care if it becomes big and clumsy in comparison to the existing 25mm lenses from Panasonic or Olympus.
that would be a nice allround lens for some.
Yes .
But not for you & me .
what’s the doctor’s advice?
An ultra fast prime is desperately needed to delight the doctor here .
I wold go for several, just in case ;).
f/1.2 you like i am sure, but you cant use a 25mm? yeah i prefer a classic portrait range fl too, but for woman’s photography I used 25mm too for some occasions, but it would not my preferred main FL
Such FL ( 25mm ) never be my series portrait shoot but it’s still useful especially for studio works , lingerie shoot
so you are willing to pay the big money for a faster 45mm.
Yes but no more than the Nocticron price .
Now the price of Nocticron is getting cheaper .
If the nocticron price is ok, why not go with that?
Agree .
Let’s see how low can it go in my place .
Agree, we need some F1 primes for the system, not another 14-150mm lens :).
Yes .
Also my 45mm F1.2
There’s not many better lenses than the Panasonic Leica 42.5mm f/1.2, it only lacks weather sealing. You should get this lens if you’re after the best 45mm.
It’s wise to wait for what FL Oly trying to come up for it’s ultra fast prime .
I did rent the Nocticron several times but still not 100% impress me .
I wouldn’t get my hopes up too high. Olympus already has that focal length covered with their solid 45mm. They also didn’t overwork themselves when they came out with their 25mm which is nothing to shout about given that Panasonic already has a slightly better one on the market for a long time. There’s really no reason to assume Olympus is going to do something unexpected. They are going to focus on the premium zooms, probably with a wide angle zoom coming next.
I agree with you. Premium prime lenses is what can set Micro Four Thirds apart from competition.
Will need OIS!
OIS in an Olympus lens ? Forget it. They want to sell bodies as well…
Maybe a kit lens for EM5 m2 .
What is the aperture anyway ?
4-5.6 I believe.
Finally… Took them long enough.
Now also do the 9-18mm.
Are we supposed to be impressed? Excited? What does R mean?
A shiny coat of paint.
seriously?
Well with the R versions of the 14-42 lens, they were in fact repaints of the 14-42 mk II that Oly put out. That said, they were released immediately after the 14-42 mk II so I’d imagine the 14-150mm R would also have some sorts of improvements.
It could be “Remarkable”, but in reality I guess it could just be “Remake”.
Hopefully the 14 Will become a 12
I expect nothing but a minor update on the existing 14-150. The old one serves me well when I need a ‘one size fits all’, for new customers it will be nice to have an updated look.
I would imagine it will be similar treatment that the 75-300 lens got (& hopefully with the lower price too).
Announces by Olympus sound a bit boring these days… What I expect from them is to drop the E-PL line, and make the E-PM competing against the Pana GM line (in particular GM-5). A compact replacement for the 12-50 would also come handy…
Yes .
Might right but I think Oly is base on sales track record to see which one entitle to upgrade & in this case , the EPL is better than EPM I believe .
Then, if possible, make the E-PL line the same size as GM Pana line, and drop the E-PM… What’s in a name, after all ?
Oly is not innovate as Pana ,
They are not willing to take a bet here so it’s wise to retain what the EPL should look like .
Maybe the sales of EPL still encouraging
I replaced GM1 with E-PL7, it is not that much bigger.
The new E-PL7 is a cracker. Basically an updated E-M10 sans EVF with bits of E-M5 II and E-M1 thrown in for good measure at an insanely low price..
Considering how well it sells in asia and europe, I cannot see them dropping the PenLite series, ever.
Concerning the E-M5 mkII : any info concerning the VF ? Will it get the same VF as the E-M1 or VF4 ? Or will it be the same as the old E-M5 and VF2 ?
i think it will get the higher resolution evf like FV4
Don’t worry ,
Definitely higher than the current EM5 or even stand a chance to beat the EM1 , I dare to say .
no, i am sure the optics have less magnifying factor then the E-M1 has
It is “E-M5 II” and not a “E-M5 MkII”
I guess my anti Mark campaign caught on! 🙂
I think people use “Mark” as a way of distinguishing concepts verbally. Otherwise you’re may saying EM-5-2 which sounds a bit gobbledygooky.
I vote for the E-M5MM naming
If it’s just a paint job I will stick with my silver version, which produces brilliant images!
Smaller version like panny did with the 14 140mm ?
That one is to support best seller , the GM series .
No way Oly is going the same way , at least for the moment .
Just buy the Panasonic 14-140mm II.
It’s quite a good lens, for a superzoom… compact, light and quite sharp at all lengths… at not a bad price.
I bought one for my girlfriend and have been quite pleased with it.
She likes it, too! 😉
Yes this lens is so compact!
For Gods sake, why?
R stands for RETREAD.
Is Olympus just treading water at this point?
Aside from the “pro” lenses, what have they released, or even announced that’s of any interest? It seems like they’re not even trying any more.
maybe the promised ultra fast primes?
Maybe.
Given the time lag between product announcements, shipping and actual availability, it seems that 1 1/2 years would be reasonable… if these mythical fast primes were announced today.
So, if you want or need fast primes sooner than way later, look for alternatives.
this is where alot of people are too stubborn; to look for alternatives
Yeah, when I bought into M4/3 3+ years ago the native lens selection wasn’t so great, so I adapted some manual Nikon lenses I had, liked working with them, so bought and adapted even more manual lenses.
I figured that as native lenses appeared I could replace the manual lenses with native M4/3.
It’s a totally workable option.
I still use a mixture of old and new primes. M mounts, a couple of almost pristine CZJ m42, R mount and minolta. All work well and focus easily.
We will see after the 300mm F4 & 7-14mm F2.8 .
Most likely is what Ulli said , an ultra prime lens is on it’s way .
Need to push hard here .
What Olympus needs to release before all Pro objectives are out?
The Pro line is what is needed by professionals who can’t stand anymore DLSR and heavy Small Format while they can get DSLM that gives equivalent image quality and is twice lighter and smaller.
The three Pro lime objectives is more than enough for most.
7-14mm f2.8
12-40mm f2.8
40-150mm f2.8
56-210mm f4
300mm f4
420mm f5.6
Then you can add few other excellent Olympus objectives like
75mm f1.8
60mm f2.8
25mm f1.8
17mm f1.8
Then one day there can come many other primes with wide aperture. Like guess if Olympus would add couple more like:
60mm f1.4
25mm f1.2
17mm f1
12mm f1
8mm f1.2
f1.2/8mm, f1.0/12mm, f1.0/17mm… I am not holding my breath, at all.
No need to hold your breath…
Think Voigtländer!
Then there’s the Kowa 8.5mm f2.8
All manual lenses with manual focus? Booooo Hoooo! 😉
I don’t mind MF. If they are optically great all around, they are called cine.
I don’t mind MF. When they are optically great all aound, they call it cine and charge accordingly.
yes at those FL, its asking for something like a spoiled child imo.
http://petapixel.com/2014/02/21/olympus-patents-impressive-12mm-and-14mm-f1-0-lenses/
As I said, if they could do those… If Olympus has patent to 12mm and 14mm f1 objectives, they could have ideas to get 8mm f1.2 and such too…
But as I said, if Olympus would get those out, it would remove the need to get anything else.
A workable depth of field with ultra fast light transmission (although we don’t know anything about T-stops)… That is a dream to come true for many.
The last column is highly unrealistic. These lenses would be manual focus only or VERRY heavy and VERRY expensive (wow, that looks cool, doesn´t it? – no).
Oh no, not heavy lenses even though people want them! Anything but heavy lenses!!!!
People are stupid.
They would be about as heavy as their equivalent lenses on full-frame…which stands to reason. Likely more expensive and more difficult to correct due to the size of aperture, though it’s not like the various 50-55mm f1.2 lenses are optically bad or astronomically expensive for what they are.
A 35mm f2 on FF weighs about 300-350g, which doesn’t seem like an outlandish weight for a 17mm f1 on M4/3. After all, the 75mm f1.8 weighs that much, despite having a physical aperture more than twice as large as a 17mm f1.
Objective is the word rest of the world, Americans use Lense.
Objective is the whole thing, from focus rings, focus mechanics to lenses (multiple) inside the objective.
And if you don’t know, Olympus has patents for f1 objectives that are almost as small as the current line of 12/17/25/45mm….
http://petapixel.com/2014/02/21/olympus-patents-impressive-12mm-and-14mm-f1-0-lenses/
To add it… As forgot to mention they would be autofocus as well…
Here in the US of A it’s LENS. No ‘E’ on the end. 😉
It’s about time they get rid of that plastic pseudo-retro look in those lenses which still have it; I wonder why it takes them that long. The 9-18 is another candidate; one I’d be more interested in than the 14.150. Not that I would refrain from buying a good lens just because of its looks, though…
Then again, I’d rather see a really good superzoom lens instead of a mediocre one with a new finish. So far, not one of the four Micro Four Thirds superzoom lenses can replace my FT-Mount Panasonic-Leica Vario Elmar 14-150, which is why I’m keeping it although it’s quite large and heavy on a Micro Four Thirds camera.
i agree a m43 weathersealed version of the pana leica preferably with a macro option maybe even starting at 12mm would be a expensive lens but i would get one in a heartbeat.
A high quality, native M4/3 12-60mm would be good.
f2.8-4.0 / 12-60 would be realistic specs
X12-35 and X35-100, both f/2.8 throughout
Next patient please.
Got $2500 to spare?
edit: seriously, that compromise already exists in the 43 lenses and last time I checked, it was a popular one.
That would be the Lumix G X Vario 12-35/F2.8 then
The Panasonic 14-140 F3.5-5.6 comes very close to your Vario Elmar in image quality. AF is much faster and it’s lighter and more compact too. Have you tried it?
I had the plan, but test results and sample images and several user experience reports I found made me decide against it. It seems to be especially weak at maximum focal length (like most superzoom lenses for any system), which is what I use most often when I’m out using a superzoom lens.
Nice! 9-18 next please!
What’s wrong with the current 9-18mm?
It’s not 7-14 ?
It doesn’t look slick enough or have the build quality people want. Very expensive for the old first generation design.
Not bothered – not selling mine just yet, although it’s mostly gathering dust now that I have the 12-40 and 35-100 2.8s, but a great all-round tourist lens, if a bit dark.
They are probably revamping it only because they want to wind down the factory setup making the exterior parts. 9-18 will be next. I’m not sure how popular it is but it deserves to be a kit lens, its very versatile.
They should have extended the range a little bit. DSLR superzooms go up to 450mm (equivalent). I don’t see the point of third 14-150mm lens in the system.
You don’t see how a optically better, smaller by size and lighter that has little over 10x zoom is better?
I could really, really use something longer than 300mm
Please, please please can I please have some decent wildlife lenses, like 450mm, 600mm or 800mm ???
There are four of those around. Who needs another one?
If the 14-150 is compact then this is the perfect slow zoom imo. So many times I’ve wanted a 100mm+ focal length but still be able to back off and shoot a subject close range.
Olympus needs to step up the build quality of both the 14-42 and the 45-150. These lenses while sharp are built like toys. Worse than toys. Panasonic lenses are SOOOOOOO better built it’s not even a contest.
just as long as the mount is metal
CN, tripper and Ulli,
Strangely perhaps,
1) plastic has better thermal stability than metal, all the best amateur telescopes are made of plastic, or wood. Therefore plastic barrel is better than alloy lens barrel.
2) plastic lens mounts are probably stronger and more resilient than alloy lens mounts, it you hit them they bounce whereas an alloy mount bends nbg.
3) the metal components they use seem to be a casting alloy closely related to cheese.
there are so many plastics, but sure i believe as long as they use the right kind of it, it should be fine…I am no expert in this but as usual there are camps who choose for this or that.
I prefer a chromed brass or steel mount as i believe it gives more precise connection then a plastic one. For the inner barrel which holds the glass elements there is also a divided opinion.
I think in the end, we just read what we see and choose the opinion we believe in the most. Its a topic which can give so many discussion imo.
Like Ulli said, there are different plastics. And you can rest assured that the specific material chosen for existing plastic mounts, which so far have only been used for the cheapest of lenses, were not selected for being even better than metal.
I don’t mind plastics at all. If I were to choose between two lenses, one all metal, one mostly plastic with metal parts here and there, I would go for the plastic one. Plastic lens mount is probably perfectly fine for a light and slow zoom lens, but it might not be the best for a very fast prime, where even a slighlest misaligment can ruin image quality. And I do feel a significant difference in how tight the plastic mount fits the camera vs metal one.
And the thing is, plastic is quite a broad a term. If you compare Oly 40-150 to old Sigma 19mm prime (plastic with metal mount), you’ll see that the difference in feel and build quality is huuge. That’s all.
Agree. Especially the 40-150 looks and feels terrible (works perfectly fine, thought). I don’t mind plastic build, but there’s plastic and there’s plastic. The cheap Sigma primes are built much better. Metal mount, solid plastic body (talking about the old version), comes with a lens hood and nice pouch for transport.
Agree about the plastic. Oly uses this soft matte plastic. It’s like the sh*t strawberry baskets are made of. It’s pathetic. The focus rings are flimsy, and on my kit lens the zoom was notchy out of the box. Really impacts the feel of a brand new camera.
40-150mm R looks good and handles well. Focus is smooth and zoom is smooth with good friction.
The only problem really is the extending zooming and would be nice to get a II model from it that has internal zoom, otherwise identical.
Olympus plastic is very good, takes hits and doesn’t get scratches easily! And mount being plastic is awesome as it withstand cold weather very well.
In future although, the plastic can wear and affect to focus plane tilt or skew little bit but with that aperture not a problem at all!
40-200mm F/4.0-5.6 with an improved build quality would be a very good news for Olympus shooters!
4.0-5.6 sounds very uninviting, maybe a 2.8-4.0 sounds better…If you go for better build, you might want the optics to be a bit more upped as well imo
Unrealistic as usual. you end up with a larger sized and even more expensive lens. And you still won ‘t buy it because you’ll still complain about it, like many of you here.
unrealistic how do know? you just got a paper in optics? ofcourse it grows larger but you need to accept this if you eant something like such a zoom..Imo a good zoom is one with reasonable max aperture..I prefer a 2x zoom rather then such 5x type, so the aperture suits more to my preferences(if i really need a zoom which is actually not the case here)
Ulli, what might be reasonable to you would be unnecessary to photographers like me; after two years, I still haven’t found a use for the 45 f/1.8 that Olympus gave me!
yes everyone needs something which is useful in the things he does, amen to that
Really, here’s an idea – stick the 45 on your camera and go and take some pictures with it. Keep it on the camera for a month or something.
It is a telephoto probably best suited to portraiture, something of an Olympus speciality.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=70610.0
Its just too bright for many situations without using a 2-3 stop ND filter.
It would be like f/2.8 from 14-16mm then f/3.5 16-18mm and then it jumps to f/4 rest.
Not good.
explain why this is worse then when you have a 4-5.6 lens
Because it would be bigger, more expensive and have a nearly useless full range f4 from widest.
I take cladly any day a 40-200 f/4-5.6 AAA the 40-80 would likely be f/4 and then jump to f/5.6 at past 150mm
Like Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6 is such that it goes linearly from widest to narrowest. Very nice thing.
Small, light and dirty cheap (Cost for R-model today is about 95-129€)
why would there be a sudden jump and why would it be so bad? We are talking about a one stop shift in both versions; f4 to f5.6 or f2.8 to f/4..ofcourse it would be bigger and heavier but how much when calling it a drawback, we are talking about mft.Anyway thedis like for a faster zoom amazes me somehow. But maybe then again, each has his opinion.
Like Panasonic objectives are the jumps.
I would gladly take a one you say, but that would be too expensive unless you can get it to 99-129€ price range and be it as small and light as the current 14-150mm model is.
Not going to happen. Those are kit objectives or second ones that people buy to holiday so they can avoid swapping objectives and it needs to be a light and small.
I sometimes forget that such wide range zoom attracts the people who have different wishes. Indeed a faster version would be not ideal, what was i thinking?
You are right and and me, I am a pro physicist-engineer.
With our modern cameras with base ISO200, a f/3.5 is actually pretty fast even before we start cranking the ISO up to telephone numbers. We’re not using 24ASA film any more.
I like zoom lenses but I’d rather have a good lens.
12-150 – YES
14-150 – NO
Can’t the camera makers stop making these useless 28-xxx equivalent lenses? Even the bridge cameras now (mostly) have got it right.
yes, yes, yes !!!!
You’ve been at the ice cream?
If it was possible, that would be great, but before you say ‘useless’ (which this lens definitely isn’t), consider this:
A monster zoom with crap optical quality due to trying to make it fit in a reasonable size, about which people will complain anyway? They will also complain about the filter size being too big. The 58 mm on the 14-150 is on the border of vignetting already – put on a cheap thick polarising filter and it vignettes from 16 mm on. You cannot make a lens with those types of parameters without going into pro-region prices, at which nobody would buy a consumer lens. The 14-150 is already expensive enough for what it is, and it’s still holding up the price.
Try googling for a 24-300 lens. Can’t find any? Strange…
If you want bridge camera style zoom ranges, just get a bridge camera, because that’s the quality / resolving power you’ll get.
Bob, you must have a faulty lens, as I do not experience vignetting with mine stopped down to f/22 at 14mm.
Not with stopping down but using a filter…..
Bob was referring to the use of a filer, so was I, as there is always one on my lenses.
“Try googling for a 24-300 lens. Can’t find any? Strange…”
Pana FZ1000. 25-400/2.8-4, in a very compact form. By making it slower (4-5.6), Oly surely could do the same size and weight for m43, especially without OIS and powerzoom of the lens in FZ1000. 24-300 eq should be even smaller.
since when is 14mm a useless starting point in a zoom, just because 12 is becoming standard?
its like people calling the PL15 “an odd focal length”
Well yes, is an odd number. …Oh lord, here comes the equivalency police…
yes when you get used to rely on a certain value in nr’s regarding to focal lenght, its hard to think otherwise sometimes.
Ok, lets suppose we’re only allowed to use lenses where the focal length is a prime number. Here come the nice young men in their long white coats …
but but but 3 times 14 is 42 which is the answer to life, the universe and everything
Bridge cameras have smaller sensors making longer zoom ranges possible, especially allowing wider apertures, they also allow the lens mechanism deep into the camera body and incorporate the shutter
You will find that the few large format bridge cameras such as 1-in FZ1000 have reduced zoom range (X16) compared to their predecessors 1/2.3-in FZ200 (X24) and the fast f/2.8 aperture has been compromised.
MFT cannot do that, besides which zoom always compromises the lens, the shorter the zoom range, the better the lens quality.
There is a certain ratio between focal length and image circle diameter, image length and image height that determines what is a standard length, wide, extra-wide and ultra-wide. On full frame 28mm is wide but 24mm is extra-wide, onset of fisheye distortion is ultra-wide. It may seem strange but engineering-wise dropping from 14mm to 12mm is quite a big ask for a zoom that is also expected to cover extra-long telephoto at 140-150mm. You may have noticed that the ultra-wide zooms such as the 7-14 have very narrow zoom ranges (X2), it’s optical engineering: you could continue zooming but the image would go pear shaped.. This is why the excellent Panasonic X-lenses have a reduced zoom range of ‘only’ 12-35 and 35-100, it’s not because they cannot make them but you get an optically better lens.
Olympus seems to think MFT can do it, as they filed a patent for such a lens (12-150) recently, by making it somewhat slower (4-6.3). We will have to see, though, if it will be possible with a decent image quality. Problem is, even the existing 14-140 and 14-150 MFT lenses, whether made by Olympus, Panasonic or Tamron, do not quite offer what I would call decent image quality. Personally, I’d rather want a really good 14-150 than another mediocre superzoom of whatever exact specification, even if that would mean having to make it a bit larger and heavier than existing lenses. (As long as it will still be significantly smaller and lighter than the Panasonic 14-150 for Four Thirds, which is what I’m staying with in the meantime.)
The new Pana 14-140/3.5-5.6 is very very decent.
And Olympus 12-40 and 40-150 beats all Panasonic/Leica zooms in quality, while having longer zoom. But they don’t have OIS to take space.
…its just such a pedestrian lens…….. why bother. 🙂 hee…hee….
I love my 14-150mm I got it as a factory recon, many many moons ago, its on its third camera body now. I think the repair guy who set it up must have been testing his skills to the utmost. From 14 to 120 its great. Over 120 a little soft and in the 20-80 range as good as most
of my primes.
A new version would have to be spectacular to get me to change.
What the hell is an R version?
Yay, another do-over. Why can’t they get it right the first time?
Judging by other “R” updates, this is pure cosmetics. They did the style “right” for early E-P1 etc, “R” designs are for E-M5 and later cameras.
Maybe along with cosmetic update they will also make its price reasonable, like they did with 75-300 II.