The current “official” Olympus roadmap doesn’t include a wide prime lens info…yet.
Next week on February 5 at 5-6am London time Olympus will announce the new E-M5II, the update 14-150mm II lens and new accessories. And a trusted source also told me that it’s highly likely Olympus will show the mockup of a new 8mm f/1.8 fisheye lens. That lens will be launched in Spring and ship in Summer.
Reminder: To get notified on all upcoming news and rumors be sure to subscribe on 43rumors here:
RSS feed: http://www.43rumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/43rumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/43rumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/+43rumors/posts
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!
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
Whyyyyyy. I’d love an 8mm prime, would keep me from having to buy the upcoming 7-14. But a fisheye is the very last thing we need. There are two very good ones out there already, but not a single UWA prime. For shame, Olympus. This is just a ploy to force everyone into getting the 7-14.
“would keep me from having to buy the upcoming 7-14” –> Bingo!
You must be assuming that a fast prime would be smaller, having better IQ and costing less. And it would take filters…
While I grant you a significant size advantage on a vapor ware (such prime ought to be shorter) I am not willing to bet right away on anything blowing the zoom out of the water, neither in IQ nor in price, if ever.
If you want UWA and can stomach the price, just get the zoom and be happy 😉
f/1.8 fisheye ? flaaaaaares !
This is the lens that every M4/3 user has been breathlessly awaiting!
Another fisheye? Seriously?
Seppuku for the deft manager who ordered that lens developed.
What a friggin waste.
Expect it to ship in 2017. And cost $900… it IS Olympus after all. 😉
Meh. Got me excited for a bit, until I read the fisheye bit.
Why a Fisheye? What about a normal 8-9mm f1.8 lense?
We don’t know yet how big the fisheye will be, but because of the more complex rectinlinear correction, a “normal” 8mm f/1.8 would need to be much bigger (and much more expensive, too).
Oly body cap 8mm f/8. Pana 8mm f/3.5. Samyang 7.5mm f/3.5. And then… another 8mm f/1.8, for taking fisheye shots in crypts, tunnels and so on.
Four (!) fisheye lenses in the system…
Still no rectilinear UWA prime below 12mm.
Still no tilt/shift.
Strange strategy.
What about the Voigtlander 10.5mm f/0.95? It ist rectlinear and it is below 12mm.
Yes…but there are no AF UWA Primes below 12mm from Olympus or Panasonic …I think that is the point here.
Yeah, indeed, there’s the Voigt now. But you have to pass on AF, unfortunately.
Sure they are – night photographers love them. A fast aperture on a wide angle is the preferred formula for Milky Way shots.
No they are not. UWA lens that fast is a little bit insane because below 1.4 aperture sensor is getting less and less efficient in light gathering.
The only real advantage of these super fast lenses is a DOF advantage but hey shallow DOF is not there for that super-wide FL.
Cheers
So, which lens in the M43 ecosystem would you recommend for night/ milky way photography (with foreground)? Not challenging, but asking. I’ve been looking to get such a lens.
I don’t get it, how does that work? You mean an f/1 lens will not be 1 stop faster than f/1.4 lens? And why the sensor becomes less efficient at wider apertures?
Well, that’s not that simple.
1) F-stop != T-stop. T-stop is the real light gathering ability of a specified lens (usually it’s 0.1 or 0.2 lower then F-stop).
2) Current sensor technology can not gather light from large apertures because of too high pixel-density photopixels gathering inefficiency. Second thing – registration distance is quite small for all modern mirrorless cameras. It means that light falls onto photopixels from too large angles. This effects mainly UWA lenses. It causes many troubles – lower sharpness, vigneting and others.
That’s why Sony brought to us their microlens and curved sensor designs.
For more details you can read this little bit outdated article:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/F-stop-blues
Cheers
Interesting. T-stop F-stop difference is obvious and should be pretty much constant across apertures. But the correlation of lost light with sensor tech is intriguing. Interestingly, gapless microlenses do not seem to make things much better, judging by the chart in the article (7D has that and is still pretty bad).
It would be interesting to see how the Noktons perform in this regard. Although I suspect it would be hard to measure reliably how much of the vignetting is due to sensor (and at f/0.95, vignetting is pretty bad). Actually, it would be interesting to read how the dxo guys measured this.
I’m still waiting too for a rectilinear UWA prime, like 8mm. Not below F/2 (no need), not too big, not too expensive but with great quality. A small good rectilinear 7mm F/3.5 would be great for me.
I don’t need fisheye.
There’s also rectilinear Kowa 8.5mm. MF only, but at that focal length, that’s not that big of a deal.
This one is hard to find, but yes. I forgot that one. Priced like the Voigtlander, but I guess that’s the price you have to pay for a good quality UWA.
Yes what we really need is a 8mm 2.8 or 4.0 rectilinear prime lens !
No
complaints about Olympus pushing lens design like this, I applaud them, but I
would have thought there were bigger gaps (and more lucrative ones) to fill
first. This feels a bit like starting to spread the jam while still waiting for
the toaster to pop.
Fish eye, not interested, ok for the occasional gimicky shot but not worth paying premium money for, come on OLY’ bring us a serious UWA lens.
For scuba divers, this is not gimicky at all.
They want to force you to buy the soon to be 7-14 for a lot of $$$$$$$$ first. After that, then they’ll announce a UWA prime.
Nice. Probably not for me, but a must-have for divers.
A fisheye lens should really be a tele lens, as its hard to get up close to most fish..
Admin, is there a release date of the 7-14mm Pro?
DK(3) In June we could see the first samples delivered but I suppose the announcement will be next week. And I doubt that Olympus can meet the demand as with the 40-150mm f2.8 – so unless you are already on a preorder list, it might take a while.
OK…I bought my Panasonic 8mm f/3.5 fisheye about a year after introduction. (great little lens…but pricey…WAY more expensive that my Canon FF fisheye prime!!!)..It introduced at $800.
I bought mine about a year after for $700..and it currently retails for about $639.
I personally see that a f/1.8 Fisheye would allow you to shoot quite a bit faster…no doubt…but how big is this Olympus going to be and I am going to guess well over $1000…no?
Anybody know anything about price?
The Panasonic fisheye is just a ripoff, just like the Panasonic 45mm f/2.8 macro is a ripoff, and the old Olympus 75-300 was a ripoff. Its unlikely Olympus will want over $700 for a fisheye lens.
Well…had the Sam Yangs or Rokinons been around then for $250 I would have bought one of them.
I doubt that an f1.8 fisheye is going to be under $1000
I would be excited if they have a front attachment like an updated sema 1 so a small stero mic can be put on the front of the camera.
This is getting ridiculous. Looks like we’ll have to wait for Panny to deliver a wide prime with AF, or perhaps Sigma is working on something.
Yes..Panasonic will….but it will exhibit random, ghosting flares on all Olympus cameras.
🙂
This means they’ll highlight video in marketing with e-m5II. Skate- and snowboard videos with a weatherproof camera anyone? But… where’s my 300 f4!?
Admin. Does “And a trusted source also told me that it’s highly likely Olympus will show the mockup of a new 8mm f/1.8 fisheye lens. That lens will be launched in Spring and ship in Summer.” mean the lens will be launched March to May 2015 & shipping June to August 2015? Spring & Summer are 8 & 10 months away for us here (downunder).
It’s not our fault you live in backwards country and drive on the wrong side, northern hemisphere FTW!
AYS?
I didn’t realize they had an internet connection in those British penal colonies. What did you do to be sent there?
Why the hell does it have to be a fisheye lens? Why not a real wide angle prime, something like a 8mm 2.8 or 7mm 4.0 lens? For gods sake…
This bright fish-eye is a star photographers dream lens (if you don´t like star streaks:). If it´s sharp wide open, i´ll buy it for sure!!
Compact F2.8 and non-Fisheye please .. Olympus, please! (or Panny, or Voigtlander, or Samyang, or Sigma, or Tamron even!)
Oly : Not for this time, obviously.
Panny : Maybe, maybe…
Voigt : They make only crazy fast aperture lenses, manual focus. Already have a 10.5mm.
Sigma : will be designed primarily for APS-C
Samyang : http://www.syopt.com/en/camera/photo-lenses-10mm-F2.8-ED-AS-NCS-CS.php
Tamron : …
Nothing Voigt makes for this system can ever be called “compact”… They can all see in the dark, though 😉
Why make f/2.8 prime when you will have 7-14 f/2.8 pro zoom? Compactness alone is certainly not a priority given the real aperture and even FL holes to be filled. A series of weather-sealed f/1.2 primes would not hurt if priced correctly (say, 13.5mm, 19mm and 27mm, to complement Pana 42.5). 500mm/5.6 compatible with MC-14, to make the system the premier choice of birders. And there are more mass-appeal lenses to be made, a weather-sealed travel 12-70/2.8-4, for example (or 12-100/2.8-4.5 etc). A real superzoom to compete with and win over Nikon 16-300, say, 12-240/2.8-5.6.
Because the 7-14 is prohibitively expensive. It’s in full frame territory. It makes zero sense to shell out that much on a big overpriced M43 wide angle.
And yes, we need 1.2’s.
Why does it have to be expensive? 14-28 f/5.6 lens for ff with short flange distance would not be so expensive.
Since its auto focus and has exif data, does that mean there is a one button click on camera raw (or could be created in the future) that would easily defish the resulting photos? or would one still have to do it manually?
I’m very happy with my Samyang/Rokinon FE. An 8mm FE from Olympus would provide no temptation at all for me.
FWIW, that road map is incomplete (or I have an imaginary 25/1.8)
I like this! I wouldn’t get one because I have the Samyang, and it’s a bit of a novelty lens you have to use in moderation (that being said, Fish-eye lenses can simply do cool things others can’t). What this fisheye may have that would make it more interesting than Samyang’s, is electronic connections enabling autofocus and aperture control, and even better optics. So far the Lumix G Vario 7-14mm f/4.0 has been the only high quality fish-eye built for MFT, and its price combined with slow aperture, make it unappealing.
Fisheye lenses generally have a 180 degree field of view and they are basically uncorrected for distortion, which is what give them they fun/cool factor. The Panny 7-14mm is not a fisheye…It’s is a rectilinear Ultra Wide Angle Zoom UWA. A rectilinear leans is designed to straighten out distortion…and make a scene look more natural. Generally Prime UWA such as a 12mm or 15mm etc. do a much better job of having the least amount of distortion compared to UWALQ zoom lenses. Zoom design is usually a compromise to get multiple focal lengths in one lens so in some areas distortion is present. ..but modern UWA zooms have gotten much better!
Although the Panny 7-14 is only an f/4….it is a REALLY small, very capable lens and is definitely an asset to the MFT system as a whole.
you’re right, I was convinced Lumix had a fish-eye, but I guess that’s what I thought it was, last time I looked at it (years ago). Can see now it’s not.
They have a diagonal fisheye : http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic_8_3p5_o20
But insanely priced for what it is, in my opinion.
yes…overpriced..I agree…but still a great little lens…its the only game in town for an AF system Fisheye though… I love mine…but I know it isn’t for everybody.
Yup – that was the main reason I got the Samyang 7.5 fish over the
Panny. Half the price, and I don’t really need AF on a fisheye. Also love the IQ on the Samyang.
yeah…but..but….mine has a filter drawer on the back element…that is worth at least $200 right there!!!!! LOL! (I have NEVER used that!)
Yours also matches the styling of other Panasonic lenses, where Samyang wasn’t even trying. Seriously? Red Canon line? -$300!
Huh you’re right, maybe I was thinking of that one. Despite the price it at least has autofocus, which puts it ahead of the Samyang in practicality. I can’t be bothered to investigate the optics though. I imagine they’re better too.
The Panny 7-14 is one of my all-time favorite lenses for any system. I love the distortion of a rectilinear ultrawide. F/4 doesn’t really matter on something like that – you’re not using that lens to capture your children running around in the dark. Most of the time you’re taking your time composing the shot since every mm you move the lens in any direction drastically changes the composition.
The Panasonic 7-14mm is NOT a fisheye lens? It’s rectilinear and actually useful.
Yeah you’re a little late on that, Speltrong already pointed this out. I didn’t say it wasn’t useful either, just unappealing due to price and aperture. Gimme a rectilinear that can eat even more light any day though 🙂
Have used the Panasonic 7-14mm?
It, along with the Voigtländer 25mm, was one of the lenses that convinced me to buy into the M4/3 system. Sure it’s a little pricey, but it’s a solid performer. I’ve come to rely on the 7mm end for shooting my design projects. For my interior work I use it with a tripod, so speed is less of an issue.
Would I like it faster? Absolutely, but I don’t expect the Oly f2.8 version to be any smaller, lighter or cheaper.
Haven’t had the chance, no. I would certainly like to. I’m constantly expanding my lens collection and have so far only sold off 1 lens in 5 years, but I’ve reached the point where all purchases are about upgrading what I have, since I’ve got everything covered. What I’m missing is a better wide angle lens, but 7 is a bit extreme fo my needs. 10 or 12 is fine. I got the 12-32mm bundled with my GM1 and it’s actually a really decent lens, very sharp, super compact, and f/3.5 is good too. Build quality’s a bit crap though. And it has some awful flaring issues.
Any idiot can make a mockup! How about using your R&D resources on real functional lenses instead of mockups, Olympus? The mismanagement of your company is nothing short of astonishing! Why would we want to buy mockup lenses? It’s so stupid!
This must be the most stupid post ever!
The reply is not far behind..
Just according to my intents intentions!
Because product mockups are one of the most useful tools possible for early prototyping, use cases, and user feedback. The Palm Pilot (precursor to the screens we all have our eyes glued to these days) was first prototyped as a block of wood that Jeff Hawkins carried in his shirt pocket to determine the maximum size and weight that a successful product could be. If you ever get to go to a trade show, you’ll find that many vendors mockup yet-to-be-released products to give customers an idea of the form factor, as well as to get feedback for their innovation process.
And to further comment, I don’t know of any camera makers that doesn’t show mock ups.
Yes, but why would you buy a mockup lens? I mean, every picture comes out blurry, its soooo frustrating! The thing is they are empty inside, and the only real use is to remove the front glass an use it as a snorkel to maby sneak up on some ducks just below the surface with a rubber duck hat, and then raise up out of the water like Godzilla! Man those ducks get scared!
Because the cameras are a fashion accessory 😀
Why is there no 25mm on that chart? is it old one?
P.M. I presume…
I have the Samyang and love it, but f1.8 and AF is really really tempting if its not too big.
fish the fing eye
Why Olympus, why? Why wouldn’t you make it a rectilinear lens? Do we need a 3rd fisheye (4th if you include the 4/3 version) before a rectilinear wide? That’s one of the last things that Canon and Nikon have that M4/3 simply doesn’t, along with a tilt-shift…
Wait, make that a 5th fisheye, if you include the body cap lens. 6th if you include the Lensbaby circular.
Current number of rectilinear wide primes? Only the Kowa 8.5mm/2.8 for $1000. Which appears to be an exceptionally good lens, but out of most people’s price range for an MF lens.
Not sure I have a use for a 1.8 fisheye but I’m sure it’ll be an improvement over their body cap version 🙂
I think I prefer it if they just announced it when it’s ready to ship. Do they regularly change their lens if people insulted their mockup? Am thinking not?!?
I wish they announced the 300mm F4 Pro in Spring and shipped it in Summer too! When it showed up on their roadmap in 2013 and then they announced it a ~year ago I got my cheque book out and waited but there’s still no real release date. it makes me crazy as it’s the one lens/tlc combination that will prevent me from jumping over to Canon/Nikon to get better options for Birding, etc. I was hoping Sigma/Tamron might enter this space in a zoom but nothing. It’s hard to hold on this long! 🙂
7-14/2.8 PRO, please. What takes so long?
You ready to sell out the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Why fish eye? Why??? Someone please make a regular 8mm f/3.5.
What about Samyang?
Because the brand “Samyang” makes people want to puke.
It sounds like something I scraped off the bottom of my shoe…
Wow racist, not like it sounds like Pyongyang or something
No fisheye please. PLEASE LET THIS BE A PRIME. Day one purchase!
Damn, just looked. It’s a fisheye. Olympus, you are so clueless.
It is a prime objective, it is just a fisheye instead rectilinear. Prime objectives has just a one focal length (this has just 8mm).
What I’d rather see is a 12-40mm 1.8.
9-whatever, pro quality with a front thread, that’s all I want. No fisheye and no stupid huge front element making filters impossible. There isn’t a good UEA and its limiting for landscapers.
What’s with the orange dot ?
And they forget about the m.Zuiko 25mm f/1,8
Agree, it’s a terrible road map. No 25mm, and, who thinks the 45mm is a ‘Premium’ lens??
They have a 25mm 1.8…. obviously you dont know much about good glass if you sa y the 45 is not great lens. :S
If it’s not metal build waterproof f/0.6 then it’s not premium, but then asks for $200
Not talking about its image quality. There are a number of Premium lenses with average IQ, and even more budget lenses with excellent IQ. The 75mm f/1.8 is a true premium lens, not a budget lens with excellent IQ, like the 45mm f/1.8. Olympus know this.