(FT3) 40-150mm f/2.8 Olympus lens coming in January?

Share

Image on top shows the current Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 X lens lens. The Olympus alternative is coming soon.

According to some anonymous sources Olympus is going to release a new High Quality 40-150mm f/2.8 zoom lens. I am not sure yet if the lens will be announced along the 17mm f/1.8 lens or later. I heard the lens will hit the stores in January. But I don’t know the announcement date yet.

This lens be compete against the just released Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 X lens. For the record, Olympus already has a 40-150mm zoom but that one has a f/4.0-5.6 aperture and by no means the same build and image quality of the upcoming new lens.

This would be the first f/2.8 zoom lens from Olympus. I hope someday they will come out with some f/2.0 lens too :)

Anyway, please keep in mind that this is a rumor from anonymous and unknown sources (rated FT3). I hope trusted sources can soon confirm the lens release for January!

Meantime, stay tuned on 43rumors the next hours and days!

—-

The two superb Zuiko f/2.0 zooms:
14-35mm f/2.0 on eBay (Click here) and via Slidoo eBay.
35-100mm f/2.0 on eBay (Click here) and via Slidoo eBay.

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

 

Share
  • http://www.43rumors.com/members/kesztio/ kesztió

    I’m afraid a bit about the price…

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/dontom/ DonTom

      It won’t be cheap. But, if it’s weathersealed and good, it will be worth more than the current cost of the Panny 35-100, to me.
      It would be a very practical portrait lens, for travel and family pics. Also wonderful for sports photography and video.
      Yes please!

      • Michael

        I’d love to see Oly offer multiple versions of lenses: 1 with weather-sealing and metal build, and 1 cheaper for us non-pros. All I want is the glass. Put is together with superglue and toothpicks if it’ll hold for a few years.

        (Ditto for EM5 body — gimme a $700 plastic one and I’m happy.)

      • RTRT

        Is that sport shooting snooker its about the only sport mFT can focus on quickly enough lol

        • Ronan

          EM-5 is MORE than enough lol

        • DoctorBob

          Yes, it’s unfortunate that we have no photographic record of any sporting event (except for snooker) prior to the invention of autofocus.

          • Jeff

            DrBob – what a brilliant comment! Haaa

    • peevee

      Judging by the recent Olympus pricing decisions, this lens will be (in the voice of Austin Powers) ONE MILLION DOLLARS!

  • Steve

    I am skeptical. Why introduce this with no shorter fast zoom from Olympus.

    • Justin

      That could come next…

      12-40 2.8

      In any case this lens really intrigues. 80-300mm. With that range you could really cover a lot of ground and it would equate to a great walking around lens.

    • MikeS

      There’s no shorter fast zoom from Olympus, but there is the Panasonic 12-35. Lately, the two companies have avoided replicating each other’s lens offerings, which is a good thing for the m4/3 system.

  • twoomy

    I guess that’s cool, but it’s a shame to see Oly and Pany compete so toe-to-toe on this. It would be nice to see them make more complimentary lenses (like they sometimes do).

    There goes many of our updated 12-60mm fantasies.

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/dimsal/ avds

      I can’t agree with that. Competition is always good (except when it gets deadly for the common purpose, of course) and it will drive prices down and R&D expenses up, which is good for me. There is certainly a hefty premium on most m43 lenses at the moment simply due to poor competition. Although I would surely prefer that third parties were involved more.

  • Martin

    It doesn’t sound very plausible to me. At least the f-number. If a new HQ telephoto lens is really coming, IMO it won’t be a constant aperture zoom but something like f/2.8-f/4. It could be a nice competitor to the Panasonic 35-100mm, though..

    • Bob B.

      It won’t be completion to the Pany unless it is constant 2.8 aperture and high quality…f/4 does not compete?

      • MikeH

        But it would be competition at 2.8-4 depending on the price difference between it and the 35-100 2.8

  • Steve

    This doesn’t make sense based on recent interviews with Olympus. I thought Olympus was going to focus on primes?

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/01/11/imaging-resource-interviewtoshiyuki-terada-and-sally-smith-clemens-olympus

    In Micro Four Thirds range, we already almost fill up the zoom lens line-up. Then, now we are concentrating on single focal lens line-up.

  • MAFAv8r

    Not sure I need it. On the 12-60 I shoot at 12-18 and 50-60. On the 50-200 I shoot 50-60 and 200, then 286 with the 1.4. I would have preferred a 12-60

  • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

    In the normal focal range it makes sense to make primes, but at the UWA, or tele side I find zooms much more useful since you can’t walk all the way.

    The 40-150 has been a (inexpensive) jewel, and v. useful at that, so this would be a no nonsense lens, if price is reasonable. Not too big, not too heavy and fast. Makes sense.

    • http://www.semiocity.com Semiocity

      Depends. For productivity a fast (enough) normal zoom is a must I feel. As much as I love my E-M5 and the various primes I regularly stick to it (14, 20, 45), I still cannot part from my Pentax K-5 and its Sigma 17-50 HSM 2.8. It “only” cost me around 600 euros and it is a real, much needed workhorse when yo have to deliver 1000 pictures within a week. If I were to go full m43, replacing it would cost me over 1000 euros, and not really weatherproofed at that price!
      So a bit of competition in the m43 fast normal zoom range wouldn’t do any bad imho…

      • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

        Yes you are right. For instance I am interested in the Fuji 17-55/2.8-4, because it might help in many situations. But so would do a 40-150/2.8-4.

        For non pro,who are not in a hurry, buying patterns are already in favour of primes for the central range, so good zooms at the extremes of the focal range are good complements.

        Compactness and good IQ is part of he ethos of m4/3. That lens fits quite well considering the 2X factor.

        If you had tried the older one you would know. It’s my most used lens after the 17mm. Upgrading both makes good sense.

    • http://www.flickriver.com/photos/photography-by-thomas/ TheEye

      “In the normal focal range it makes sense to make primes, but at the UWA, or tele side I find zooms much more useful since you can’t walk all the way.”

      I see this the other way around. With a UWA and even WA, just moving very little makes for a dramatic change in spacial relationships, and I don’t need a zoom there. I prefer tele zooms over tele primes, with the exception of short and very long tele lenses.

      • Anonymous

        With UWA you often find yourself in spaces where “moving around” is not optional. Plus, if you have a 7mm prime lens, and you realize you need 8mm or 9mm, you cannot zoom in with your feet because the perspectives change, as well as the foreground/background relationship. The only thing you can do is crop.

        • http://www.flickriver.com/photos/photography-by-thomas/ TheEye

          Obviously it depends on your subject matter. I generally shoot in places where I can move back and forward. I don’t use the zoom to replace my legs, but I do choose a particular FL to get the spacial relationships I want. I tend to shoot wide anyway. 90% of my street shots in my pre-Olympus digital days were done with a 20 mm on a 35 mm SLR. Most of my environmental portraits were also done with my 20 mm. Sadly, Oly has still no 9 or 10 mm lens – it’s what I really want.

          • Es

            But if you move back/forward, the background/foreground relationship changes. A shot at 7mm if you walk closer is widely different than a shot zoomed in to 9mm.

  • Jack

    Meh, I’d rather Olympus remake the 50-200. Rarely is the wide end as important as the end for this type of lens.

    • Tron

      +1 … or 90-250mm

      • Bronica

        Or a 75-300 f4. I like long focal lenghts.

        But ok: 40-150 f2,8 sounds very promising.

        Important is the price and the quality.

        Many peaple say here – so am I – that they probably dont’t go for the Panny X-Zooms. Tests say, that they are very good albeit not excellent.

      • mannytera

        Yep , the mFT users are making huge demands for a $6000 tele zoom , the sales numbers would be astronomical lol. You guys don’t get it the SHG lenses were part of the failure of FT,if the demand for mirror-less hasn’t shown you that people want small and compact.

        If as we all hope Olympus is to survive as an imaging company we have to hope that they have learned from their past mistakes , and chasing a pro market was one of the biggest mistakes.They spent money developing a range of lenses that while very good cost as much and weighed as much as FF lenses for a sensor a quarter the size.This type of lens assuming good quality and sane price is more what will actually sell.

        I would v worry about the price look at the mFT 75-300 no better than the FT 70-300,yet double the price and actually even a little slower at the long end.

        • Bronica

          +1. The lenses are sometimes to expensive. I use therefore the FT 70-300 with adapter.

          The MFT 75-300 is’nt that good that I want to spent so much money. A normal price would be +/- 500 Euro.

        • Walter Freeman

          Not at f/4 it wouldn’t. Sigma makes a 100-300/4 for $700; Nikon makes a 300/4 for $1000 with fantastic optics.

        • Tron

          I’d gladly take a 200mm 2.8 prime with a 2X teleconverter @F4. That should be fairly inexpensive to make… say $1K or so for the pair. Maybe Panny will offer a 2X teleconverter to be used with the 150mm 2.8… we shall see.

          • Walter Freeman

            If that combination was sharp wide open (at 400 5.6) it’d be fantastic.

            • Bronica

              But which combination is fairly sharp wide open????

              The only example I know is from Leica. $8K.

              • Mymaco on Instagram

                What kind of leica lens are you talking about Bronica? At that price I suspect it’s 50mm Noctilux. But I can tell you that also Leica sensor helps a lot in that case. I hope I’m not misunderatanding: but Voigtländer 17.5mm wide opend at f0.95 AT NIGHT is sharp, on my OMD.

                • Bronica

                  Apo Elmarit R 2,8 180mm with Apo Extender 2x for Leica R series.

      • r3r3tr

        Yay , $6000 lenses just what the system needs they buyers would be lining up lol, get real

  • BEEFCAKE

    Weather seal that bad boy and keep it under $1000. THAT would be something!

    • Steve

      Maybe under $2000.

    • [-pou

      Let’s see Olympus FT 70-300 $400 mFT 75-300 {slower and poorer} $800. Panasonic 35-100 $1500 Olympus 40-150 mm if it is under $2000 I will be shocked {no hood obviously}

  • Es

    The problem with this lens is that it would compete with the 75mm f/1.8

    I don’t think that will ever happen.

    Why would Olympus sell us a zoom when they can sell 3 primes instead?

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

      I don’t agree the 75 mm f1.8 is a very specialized lens mainly for (professional ?) portrait shooters. The 75 mm is useful when you can easily control the distance from your subject for example with a model…I will clearly never buy this lens at this price because I would use it too rarely. In the other hand I could buy a 40-150 zoom as a sport, wildlife, landscape, nature lens because of the versatility…but I think a 40-150 f2.8 would also be too expensive…and very big !

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/zwagner/ Zach Wagner

      I don’t get this argument. It’s like saying to Canon or Nikon: don’t make your 24-70mm 2.8 lenses anymore because you have a bunch of primes that cover *some* of the focal lengths found within the range. I’m not on the bandwagon that primes are the only way this system shines. You’d have to prove to me that my 12-35mm 2.8 isn’t an amazing lens and completely worth it to own because of the versatility.
      I would absolutely welcome some competition for Panasonic on this front, though I’m not sure Oly will do it. If they made it happen and it was cheaper than the Panasonic 35-100, I wouldn’t bat an eyelash *add to cart*.

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/infared/ Bob

      I don’t think ANY ZOOM will compete with the 75mm f/1.8 for sharpness…Let’s get real.

      • http://www.43rumors.com/members/zwagner/ Zach Wagner

        +1

      • Anonymous

        But sharpness is not the only measure of a len’s utility or value. A 40-150 f/2.8 is a whole lot better for shooting soccer, baseball or football than the 75mm lens is. The 75 is too limited in utility for my needs. A 40-150 2.8 would be far more useful. For MY needs.

        • Bob B

          Different animals completely, I guess…

        • Es

          Exactly. How many people would buy the 75mm f/1.8 if this comes out? Very very few, as it will become a niche item.

          How does that make sense for Olympus?

          • E-1

            Me. You can pry the 75 from my cold dead fingers, it’s the best lens I ever owned.

  • MikeyD

    Well, there recently has been a sale on the current Oly 40-150mm in the US at getolympus.com. Word is there was also an employee 8-day sale that started last Friday, which included the 40-150mm for $100 if bundled with the OM-D and a one lens kit. They might be getting rid of their inventory as we speak for the announcement.

    • peevee

      The sales go to since times immemorial. 40-150/4-5.6 could have been going with a camera/lens kit for $100 for at least 6 months now. And it is very good price for the lens that good.

  • jens

    it is defitely time for a tele converter!

  • Anonymous

    I think Olympus just planted this rumor to see what our reaction would be. Based on a few comments already I would say this lens won’t be appreciated by as many people as they thought it would.

  • JP

    I’m happy they are making a better 40-150 mm zoom, but I wish there was news about something to compete with the Panasonic X 12-35, now I am leaning towards buying the X 12-35.

    • J.S.

      Seems to be a good lens.
      But I also see more need for a better standard zoom with an aperture of 2,8-4.
      The new 12-50 is a quiet interesting lens, weather sealed, macro function, wide range. But sadly the quality seems to be not as good as the 14-42 lenses.
      I’m waiting for something between standard kit quality and expensive Panasonic 12-35 .

      • Bronica

        +1.

        Where is Sigma, Tamron and Tokina?

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

          +1000 we are missing sigma, tamron and tokina…

          • http://www.semiocity.com Semiocity

            +10K 😛

            Just help me switch completely to m43 please…

            • lorenzino

              I am already thinking about putting my Nikon gear to rest… I have the feeling that soon m43 will be a more complete system than any dslr-apsc system around…

              • t64y

                Please save with the BS the Nikon system is huge , lenses, flashes, accessories and dozens of OEM options. Plus every single camera from the D5100 upwards outperforms the very best mFT camera. The majority of mFT lenses are dog slow kit jobs , with a couple of good performers like the 75mm which is not even weather sealed!

      • Dogbytes

        Back in the real world the 12-50 is a perfectly good lens. I bought one with my OM-D just to have a weatherproof lens but its probably my most used lens at the moment. Far better than I expected from the negative publicity and very versatile.

        • peevee

          12-50? Too dark from 18-20mm already, and bad CA at 12 mm. Other than that, a good lens. But OM-D definitely deserves better.

  • Riki

    OH YES

    I’ll be preordering any fast tele zoom they make – I have been waiting so long to finally round out my lenses
    12/20/45/tele
    I was going to have to get the Panasonic – until the reviews started saying it was soft wide open. was starting to get cold feet on it

    • Anonymous

      The “review” on the 35-100mm was wrong. It simply isn’t as soft as that review made it sound. Funny how 1 review says something and everyone suddenly misinterprets it to mean something else.

      • Riki

        *shrug*

        the review made me not want to preorder and wait for review sources I trust.

        But given a Olympus tele zoom rumour – I’ll just wait till Jan and see what happens – I don’t use a tele much in winter.

        Besides I use my 40-150 at 150 much more than I’d like – despite how soft it is/how often it misses the focus.

        Riki

      • http://www.43rumors.com/members/zwagner/ Zach Wagner

        If you’re talking about the lensrentals review, I’m not sure how it’s ‘wrong’. He tested 7 copies of the lens, and got similar results from each of them. Sharpness falls off pretty dramatically at 100mm; but guess what? It does the same thing on almost every single 70-200mm 2.8 in existence.
        So, while I don’t think the lensrentals review is incorrect, I think it should be looked at in the correct light.

  • DJS

    It would be pretty big 150 @ 2.8
    probably 150 x 75mm?
    Doesn’t sound right to me probably a stop or two slower at long end

    • nobody

      The front lens diameter would have to be 150:2.8 = 53.5mm.

      Contrary to the Panasonic 35-100mm lens, it wouldn’t need to have an IS system implemented. So it wouldn’t have to be much thicker than the Panasonic lens which has a filter thread of 58mm.

      Definitely too big and heavy for Pen or GF cameras, but IMO that could be a good match for the GH3 and an Olympus model above the EM-5.

  • Ulli

    a constant 2.8 with this range sounds unlikely to me, as most people would prob whine about the size of such spec’d zoomlens. On the other hand, Olympus is already used to complainers.

    • Miroslav

      +1

      Nobody mentions the size and I think a 40-150 F2.8 would be too big for all m4/3 bodies except GH3 – where it would be of limited use due to no IS.

      I’m hoping for a wide angle analogue though. Dreaming of 14-40 F2-2.8…

      • Ulli

        personally i dont mind big fast lenses, but most people would mind if its meant for m43. I am really curious what the announcement will be.

  • Daemonius

    Too slow for m4/3s. Are they aware that there are prime lens with f0.95?

    Obviously I dont think they should do f0.95 zoom (even tho that is possible), but f2 or rather f1.8 would be good. F2.8 is F5.6 DOF equivalent which is frankly meh..

    • Walter Freeman

      Meanwhile the film guys talk about getting more DOF all the time — I know a very good nature photography book that advises against getting very fast lenses since you’re going to be stopping them down most of the time anyway.

      f/5.6 FX equivalent depth of field is plenty shallow for a lot of applications.

      • WSG123

        Yeah, I’m not too sure what the obsession is with ultra shallow DOF around here. I’m more concerned about getting the light, not 1″ DOF.

        • lorenzino

          besides, 5.6 equivalent at 300 mm. equivalent is not as “bad” as a 5.6 equivalent at 50 mm equivalent… I don’t know many ff zooms that are 2.8 at 300mm… yes, ok, there is a sigma (120-300) but AFAIK it is a monster lens…

    • Anonymous

      LOL. Olympus can’t win. Right above this comment are worries that the lens will be too big as an f/2.8, and you want it as an f/2.0. That would be very large.

  • http://www.admiringlight.com Jordan S.

    This is exactly what I want. It might be bigger than many m4/3 lenses, but it shouldn’t be huge. Sigma makes a 50-150mm f/2.8 for APS-C, and this shouldn’t be any larger than that. Great range with constant fast aperture, and they should be able to put this at $1200 or so, which would be great. I might pay up to $1400, but beyond that it would be hard to justify.

    As for Daemonius above…if ultra-shallow DOF is what you need, then m4/3 is not for you…go full frame. If you try and make DOF equivalent lenses for m4/3, you will end up completely negating any possible size advantage for the system. It’s simply a choice of format. You don’t see APS-C lenses coming in a stop faster than their FF counterparts…why would you expect that with m4/3?

  • Anonymous

    I used to use zooms but then got the 14,20,45 primes and only use zoom at the extremes (7-14, 100-300). Haven’t been tempted by the Panny f2.8 zooms. So what would I want from Oly?…
    ….. A 30mm f1 prime of course! This would fill a gap in the market (only the slow sigma is available) and act as a normal/wide-portrait lens. Oly need a high quality offer prime between the 17.5 and 45 and they need to respond to the up coming Panny 42 f1.2. There must be a market for an AF Voigtlander speed lens as a technical showpiece.

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/i-m-feoyon/ lnqo-M

      LOL…. :-) Agree a 30mm F1.0 and under 1000$

  • Rasmus

    If it’s weather sealed, as sharp as the Panasonic zooms or sharper, and has constant f/2.8 I’d definitely buy it, unless it’s in the 3000€ range or above. Too bad that there’s just too much about this that sounds too good to be true.

    Oh, in my dreams the zoom is of course internal…

  • Justin

    Remember that Panasonic has a 150 2.8 in prototype. http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/articles/7702717033/newlenses.JPG?v=1828

    It looks to be a fairly beefy lens. Surely a 40-150 2.8 zoom would be even bigger. But bad ass no less.

    • http://www.admiringlight.com Jordan S.

      I’d expect it to be about the same size as the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 for APS-C. There’s not a lot of size savings for mirrorless at the telephoto end, except in the narrower field of view due to the smaller sensor.

      http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/853533-REG/Sigma_692_101_50_150mm_f_2_8_EX_DC.html/BI/4499/KBID/4968

      It’s 7.8″ long and weighs about 3lbs. Not small, but still way smaller than something like the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 for full frame, or the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses as well.

      • nobody

        No, that Sigma 50-150 is almost as large as the 70-200 f2.8 zooms. Very strange!

        • http://www.admiringlight.com Jordan S.

          Hmm…you’re right. The new one is that big. The older (non OS) version of the 50-150 f/2.8 was much smaller…about 3 inches shorter and lighter to boot…I assumed the new one was the same, but it appears I was wrong. In any case, they should be able to match the size of the OLD sigma 50-150 f/2.8, which WAS much smaller.

          http://www.flickr.com/photos/gkemp/6273370389/

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

    40-150 f2.8 ? That sounds :
    1 good
    but:
    2 big (too big for travelling and hicking ?)
    3 (too ?) expensive
    This lens would compete with both pany 35-100 f2.8 and 150 f2.8 !
    Oly will soon release the biggest silver lens ever made in photography history ! lens hood non included of course ! :p

  • Anonymous

    I know why Olympus or Pana don’t release a very good 12-60mm. Because many people would buy this lens and not other in this range. 😉

    • beautemps

      +1000 Salesmen control the company. If you split an important zoom range, you can sell two lenses in the market! Never give the customer exactly what he wants…

  • Robbie

    Not sure what to make out of this.
    I mean Olympus 40-150 has always been very a good lens (43 or m43), versatile, especially with a reputation for value for money.
    Aside from the first make of the 43 version, the rest do suffer from the smaller aperture but in practical use, it’s not so much of a problem.
    I mean it’s always good to have new lens, but given the fact the old versions are far from bad, I would rather that they spent their R&D elsewhere on more challenging designs.

  • Eirik

    A 40-150mm f2.8-3.5 with fast MSC autofocus and packed into a reasonable size, less expensive, and not much bigger than the Pana 35-100/2.8 would be right on top of my do-want-list… :-)

    • nobody

      Indeed, f 2.8-3.5 might be more reasonable to keep weight, size, and price down.

  • Rinaldo

    BTW 35-100/2.8 in stock at B&H 😉

  • alexander

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12-60 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    that is all I want!

    the smaler the better!

    • Pete

      I hope Olympus will not forget people like me, who cannot pay 1000,- €/$ for one lens. I like my 300,-€ 45mm very much and there should be more lenses in this quality, like a 2,8/10mm. And, of course the number one for me and thousands of MFT’er: the 2,8-3,5/12-60 or 14-54!!!

      • eyyuii

        the problem is the 12-60 FT costs $1000 and Olympus are not known for lowering prices. We will be lucky if they don’t give us a slower 12-60 with poorer performance and a higher price

    • Ash

      I would prefer an even smaller 14-54mmm…

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/j-f_leguen/ JF

      For “small”, you have the oly 12-50 (ok it’as not that small)…Now we need a not that small but maximum IQ little brother of the legendary 43 12-60 f2.8-4 with 0.5x magnification ! Unfortunately, we can’t have small and maximum IQ…

    • http://www.flickriver.com/photos/photography-by-thomas/ TheEye

      A 10-50 mm f/2.8 with inernal zoom mechanism would tickle my fancy, regardless of price.

  • spam

    Useful zoom range, but slightly more different than 35-100 would have been even more useful.

  • meh

    no OIS for panasonic bodies

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/infared/ Bob

      Rumor has it that could be changing soon for an upcoming Panasonic body! no?

  • mlo

    I’d like the 12-60 but with 2.8/3.5 aperture (still 2.8 at 35mm), even if it’s a tad bigger than the current 12-35/2.8. That would be a great walk around lens IMHO.

    • peevee

      Yeah, we can dream… Especially if it is 11-60… 4:3 is not wide enough at 24 mm eq…

  • sneye

    Not going to happen IMO. A lens like this would be a declaration of war against Panasonic, making both the 35-100 and the planned 150 obsolete before they really start to sell. Of course, stabilization is an issue at those focal lengths so I would add OIS too (to use with Pens, with a pronounced wink to GH2 and GH3 users), but as I said this lens is very unlikely in the first place.

    • n

      Of course an Olympus lens would not have an OIS system. No Oly lens has it. It’s not necessary since all Oly cameras have IBIS.

      And there are Olympus and Panasonic lenses that are far more similar than a 40-150mm lens is similar to a 35-100mm lens.

      So, IMO, these arguments don’t hold much water.

  • MikeH

    OIS? 😉 Black? Hood(ie) included? Weather sealed?

    Sounds good if the price is under the 35-100 and the quality is high. Why wouldn’t they start at 45-50 instead just to keep the costs lower?

    • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

      Yes, people forget that the 50-200 is a massive lens therefore it would never do on a small body. Instead a 40-150 2.8 could be bigger than the present one, but manageable.

      What people forget too is that bokeh is no object in such a tele, instead good MF, with with excellent stabilization might make all the difference, and the OM-D has it.

      In the interactive age people feel that they have a say, even better than designers, but the latter have the past wisdom of not proposing impossible lenses.

      Besides the 40-150 was known for its sharpness AND lightweight. The 2x factor allows such miracles. SO, like in the case of the 17mm we have an upgrading, not a SHG lens.

  • milkiwei

    It may be an f2.8-3.5, i.e. f2.8 class zoom, like the ZD 50-200mm. It can 1, save some cost and 2, keep the size relatively small. If they can sell that at the price point of and keep the size similar to the Panasonic 35-100, it would be a great deal of attraction.

    Hopefully it’s the answer to the much hoped for m4/3 version of the 50-200mm.

  • chronocommando

    Its a rumor!
    And a bad one.
    This will not happen.

    • http://www.flickriver.com/photos/photography-by-thomas/ TheEye

      “Maybe, maybe not.”

  • http://www.flickriver.com/photos/photography-by-thomas/ TheEye

    A 40-150 f/2.8 makes sense. It could be complemented by a 10-40 mm f/2.8, or more likely, by a 12-40 f/2.8. I hope that software correction will be limited to distortion only in those hypothetical lenses. Then I will be interested.

  • http://www.piter.ch Matthias

    550 Euros and I will buy it 😉

    • nobody

      Twice the amount of glass, as compared to the 35-100, for half the price?

      Dream on!

  • Ren Kockwell

    Thank you Admin. True or not this is something I really could use and I’ll definately be waiting for it. No Panasonic 35-100/2.8 for me for now.

  • Andrew

    I appreciate the final posting of this rumor, however, I dunno how an anonymous source gets an FT3. And for some reason, this sounds like a lens a user would wish for, but a lens maker would never produce. I can’t help but be skeptical, however, would be a lens I’d want actually. It’d have no IS of course.

  • jonathan

    Why do all these zooms start at 35 to 50??? I want my zoom to start at “normal ” at 25…

    I love my 12-35, now I want to extend it, but start at 25 please! It will allow me to cover normal whichever lens I have installed.

    • Justin

      I agree with this. Start at 25mm. Have some overlap. That way (like you say) we can have either lens mounted and achieve a normal look.

  • Ren Kockwell

    NIKON HAS JUST FILED FOR BANKRUPCY!!!

    Nah, just kidding but they’ve just filed a patent for a 55-300 f2.8-4 lens.

    What does this have anything to do with us m43 users? Plenty!

    It means it’s possible to make and the Olympus 40-150/2.8 could be very real indeed.

    Here are the details:

    Patent number: 2012-212087
    Patent release date: November 1, 2012
    Patent filing date: March 31, 2011
    Zoom ratio: 5.17
    Focal length: 56.50 – 292.00mm
    Aperture: 2.88 – 4.12
    Angle of view: 8.35 – 23.13°
    Image height: 21.60mm
    Lens length: 248.90 – 288.60mm
    Back focus: 38.47 – 62.51mm
    Lens design: 22 elements in 17 groups with 5 ED elements
    VR

    • Agent00soul

      Ouch.. 22 elements! That must be some kind of record, mustn’t it?

      • Esa Tuunanen

        Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM and EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM both have 23 elements.

  • Yun

    I like the idea of 40-150mm F2.8 but I don’t think a Pana camera can hold it without IS .
    Pana , where is the camera for this type of lenses ?
    Might get an Olympus camera if the reviews of this lens is better than the 30-100 F2.8 .

    • bart

      IS can be a very useful tool and is desirable as one of the tools in your arsenal… but suggesting one cannot use a longer telelens without IS is just as silly and wrong as suggesting that IS is useless because it cannot stop subject motion.

    • beautemps

      EPLs can’t hold it either! So where are the Oly-Tele-Zooms with OIS???

  • ckmaui

    if they could pull it off would be cool and hurt panasonic sales big time

    kill the 35-100 sales and kill the future 150 F2.8 lens they have coming out

    I would buy one of those as long as it was sharp on the long end

    • Ren Kockwell

      In the words of Russell Peters (in a thick south indian accent), “Nobody gonna get hurt”. That’s right, Panasonic ain’t gonna get hurt here. GH3 users will want the Panasonic 35-100 for the OIS. Olympus users won’t mind the 40-150 not having OIS because they have IBIS. As they say in India, “Everybody happy, nobody gonna get hurt”. Where I come from I can only say “Amen”.

      • ckmaui

        no panasonic wont get hurt but sales of the 35-100 will and the 150 2.8 will some :)
        to small a market and yes panasonic folks will want it with the IS since chances are the oly wont have it if the rumor is even true :)

    • Jørgen

      First of all that lens prolly won’t have OIS. With that focal length on a Panny body it is pretty useless. Most of all at the longe FL. Second point: we do not know a tjhing about IQ, whether it is weathersealed, will it have a very snoth zoom for video.

      The 105 f2.8 will probably be a speciality lens with very special IQ. I don’t know that either, but yu can expect that of course.

      I am into the 40-150 f2.8 if it is good and small enough. I noticed that the 100-300 mm Panny does not balance nicely on my EPL5 at all (does so on my GH2).
      But may be the next DSLR like cam from Oly will replace my GH2. It needs to get much better IQ than the difference between OMD (EPL5) and GH2. There is no real reason to change for such a small difference in my view.

  • Kabe

    While I would believe that Olympus would rework the current 40-150 to become weather sealed and thus a nice match for the 12-50 (would be great for OM-D kit offers), I don’t buy a complete rework of this lens.

    Primarily I’m not buying the 2.8 f-stop – at least not at the long end – a 2.8-4.0 could be a different story. Such a lens would weight more than a full kilo, and with quite limited benefits.

    • nobody

      The excellent Canon 70-200 f4 without IS weighs in 705g. A m43 40-150 f2.8 would have about the same diameter, but it would be shorter than the Canon’s 172mm. So it may weigh in 500-600g. Definitely not more than 1kg.

      Anyway, making the long end f4 or f3.5 might be not a bad idea to limit size, weight, and cost.

      • Kabe

        Yes, and it’s f4, not f2.8… As I said, might be a different story with f4 on the long end, but with f2.8 this would become heavy and expensive.

    • http://www.piter.ch Matthias

      If it would be so I wish that the 40-150 2.8 will has a better optical quality then the 12-50. I like the 12-50 for it’s zoom range and the macro mode, but it’s not a really sharp lens, unfortunately. My mFT 14-42 II from E-PL2 kit is sharper, especially in the corners. But let’s see if this rumor is really true or not.

  • http://www.43rumors.com/members/amalric/ amalric

    Size constraint is the very reason why I don’t expect Oly to make any SHG glass for m4/3.

    A customer compares a dSLR to a mirrorless, lens for lens, and sees that the latter is fairly smaller.

    So it’s useless to propose all the time exotic lenses. What you see instead a an improvement of the old Oly SG line, And even if you could stretch the notion to HG glass, there is a fairly amount of SW correction.

    Tele don’t need as much as WA, so this could be a good lens for – let’s hope – a good price.

    Panny however gave such a negative example with its latest zooms that I made me think of getting a Fuji with the new 17-55/2.8-4 for half the price.

    • ckmaui

      the Fuji X series has a great lens line up and if their road map is for sure some nice options coming up also and all for a fairly good price !

      wish it focused a bit quicker and I would not be bothering with the OMD ? as a nice light option to FF gear when working

  • M

    If it´s a 40-150 that would indeed compete with, but not equal, the Panasonic, since Panasonic´s lens is 35-100. Big enough difference to make both interesting, and to offer some real choice other tha the brand name…

    Only a good thing that the 2 companies doesn´t offer “twins” too often in their lineups, but rather spreads the f-lenghts and other characteristics out a bit, if ever so sligthly.

  • http://cazaluz.zenfolio.com cazaluz

    step by step…and this seems another good step!…but:as long as there is nothing
    bloody similar to my 14-54,I´m not “stepping” into the “Micro-FT-World”…
    please Olympus,make THAT lens shrink!!!

  • homerr

    It astonishes me the amount of expert economists on this site. They seem to know what olympus neeeds to put out to save the company, how to price the lenses, what the f stops should be and even future predictions on the demise of panasonic’s sales. Why arent you people working at olympus!!!??
    Amazing…

    • shep

      Agree!! And some who have interesting ideas about the laws of optics, size, weight, and consequent price.

      MFT’s primary feature is its compact size. Giant lenses (high aperture teles, for example) are not a sensible way to go.

      • Anonymous

        It is when there are enthusiasts and potential pros looking for high end optics to complement the higher end bodies. There are already plenty of compact low grade zooms, and amazing compact primes to satisfy those looking for the smallest kit possible. Why not make a few high end zooms to please those looking for better IQ and larger apertures? Even if these lenses are larger than what’s currently common for m43s, they will still be smaller than their dslr counterparts, and compact size would still be a benefit of the system. Diversity is a good thing.

  • UW

    One of the major reason not considering PANA 35mm-100mm is “MADE IN CHINA”. As long as the new OM 40mm-150mm is made in Japan, f2.8 or f2.8-4, I will buy it for sure. All I need from OM is a high quality wide angle zoom lens like 8mm-17mm f2.8-4, so that I can use m43 system instead of 5D2 for press (body+2 lens = approx 4 kg, so heavy!)

    • homer

      Are you kidding? That is what decides your lens purchases?

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close