(FT2) Olympus 50mm f/1.8 coming? The 12mm is expensive…
Image on top: The current Olympus Four Thirds 50mm f/2.0 macro lens.
I know from our trusted sources that Olympus developed two different portrait lens prototypes. A 45mm f/1.7 and a 50mm f/1.8 lens. I am still not sure which one is coming but a new sources contacted me to say that the Olympus 50mm f/1.8 lens will be announced along the E-P3 in late June. The retail price will be $499 (499 Euro). I am also getting some other reports saying that the lens will not be a macro lens like the Four Thirds 50mm f/2.0 or the Panasonic Micro Four Thirds 45mm f/2.8 lens. And it will be very compact. But please keep in mind that those specs and price are from a new source! Take it for what it is, an unconfirmed and yet not reliable rumor! I hope other sources can confirm or deny that rumor soon.
Meanwhile thanks to the anonymous sender for sharing the tip. All 43rumors readers should hope that new source is telling us the truth also because he said the E-P3 will have a built-in Viewfinder 
Loading ...P.S.: Another source told me that the Olympus 12mm f/2.0 SHG (Super High Grade) will be very expensive. He didn’t send me the price but I hope he will send me that info after reading that post
Here is a list of current Olympus SHG Four Thirds lenses (all made in Tatsuno):
14-35mm f/2.0 ED (Click here to see that lens on eBay).
35-100mm f/2.0 ED (Click here to see that lens on eBay).
90-250mm f/2.8 ED (Click here to see that lens on eBay).
150mm f/2.0 ED (Click here to see that lens on eBay).
300mm f/2.8 ED (Click here to see that lens on eBay).
Reminder -> 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
Thanks anonymous sender
Share
Recent comments
Comment from : wow, i didn't knew that. very interestin...
Comment from juavel: That would be intelligent....
Comment from cL: When is a 12mm f2 for $599 an expensive ...- Comment from cL: "Isn’t the FT 50/2 a $500 lens… and ...
Ulli
12 months ago |hmmmm…so not a 1.4 ?
leendert
12 months ago |And twice the price?
Ahem
12 months ago |Yeah, a proper portrait lens should be 1.4 (at least) for background separation. Also would have preferred longer, 60-70mm.
Hope it has pleasing bokeh.
I’ll stick with my Hexanon f/1.4.
frosti7
12 months ago |Ahem, dont forget that 50 or 45 X2 would be 100mm, and 100mm f1.8 is more then you will ever want for pleasing bokeh, even on a MFT
Thomas S
12 months ago |I think the DOF, and probably also bokeh, would be comparable to 100mm f3.6, not 100m f1.8
frosti7
12 months ago |Thomas, ur correct for FF
but on APS-C body the bokeh would be as 100 f/2.5
Ahem
12 months ago |I use 135mm FF equivalent for portraits, so 100mm equivalent (ie. the rumored 50mm MFT lens) is too short – usable, but still too short.
Also note that f/1.8 in MFT is much more than f/2.0 FF equivalent, can’t be bothered to do the math.
Mick
12 months ago |Are these new Zuikos 43 or M43?
frosti7
12 months ago |MFT
Faidz
12 months ago |I hope the image quality is awesome to justify the hefty price tag…but other than that, we need a really good body to fully utilise the potential of such lens.
NiKo
12 months ago |The E-P3 built-in viewfinder rumor just made my day shine
I really hope this source is not kidding us…
Peter
12 months ago |I would pay 500 euros for a 50mm f/2 macro (with hesitation), not for a simple 50mm f/1.8
If Canon, Nikon and Sony can make a full-frame 50mm for less than 150 euro then why not Olympus? Like Sigma, I fear Olympus has lost sense of reality
Tom
12 months ago |well but those 150 Euro primes are… well… so extremely cheap built. I rather pay 500Euro for superb build quality and optical quality then 200 Euro for cheapo plastic build with mediocore optical quality…
MJ
12 months ago |I doubt they would go ‘all out’ for a 1.8. If it was really ‘SHG’ quality like the 12/2 they would at least make it F1.4. It’s a 50 for pete’s sake, the simplest length of all.
Nico Foto
12 months ago |Well, canon’s nifty fifty sells for 100 bucks, the build quality is nothing to rave about, but in terms of IQ it is QUITE good. Nice contrast and resolution. For 500 dollars, it better be good. I think Oly SHG lenses were top notch, hopefully they come up with something similar.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |The generic 50/1.8 isn’t designed for digital, and don’t have great performance wide open. I expect that any Olympus lens will be superb wide open, and be in an altogether different class altogether.
Ahem
12 months ago |No, for 500 EUR it won’t have “superb” wide open performance.
Ahem
12 months ago |Economies of scale: Canon and Nikon sell those 50mm lenses by the boatload, Olympus doesn’t.
Tom
12 months ago |500 Euro sounds good to me, if it has the qualitiy of the current 50/2.0!
50/1.8 is fast enough for a portrait lens.
So im starting to save money… E-P3+50/1.8 could be hefty
Along with the 9-18 i need :-/
Ben Bammens
12 months ago |A standard 50mm 1.8 costs just over €100 so I think 500 for a simple 1.8 is very pricy…
MJ
12 months ago |Yes since when did m43 become More expensive than SLR equipment ? It should at least be 1.4 for that price. This better be a joker source. I understand a high price for a 12/2 SHG, but a simple 50/1.8 no way !
D
12 months ago |Too bad about the 12mm. I would’ve liked to have gotten one but not if its gonna be expensive. I guess I’ll stick to my Computar 12.5mm C-mount lens.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |Completely different class of performance, not that c-mount lenses don’t have their place.
davide
12 months ago |How much does it vignette? Samples?
occam
12 months ago |No macro = No sale.
Tom
12 months ago |If you want a macro, why dont you buy the Leica 45/2.8 ? Its superb in all terms!
It sounds like Olympus is getting through… There is an macro, but no portrat lens, so why just putting another macro on the market?
And if you complain about the price of the Leica: an mFT 50/2 Zuiko Macro would cost around 600-700 Euro as well…
occam
12 months ago |Isn’t the FT 50/2 a $500 lens… and has a better reputation (“perfect”) than its counterparts? Bringing that lens to mFT would be great, but dropping the macro eliminates one of its best applications.
Tom
12 months ago |MSRP should be round $649, you cant get the 50/2 macro under 599 Euro here…
Actually, ist at the same price range as the Leica 45
occam
12 months ago |Oly FT for US$499 at Amazon (link above in article).
Tom
12 months ago |Amazon.de says 770 Euro to me
And cheapest price in Germany seems to be 599 Euro
What a darn big differance… gosh
Do
12 months ago |AFAIK there is no other MFT/FT lens with a bigger price difference between US and Europe – some months ago i noticed that it’s cheaper to buy the Zuiko 50mm at B&H photo, duties and shipping to Europe included, than in any german online store.I’ve read somewehere that Olympus doubled the recommended retail price for Europe to 1000 Euros, obviously they didn’t in the USA.
tmrgrs
12 months ago |You already have the PL 45/2.8 for macro so no need for that in this new 50/1.8. With all the complaints about the price at $500, I wonder why no one has remembered that the PL 45/2.8 is much more expensive and it’s been out for almost two years now.
If this new 50/1.8 is truly compact in comparison to the 50/2 macro and has similar optical qualities, I can well imagine that it would cost as much even without the macro capability. It’ll be on my wish list for sure. Lets remember that this has been one of the most requested lenses for m4/3 since day one and now it’s almost here.
You guys who are bellyaching that it isn’t f/1.4 or less expensive or a macro lens are being foolish IMO and are not representative of the majority of the serious enthusiasts who have bought in to the m4/3 system.
Ulli
12 months ago |@tmrgrs… unless this 500 bucks zuiko 50mm 1.8 would beat the FT 50 2.0 in performance, its too expensive. Otherwise it would be you being “foolish” to buy it(or maybe you just have too much cash to spend…)
And i take it as a compliment for not being “representative of the majority of the serious enthusiasts who have bought in to the m4/3 system”
davide
12 months ago |+1: Fully agreed!
If this portrait lens is smaller than the tele zooms, and has fast AF, I’ll bought it for sure.
I’d love if it were be cheaper, but really, the price is right! And it does not have any competitor (actual or rumored) for any mirrorless camera (not only m43, but also NEX or NX), so they could make it even much more expensive and probably still be able to sell it (not to me, unfortunately).
People are the most photographed subject, yet I can’t understand why everybody wants a macro, wide, or zoom lens before a decent portraiture one.
cL
12 months ago |“Isn’t the FT 50/2 a $500 lens… and has a better reputation (“perfect”) than its counterparts? Bringing that lens to mFT would be great, but dropping the macro eliminates one of its best applications.”
Well…, because people want f1.8 or f1.4, so they had to drop macro option. Macro are usually shot at f8 or smaller, so the wide open aperture can’t be that small or it’ll hit refraction early, which would make it totally useless for macro. So choose one, big aperture (portrait) or macro. Besides macro lens’s characteristics is kind of different from portrait lens. I really don’t care for a lens that tries to please everyone, but can’t do a good job at anything.
frosti7
12 months ago |+1.7
Olympus finally getting it – to be competitive they have to offer MFT something that panasonic dosnt have
NativeFloridian
12 months ago |1 vote for the 45mm, but no complaints as long as it is a compact lens (pancake?). A travel kit including the Panny 20mm and an Olympus portrait prime is appealing to me.
Atle
12 months ago |A bit expensive with 500 Euros. And I would rather have 45mm than 50mm. But i guess its nice to have som models in this focal length range.
sneye
12 months ago |I don’t trust the pricing info. If it’s weather sealed and optically corrected for distortions and CA like all Zuiko HG lenses then it will be more expensive (perhaps 600-700 $/Euro). F/1.8 is a new venture for Olympus and will demand a premium.
Iain
12 months ago |Actually lens being weather sealed is a good point… and hopefully means that so will the ‘Pro’ E-P3… combine that with the built-in EVF… and that could be a pretty awesome package!
Ultimate beach portrait camera? hahaha remember Oly’s ‘smallest DSLR’ commercials at the beach?
Not that I will be able to afford it though!
But I’ve been waiting for these releases before I started buying the VF-2 viewfinder for my E-PL1 and trying out manual portrait lenses. My wife will kill me if I try to convince her to trade my less-than-one-year-old E-PL1 for a better model already!
Soeren Engelbrecht
12 months ago |So: If the 50/1.8 is 500 EUR, and the 12/2.0 will be “Expensive”, you will probably be able to buy TWO Panasonic GF2 kits with 14/2.5 for the price of the 12mm Zuiko… It better be really, really good…
43RC
12 months ago |$500 is a very high, but if IQ is also very high, I’ll buy it.
45mm or 50mm, either is fine.
f/1.8 is slower than proposed NEX and NX portrait lenses.
If this one is only 1.8, it better be very compact (collapsing, maybe?). Maybe that’s the new strategy?
alphonse2501
12 months ago |Can people use old manual OM or other brand 50mm f1.8 lens instead of these uncomformed new lens for portrait? Even just f1.8 is very cheap on eBay.
emde
12 months ago |For all those who refer to the 150 EUR 1.8/50s. Did you ever have a look to the corners and to the resolution wide open? If the 1.8/50could be used wide open with only minor limitations I would go for it. Please also keep in ming that a recommended retail price is not the street price. I would expect the lens to sell (after some weeks or months) at around 400 EUR.
Tom
12 months ago |yes, thats it.
>For me, a compact 50/1.8 prime is FAR FAR more attractive then Sony NEX 50/1.8 Prime, which is as big as Olys 14-150!
Go ahead Olympus! I know why i love you <3
Was absolutely the right decision to move to mFT!
Peter
12 months ago |The Canon 50mm f/1.8 has massive vignetting (3EV) wide open on full frame and much less (0.7 EV) on APS-C. Stands to reason that the very same design would have even less vignetting with a 4/3 cropfactor.
Same with border sharpness, wide open photozone rates it “good” on full frame, “very good” on APS-C. The difference between border and central sharpness is also (predictively) much less with APS-C than with full frame.
Given the choice between a Canon f/1.8 with MFT lensfitting for 120 euro (68x41mm, 130 grams), and a Olympus “it will be smaller” for 500 euros, I dare say 90% of MFT owners will opt for the cheaper option (which will still give excellent picture quality).
If this rumored pricing (the 50mm, a “very expensive” SHG 12mm) comes true then I predict even worse financial results for Olympus in 2011 (and those of 2010 already were terrible as reported on this site).
It’s a damn shame really
I would have *loved* a MFT equivalent of a E-6xx camera with HG lenses at reasonable prices (reasonable: not cheap, but affordable).
cL
12 months ago |When is a 12mm f2 for $599 an expensive lens??? I think this in psychology or statistic such statement is called a lead-in statement. When some people phrase it a certain way, people will begin to think in that direction. That’s why a well designed survey will never have that sort of phrasing, but always an open ended question.
12mm f2 would be equivalent to 24mm ~f2.8 in FF, and please check the price of such lens from other makers. $599 is not that expensive and at that price, it won’t be a SHG. SHG lenses are usually $1,500 and up because they use a lot of ED lenses…. Some SHG lenses have Super ED glass…. Nikon 24mm f1.4 ED is $2,400, by the way, if you’re comparing SHG class of lenses….
12mm lens is several times more difficult to design than a normal lens, on top of that, it’s an f2…. $599 is pretty average price. Because of smaller sensor, 4/3 lenses have to have twice as much resolution to be competitive, so they’re more expensive to make to begin with…. Many of the cheap lenses are either cheap glass inside or they were old film lens resold as digital, so there is very little R&D cost there…. Even small third party company can port lens to another platform, so selling film lens as digital cost next to nothing for Canon and Nikon to make.
Keep in mind digital lenses need extra CA correction which film cameras don’t need as much. Built for film lenses won’t excel in that part, no matter how sharp it is. Ultra wide angle like 12mm will be filled with purple fringes if you used a film lens on digital body (actually CA is even more visible especially when the IQ is high). You need designed for digital lens at ultra wide angle, period.
Aoshi
12 months ago |I just bought the 50mm f2.0 and was berating myself till I took a double-look and it said rumour + MFT.
Guess I’m not losing out too much.
davide
12 months ago |Unfortunately you can get those prices only with the huge volumes that Canon and Nikon have. Olympus does not make lenses in these huge numbers.
And remember, it’s not only size, but AF too that you miss when adapting a lens on m43. So, if this lens would be noticeable smaller and with good AF, it’ll be a hit (sure, a hit for Olympus, which is irrelevant, number-wise, to Canikon)
napalm
12 months ago |a compact 50mm f1.8 would be a good portrait lens. for macros, there’s the 45mm pany at f2.8. or cheaper versions would be legacy lenses as you’ll use manual focus on macro anyway. and would you really need to shoot wide open at f1.8 for macro? i shoot at least f4.5 and with a tripod to get most of it sharp
Xah
12 months ago |I preordered the Fuji X100, but now I think imma wait for the specs of the EP3.
And I really dont ask much:
+ High ISO performance (1 stop better then EP2)
+ Builtin Viewfinder
Heck, if the builtin viewfinder rumor is upgraded to FT5 I will cancel the X100 right away!
I’m already dreaming about the EP3(w builtin viewfinder) + 25/F1.4 PanaLeica combo
frosti7
12 months ago |We dont have concrete data, but my best guess is that G3 is 1.5 stops cleaner then E-P2 – and i hope that e-p3 “photographic sensor(hopefully)” would be at least 2 stops improvement
leendert
12 months ago |I find a old mockup of a PEN with built-in viewfinder. ( http://43rumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/6dc8d4c5.jpg )
I changed a few things (add the EPL2 grip and LCD…and of course this is a swivel screen!).
Something like this is the PEN in my dreams:
http://www.imgdumper.nl/uploads4/4ddce075d2a4b/4ddce075cfb72-6dc8d4c5.jpg
sneye
12 months ago |Not bad at all
Evgeny
12 months ago |Nice picture, but impossible to make
Thierry
12 months ago |I’d love a PEN like that too!
Gekopaca
12 months ago |Thanks for your work, but I absolutely need the hot shoe in the alignment of the lens, for possible external VF
leendert
12 months ago |A new one for you:
http://www.imgdumper.nl/uploads4/4ddd0dc8cd3b9/4ddd0dc8ca4da-6dc8d4c5.jpg
admin
12 months ago |Can I use that for my next rumor ?
leendert
12 months ago |Of course!
use this one please: http://www.imgdumper.nl/uploads4/4ddd12e225fa9/4ddd12e2230c6-6dc8d4c5.jpg
leendert
12 months ago |Sorry, this one:
http://www.imgdumper.nl/uploads4/4ddd153d769b7/4ddd153d73ad5-6dc8d4c5.jpg
Narretz
12 months ago |Is the viewfinder invisible on the front?
frosti7
12 months ago |They all look identical to me
Its a very nice mockup – but it both makes the E-P2 bigger and it has a tiny EVF (seems like tiny)
I just hope that Oly’s engineers are more capable
leendert
12 months ago |The last one has a bigger EVF
And I hope it too!
DonTom
12 months ago |And they are all very nice. I’d save up for a cam like that.
fta
12 months ago |leendert, an E-P3 like that would be impossible to keep “in stock”
I would buy one ASAP! Even at introduction/msrp prices..
Tom
12 months ago |does that mean your next rumor is regarding EP-3 having an integrated EVF. I hope some sort of confirm by one of your trusted sources?
that would be f*cking great!
owczi
12 months ago |These look a bit like the old E-P2 mockups based on bits from E-P1 and half frame PEN
Although the grip and the controls look like E-PL2 to me. But where’s the accessory port – it’s not only for the EVF so it should still be present even if EVF is built-in – which probably won’t be and thanks to that I won’t be tempted to buy it 
Monique
12 months ago |Once you put something in the hotshoe, the viewfinder would become unaccessible.
Michael Meissner
12 months ago |Monique:
In theory it doesn’t have to be that way, as I could imagine an extension cord that plugs into the accessory port and leaves the hot-shoe free. It would be nice if you could daisy chain accessories, but I suspect that they are not set up like USB so that you can have multiple devices. I really wish Olympus could think outside of the box, and incorporate things that allow for non-standard usage.
Unfortunately, Olympus uses a non-standard port for the accessory port. If they had used a standard micro or mini HDMI cable (or even displayport), it would have been a piece of cake.
Similarly, it should be possible to etch into a VF-2 wires to move the flash off camera. Somebody else proved that you could do it a year or so ago by taping the wires and connecting them to a flash. I’ve thought about it, but so far, my cable hacking skills are lacking.
AndyOz
12 months ago |Michael.
Thanks for the info. Always very informative.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |I have mixed feelings about using proprietary protocols on standard connectors. On one hand, its nice to be able just to order cables from monoprice. On the other hand, the howls from the masses of “my USB drive doesn’t work!” drive me nuts. As a manufacturer, I think that the support headaches of overloading the meaning of the connector isn’t worth it.
admin
12 months ago |I like that
alexander
12 months ago |fantastic !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
alexander
12 months ago |!!!!!!! fantastic !!!!!!!!!!!
Evgeny
12 months ago |I doubt they can create a camera looking like that. I know, we all were happy to see such a compact and nice design, but it is impossible to combine a large LCD and good EVF like you did on the sketch.
Take a look at Panasonic’s GH-series – their excellent viewfinders require that ‘pentaprism’ design… And external EVF’s (made by Olympus) are very large as well.
One possibility is to widen the body to fit all the neccessary stuff in it. I hope for such a design – I prefer maybe larger, but “bricky” camera body than panasonic’s “hard-to-fit-anywhere-in-the-bag” design…
Good drawing you did, anyway. “That’s how our impossible dream looks
”. I’d like to have flash in the corner – don’t like that large empty space. But that’s only my point of view 
Schwarz
12 months ago |ZD 7-14 is not made in Tatsuno? y is it left out? hmm
Agent00soul
12 months ago |Aren’t the high grade lenses (like the 12-60) made at Tatsuno too?
radix
12 months ago |oh my…
Agent00soul
12 months ago |If the 12/2.0 is going to be very expensive, they had better have a very good body to go with it.
che
12 months ago |i really think they should make wide to normal zoom like 14-25mm f2.0 or faster like canons and nikons have.
but really that would be a dealbreaker.
For about 400e tops
emde
12 months ago |I probably missed something, but I have never seen any f2 zoom lens apart from the 2 Olympus FT SHG lenses. And where does Canon and Nikon sell those at 400 EUR? Maybe those lenses are also mage from titanium, aren’t they?
Come on and please wake up! You cannot ask for premium optics at a discount price – that is simply ridiculous
Nico Foto
12 months ago |+1
TR
12 months ago |1.8 is too slow in MFT for my liking. I think I will keep the OM 50mm 1.8 and save my money towards one of the 25mm lenses (vogtlander or pana/leica).
Agent00soul
12 months ago |Yeah, with 1.8 I’ll have to decide if I’m going to stay with my Nokton 40/1.4 or get the m-Zuiko. The m-Zuiko will have AF but the Nokton is faster. And paying for getting a slower lens than the one you’ve already got isn’t very attractive.
TR
12 months ago |My thoughts exactly.
Eric
12 months ago |I used that Nokton 1.4 on my E-P1 for a while. While it is a very attractive combo, as seen here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eparks/3740878223/
…I wouldn’t recommend it. It handles wonderfully, but as with most of these manual focus adapted lenses it is pretty unusable wide open. On top of that the bokeh is very harsh. It can be used to create some unique images, but I personally don’t think it makes a very good portrait lens. So if you’re wanting something faster than f/1.8 then look elsewhere, the Nokton is only an f/1.4 lens on paper (like most all f/1.4 lenses not named Leica).
Owen
12 months ago |Likewise, with an OM 50mm f1.8 and adaptor for pennies i couldn’t justify that much for AF. I know the new ones will use fancy optics but I;ve got a lovely example of the OM Zuiko 50 I’m extremely happy with.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |You’ll end up with the same DOF control with the 25/1.4′s as you would with a 50/2. The Voightlander is another beast, but its not very sharp wide open.
Imants
12 months ago |…..I have a 20mm (40mm) …….I can use a 50mm(100mm) ………1.8 no dramas…………… so buying is not a problem
Nick Clark
12 months ago |I hope this is true. I’ve wanted a fast portrait-length prime since I came to 43 (and now m43) but I’m just not into macro photography.
I know most macro lenses also double pretty well at portraiture, but if I don’t *want* a macro, I’d prefer not to be compromised in terms of AF speed, aperture speed, size and cost… And in those areas ALL macro lenses are compromised…
davide
12 months ago |+1
Jules
12 months ago |The 1.7/45 wins hands down over the panleica as a low light walk around prime and for occasional situations where shallow DoF is critical (not that often)
For portraiture, f4 on a 43 sensor is good enough for me.
Even with the $300 price difference (the Olympus is announced at $500 ) it is a tough choice for me.
Mr. Reeee
12 months ago |I’ve been using a 50mm f1.4 Pentax SMC Takumar screwmount lens for a walk-around lens. I just inherited it, had never used anything from Pentax and have been extremely impressed! And yes, it’s manual, all metal and glass, compact and solidly made, with a real aperture ring… Just like the “good” old days
It’s actually bumped my 20mm.
It’s a shame that only Voightländer currently makes a lens like that for M4/3.
Mar
12 months ago |50mm on (m)43 = 100mm on FF or ~65mm on APS-C.
You can’t say they should price it @150-200$ because it will cover entirely different AoV and 100mm lenses cost 1000$ easily.
50mm for SLRs are easy to make because flange distance is close to 50mm, so no need for special optical elements. On m43, it’s around 20mm – so Panny 20mm should actually cost 150-200$ as it’s not much more expensive to make compared to 17mm 2.8 but it costs quite a bit more.
Peter
12 months ago |50mm is easy to make for (m)43 too. So it probably needs a spacer (a bit of plastic…) to put the rear element of the lens at the proper distance of the sensor. Big deal.
It would make the lens a little longer though (but the camera body can be less thick). Now, if they wanted to create a more compact 50mm then the usual design for a 35mm full format, then maybe they needed a more complicated and therefore more expensive design (seems plausible, but I am not a lensdesigner
)
Mar
12 months ago |By that reasoning, 100mm would be as easy to make for FF…
Obviously it’s not the case
Peter
12 months ago |You mean 100mm would be as easy as 50mm? Well, the distance between the rear element and the sensor is not the only difference between a 50mm and a 100mm lens of course (speaking about the focal length, crop factor does not change that).
For example, if you want to keep the “speed” of the lens the same (say at f/2.0) then you need a larger physical aperture. A 50mm at f/2 has an aperture of 25mm across, for a 100mm it would be 50mm across. A bigger physical aperture means you need bigger lens element (at least the front element, that’s the reason why a 300mm f/2.8 has such a huge front).
KL32
12 months ago |$500 for a 50mm 1.8 is a flat out rip off, whether it’s made for 4/3 or APS.
Jules
12 months ago |“$500 for a 50mm 1.8 is a flat out rip off, whether it’s made for 4/3 or APS.”
The optic quality of a lens does not exclusively depends on its speed.
You cannot call it a rip off prior to any hands on review.
Miroslav
12 months ago |“Olympus 12mm f/2.0 SHG will be very expensive”
Sony Zeiss 24mm f/2.0 is 1249 USD, I suppose that qualifies as “very expensive”. Oh well, I hope one remaining kidney will do the job
.
The SHG mark is good news, though.
Ulli
12 months ago |Miroslav,please dont sell your kidney…lol!
frosti7
12 months ago |Dream Kit?
9-18mm 4-5.6
25 f/1.4
45 f1.7
AndyOz
12 months ago |frosti7,
I mostly agree with this dream kit. Although I am tossing up between the 20 f1.7 and the 25 f1.4? I would probably go with the 20 f1.7 for having compactness in one lens option. I like the sound of the 12 f2 prime but unless the IQ is that much better I think I would stay with the Oly 9-18.
Oly 9-18mm 4-5.6
P 20 f1.7
Oly 50 f1.8 (if that what Oly produces in the end) – I would prefer a 40mm f1.4 or 1.8 but thats just me
Plus I would also add a HG MFT version of say the Oly FT 14-54 zoom lens. Sometimes a zoom like that can be handy just for casual shooting! I hope that is next on their lens to do list.
frosti7
12 months ago |I here you with the 20 vs 25mm, and if the 25mm would be considerably bigger (like more then 160%) then the 20, i’m staying with me 20,
Admin, any news about that 25mm f/1.4?
AndyOz
12 months ago |Actually I have been thinking about this. I am no expert in portrait photography. I just wonder whether sharpness and wide aperature is that important for a portrait lens? I know if a 50mm f1.8 ends up being used for other tele work then sharpness and available light would be important. Often with portraits you dont want to show up too many blemishes etc. Perhaps the Oly 40-150 zoom would be good enough for my purposes here!! Others will prob disagree.
Makes me think that I am going to spend too much money on a 50mm lens that I probably would find a bit too telephoto for my taste. I would probably just prefer the Panasonic 25 f1.4 for use in low light situations like weddings etc and where I want the widest aperture for small depth of field.
So I have rethought my dream kit:
Oly 9-18mm f4-5.6
Oly 17mm f2.8 small prime for street shooting
P 25 f1.4
Oly 40-150 – hey its cheap and I think would be good enough for me.
I decided to swap the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 for the Oly 17mm f2.8 for compactness and because I thought the 20mm might end up being too similar to the 25mm. Decisions. Decisions. Any other ideas for a dream kit out there?
frosti7
12 months ago |i agree with – If your getting 25, the 20 makes no sens,
as about 17mm – why not get the pana’s 14? its faster and wider?
Personally i would have to due with 9-18 for that fov because budget reasons.
But i cant prefer the 40-150 over the 50 f1.8,
because the 50mm f1.8 is 2.5 times faster, and would have much better Bokeh and DOF seperation – the main reason i’m interested in that lens
davide
12 months ago |Oly 12/2
Panny 20/1.7
Oly 50/1.8
But not with current cameras, unless the body comes “almost free” if bought with one of the mentioned lenses.
If the 12/2 is *really* expensive, I might opt for the SLRmagic 11/1.4
AndyOz
12 months ago |Davide, Nice choices.
The 12/2 would be nice but I am just worried about the cost. If it is alot better optically than the 9-18 then I will have to get the 12/2.
I remember getting good lens discounts when i bought a film body years ago but Oly probably wont offer any of these primes that cheap bundled as a kit. Hope they surprise me.
AndyOz
12 months ago |Hey frosti
Thanks for the reply. Good point about the 14vs17. I had wondered about the Panasonic 14mm over the Oly 17mm. They are both small and their cost will prob be similar. I just wondered whether to make a small ‘pocketable’ combo and for going around the city etc that I might prefer the 17mm FOV. But thats just a preference. Plus I had wondered whether I could get the 17mm cheaper as a second hand. But it has to be black. The 14mm is covered by the 9-18 choice.
I understand that you would prefer the 50 1.8 over the zoom and it will be a much better lens. I am just budgeting my pref! If I go for 25mm 1.4 then I can’t get the 50mm 1.8. The most important lenses to me are the 9-18 and the 25.
As for the 50mm 1.8 versus a zoom like the 40-150mm here are my thoughts:
1. Yep its a lot faster, better for low light. In my case not a huge deal – with a better G3 like sensor hopefully we can bump up ISO!
2. Sharpness – yes it will be alot sharper. But for portraits is that vital? Alot of people ‘soften’ their portraits shots to make them more flattering. Agreed if for other type of photography this could be important.
3. Better DOF separation. I agree but how much and is it important to the photographer. For some yes. I was just having a play at:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html
Around the 50mm focal length I dont see aperature being quite as sensitive as it is around the 25mm focal length (where 1.4 vs wider aperatures makes big difference). For 50mm I tried comparing f1.8 and f4 (the 40-150zoom fstop) for objects at say 1m, 2m, 4m and 10m. Yes 1.8 is better but its not huge at some focus distances and in my case I dont think it warrants enough for the price. BOKEH is a different matter I guess. But there are heaps of cheap 50mm 1.8 legacy MF primes out there for the occaision I need it.
Just some thoughts.
frosti7
12 months ago |I guesse if you have to choose between the 50 f1.8 or 40-150 then the latter makes more sens due to its range, althou i must say that the 50 f1.8 DOF would be significantly shallower then f4.4 (or something around that)
As for 9-18- yes the 14mm is covered in that range, and so is the 12mm and the 17mm as well,
I’m posetive that the 12mm IQ would be better – but i am not interested in IQ as i am in DOF/Portability
At 12mm and 14mm the DOF is going to be HUGE, so i presume having a 4-5.6 zoom is not going to change the general look and feel of an image – also because the wide FOV u can get away with slow shutter speeds
Frankly i can see good use for 24mm f2 lens on FF body, but on MFT it just wont have the same DOF and dosnt worth the trade-offs for me (the 9-18 is probably half the price and covers very nice FOV)
Rocky
12 months ago |Seems everyone want’s quality (fast len’s) but don’t want to pay for them? Check out the prices for Canon and Nikon pro len’s… They will put a dent in your wallet.
lorenzino
12 months ago |yeah but that is pro. To be used with pro gear by pros. So far nothing like that from Panoly. Only low-average amateurish lenses, some of which not cheap
MikeS
12 months ago |+1
Such as the Oly 75-300mm, which inexplicably sells for ~$800. Once there’s a decent f/2.8 or faster zoom available, I’ll happily pay $1000+ for it. Until then…
adam
12 months ago |Not for a 50 f/1.8. This is more expensive than even the 50 f/1.4s for Canon and Nikon, as well as Canon’s 100 f/2.
Peter
12 months ago |I do not want “super high grade”. I would love to see a m43 version of the “high grade” Oly 12-60 f/2.8-4.0 though (although 1000 euro is only _just_ acceptable I think).
AndyOz
12 months ago |+1 here. Or even a version of the 14-54 would do me.
MikeS
12 months ago |Olympus had better back up their “very expensive” lens with a high-quality body (i.e. an E-PL2 in a sturdier body plus an extra dial is not going to cut it).
Rocky
12 months ago |High quality body cost’s more to produce. Will M43rd users pay for it?
Agent00soul
12 months ago |That’s the question. But if they are going to release a very expensive lens, they must have a body of the same calibre in the works. Not many would purchase such a lens for their E-PL2.
leendert
12 months ago |+ 1
But for me a EPL2 with this modifications is OK:
- New Panasonic G3 sensor (or new 12mp sensor designed by Olympus…but I do not expect this)…again the old sensor would be a shame
- TruePic V+ Processor (Olympus E-5)
- Built-in EVF
- tilt-swivel LCD
- faster AF(Also with 43 lenses)
- sturdier body
Harold GLIT
12 months ago |a 45mm is a BETTER focal lens than a 50mm for portrait
100 FOV is often too long for small spaces
Please oly check out what the market is made of
there is WAYYYYY more 85 mm to 90mm FOV equivalents than 100mm as the first portrait lens
Harold
Ulli
12 months ago |I think this difference in 45(90) or 50mm(100) is rather smallish.
rather then to rely on classic portrait fl’s, its better everyone for him/herself finds out whats their fav portrait lens. you would be surprised how wide the fl range can be then.
Ahem
12 months ago |That’s right. Some prefer 85mm FF equivalent, some above 200mm. I go for 135mm.
nobody
12 months ago |The all new Nikon 1.8/50mm FX lens with an aspherical element has an MSRP of € 229,00. Olympus would be insane to price a 1.8/50mm m43 lens at € 499.
I am used to paying serious money for good lenses, but I would never ever spend that much money for such a lens.
Nick Clark
12 months ago |But a 50mm *FX* is a normal full-frame lens – a 50mm 43 is a short tele. Completely different… How much is a short-tele f1.8 in Nikon land?
El Aura
12 months ago |Don’t be silly, add a Nikon2m43 adaptor (a short metal tube) to the Nikon lens and it suddenly becomes more expensive to manufacture?
At any rate, the Olympus lens should be cheaper (shorter flange distance makes things a bit easier optically, smaller image circle as well). Maybe aiming for a higher central resolution would make the lens more expensive.
The real reason is that Nikon expects to sell about ten times as many lenses, that is why the Nikon lens is cheaper.
Peter
12 months ago |Sorry, but no. 50mm is 50mm. By your reasoning that same 50mm Nikon lens would be more value for money when used on a APS-C because “it would be equal to a 75mm f/1.8″.
Not so.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |+1, with a caveat: Olympus designs for roughly twice the resolution as Nikon: MTF 60/20 vs. 30/10. Which is a big part of the reason that many Olympus lenses cost more than their Canikon equivalents.
frosti7
12 months ago |+1 to Archer and:
Would you buy MFT lens if its the size as the nikkor 50mm+extension adapter?
its as big as the 14-150 zoom or even larger! and thats what you are paying here – SIZE
nobody
12 months ago |You’d have to compare it to a 100mm f3.6. Of course, there is no such lens in Nikon Land.
But an 85mm f1.8 goes for about € 370 in Germany.
Nick Clark
12 months ago |In terms of DoF maybe. In terms of speed no, you’d still be comparing to a 100/f1.8…
Jul
12 months ago |By that logic there should be really cheap 25mm 1.8 mft lenses.
Nick Clark
12 months ago |Yes, there should…
AndyOz
12 months ago |Interesting news. I dont mind the sound of a 50mm 1.8 lens too much but I tend to agree with Harold that 45mm or something a bit shorter would be better.
Is it just me or would anyone else like to see say a 40mm f1.4 or even a 40/1.8 lens? I would prefer a lens around this focal length for portraits. It also fills the gap from the upcoming Panasonic 25/1.4 and the Pana 45mm macro.
Now that I think about it – isnt there a Pen F lens that is 40mm/1.4? Couldnt they base a new AF design of that lens design. Now I would like to see that. I appreciate with AF etc it would have to be a bit different but if they could do it then – surely they could do it now.
Atle
12 months ago |I totally agree f1.4/f1.7 40mm would be perfect. (and hopefully it would be abit cheaper than a pretty steep 500 Euro)
Archer Sully
12 months ago |For that lens you’ll have to go Old School. Rokkor 40/1.7 is a good place to start.
frosti7
12 months ago |I would want 25mm at least, because in MFT we need all the DOF we can squeeze
Ahem
12 months ago |I would have zero use for a fast 40mm. I would buy a fast (f/1.4 or faster) 60-70mm prime in a heartbeat for portraits, even if it was more than 1000 EUR.
Michael
12 months ago |Sounds interesting! 50 f1.8 with decent AF ability would satisfy my portrait needs. As for the price, well, we’re paying for miniaturisation and a niche product. Until m43 captures a larger market and gains a more solid foothold I don’t see that changing. If it means I can carry a camera kit around without all that extra bulk and weight, I’m happy paying extra.
lunic
12 months ago |Why oh why they don’t know the good focal length? They need to see what kinds of lens other companies make. (Ex. DX 35/1.8 of nikon & DA 55/1.4 of pentax) Olympus need 26mm & 42mm for both classic 4/3 & m4/3.
Steve
12 months ago |I agree. That is why the Panny 25mm f1.4 interests me more. It has the correct focal length I would need. Somehow Oly thought people need a 50mm as they were using 3rd party fast 50mm. But that was because this is all they had.
davide
12 months ago |-1
25mm vs 20mm as well as 40mm vs 50mm is not that much of a difference.
Given the choice, and everything be the same (price, aperture, IQ), I would probably pick the shorter focal length, because it will be smaller and lighter. And if I really needed the extra reach, I could always marginally crop. But that is nitpicking, there isn’t much of a difference, really.
Robbie
12 months ago |Really, the some peeps here are lame. Olympus is going to deliver new lenses that we wanted, now some start to carp at pricing, aperture etc.
Archer Sully
12 months ago |Yep. Some people are never happy unless they’re grousing.
tmrgrs
12 months ago |+1 and I said something about this complaining earlier today only to learn that I’d be foolish to spend $500 on this 50/1.8 and that maybe I “had too much cash to spend” – LOL
Björn Utpott
12 months ago |It’s nice to see Olympus not duplicating an already existing Panasonic lens by developing a macro lens . Both the 45/1.7 and 50/1.8 could end up replacing my Leica 45/2.8 macro as a portrait lens if image quality at f/2.8 is comparable to what the Leica produces. The wider apertures would then become a bonus for decreased DOF and/or better low light capability. Of course the new M.Zuiko would not be stabilized on my GH2, so for static subjects I can use slower shutter speeds with the Leica.
Brian
12 months ago |This is a silly rumor as there is a 50mm macro *on the roadmap* IE announced they would release one this year… So the lens in question seems like it should be a m4/3 of the 50 mm f2 macro. They aren’t going to build that many lens for the same focal length… that would just be silly given that it is a 100 mm lens effectively.
frosti7
12 months ago |where did you see that 50mm announcement?
Ross
12 months ago |It has been around for some time. It was on here previously (& still is) http://www.43rumors.com/ft4-olympus-will-go-pro-within-the-first-half-of-2011/
frosti7
12 months ago |This is also a rumor, much like this one.
It is not “announcement”
ihateidiots
12 months ago |Honestly, people are going to always complain about cost and give various excuses about pro bodies and whatever not. Nevermind the poor skills of most photographers. If the camera has a decent sensor that can take photos, but doesn’t have all the gimmicks that people want, it apparently becomes a substandard camera not worthy of a good lens. What logic is that?
And as usual, the quality of optics is trumped by all other concerns. I for one would just want a decent body and a good lens and let the lens do the drawing. If the lens cost too much, then I will save up and get it. Bitching about it is a waste of time.
Rocky
12 months ago |A+
tmrgrs
12 months ago |+ 1 – well said
MikeS
12 months ago |-1
What constitutes a “decent” body/sensor, a “good” lens or a price that’s “too much”?
People can go overboard with criticism, but it has limits, and is usually based on a legitimate concern. I haven’t seen anyone around here asking for a D3x in a m4/3 form factor for $99, for instance. Enjoying the use of our photographic tools and wanting specific improvements in future models aren’t mutually exclusive; in fact, shooting more often allows us to pinpoint exactly what we’d like to see changed. Those who let their hangups prevent them from shooting altogether are the ones who need new equipment the least.
ihateidiots
12 months ago |Pray tell, are there any issues with the bodies that will deny us from shooting altogether at all? People keep asking for weather proofing and so forth, but these will drive the cost and weight up. If you want those, go to another system. It defeats the entire purpose of M4/3 to go overkill with these features. As it is, the GH2 is on the edge of “small size” already. How much bigger and heavier do people want it to be? If they so much as introduce a camera with these features, it will be likely approach the size of a Canon 550D or 7D. Lenses will also need similar weather sealing too, driving up the cost.
And good optics cost much. Get over it. If you want low distortion, vigineting, large aperture, low software correction, it will cost much. The prices of the lenses from other companies provide the guideline. Accept it and life becomes easier.
Jules
12 months ago |Size does not defeat the purpose of m43. To begin with, its a protocol, not a purpose. Otherwise, there would be no AG-AF100!
Small size is marketable and I dare to say that the niche market is not big enough for a weather-sealed kit depleted of a blazingly fast and accurate AF tracking. So far I can read, the GH-2 still cannot compete with the top APS-C sports SLR.
–
To MikeS: “People can go overboard with criticism, but it has limits, and is usually based on a legitimate concern. I haven’t seen anyone around here asking for a D3x in a m4/3 form factor for $99, for instance.”
What I have seen all over this thread is people that consider lens’s speed as the only legitimate measure of optic quality and only acceptable measure to justify pricing. I don’t care if Canon produces a 1.8/50 for $100, it is notorious for begging for upgrade.
What I have also seen all over this thread is people making abstraction of image circle, crop factor, flange distance and a plethora of other factors. m43 is a different complexity and many people’s concern, based on direct comparison, are not realistic at all. If it were, we would have a Nikkor Fx 7-14 on the market…
MikeS
12 months ago |@hate: It’s ironic that you dismiss camera bodies offhand, yet consider expensive lenses to be the primary determinant of decent photography. Also, the comment about equipment preventing people from shooting was hyperbole; the point was that people use their equipment, regardless (or switch systems), but still maintain legitimate criticisms of the tools they use, and suggestions for how they can be improved.
@Jules: I agree that comparisons to nifty 50′s are unfair, since they generally lack somewhat in optical quality (until considering more recent ones, which are more expensive and thus less nifty). With few exceptions, I think m4/3 lens prices are totally reasonable, for now. If lenses start to cost more than twice of their SLR equivalents, it’ll be a different story.
Mr. Reeee
12 months ago |Exactly. Just look at, and pick up an E5. The thing approaches the size and weight of a Nikon D700, so why waste money on an overpriced mediocrity, when the real thing costs only a bit more. That’s not even taking I to account the huge selection of Nikon lenses compared to a handful of 4/3 lenses.
Ulli
12 months ago |Mr. Reeee, though you’ve got a point regarding the E-5 costing much, I wouldn’t call a d700 more of a real thing then the E-5, both are professional dslr’s. I would choose for the E-5 if i still would use FT
Mr. Reeee
12 months ago |Yep, bad choice of words.
Translation: Real = Full-frame.
4/3 is, well 4/3. If I were to commit to a big, heavy camera, I’d bite the bullet and go full-frame, not 4/3. for IQ and choice of native lenses and accessories, especially if we’re talking Nikon vs. Olympus. In that matchup, there’s no contest.
Nikon trumps Olympus, 4 times out of 3.
Ulli
12 months ago |FT mains strength is in the quality of the optics.
Even with the E-5, which is 270 gr less heavy then the d700, you will get a more compact and light set when using long focal lenghts. for example you could use the zd 50-200, as you would need a 100-400 range zoom on the d700 to get the same fov. these are quite big differences in weight and size.
I don’t see many advantages in using FF
cbr09
12 months ago |I think non-macro makes sense. A macro lens is necessarily much larger because of the long travel needed and for this format what we need most is a compact lens.
It may also be that if Oly have found a way to focus the 4/3 lenses as fast, or nearly as fast as with phase detection, that they will simply rely on the existing range of high quality large lenses from the 4/3 range for macro etc for the moment – any m43 versions of these would anyway not be much smaller (if at all). This would enable a pro/semipro to switch between E5 and EP3 or EM3 or whatever it is. What they need for the small camera is small lenses for unobtrusive work: the 12 f2 and 50 (or 45) f1.8.
However surely they will also need to replace the 17 – or add a more expensive 17 f1.8 – and produce something like a 25 f1.4 too to make a comprehensive line-up. Even if users are happy with the Pany 20, Oly won’t want to have to recommend this to people.
safaridon
12 months ago |I would find a compact 50/1.7 very appealing for any compact m4/3 system if the price is right and hope Oly or Pany will also make a 85 or 100mm small tele lens for m4/3.
I am surprised at the extent of interest in the 12mm/f1.7 however good quality it may be, given that the prediction is it likely will be very expensive (say $1000) more than 3 times cost of NEX kit 18mm/f2.8 and more than 3 times the size of Pany 14/f2.5 which many on this forum saying is too wide for a kit lens.
I think Oly is responding to many on this forum clamoring for a 12mm/f1.7 but I can’t see much volume potential in sales while the 50mm/1.7 portrait lens should be very popular if anywhere as good quality as the 4/3 version.
If you want wider view why not just use a stiched panarama?
blastingmill
12 months ago |a fast wide angle lens is needed for shooting concerts, events and wide establishing shots on locations with poor ambient light…in situations where a flash is inappropriate.
i have only used a stitched panorama for nature shots, where nothing is moving.
to me, a 12mm f2 is exactly what is missing from olympus’ entire lens range.
safaridon
12 months ago |Yes a very useful fast lens for special occasions as you have mentioned. However the good high ISO performance from new sensors like that in the G3 for m4/3 lesson the need for a faster lens to some degree.
Alfons
12 months ago |It’s not only about sensor noise. Large aperture may help in focusing and make it easier to see through finder. More light to sensor means faster refresh times on EVF, so I think this is nessessary if they want to compete with EVF against SLR and rangefinder technology. Not to mention artistic effect of large aperture. When focused close, you will get bokeh even with wide angles.
frosti7
12 months ago |blastingmill&Alfons, u both raise good points, almost makes me want one too
blastingmill
12 months ago |plus, high ISO is still high ISO, regardless of the camera system, it is still a compromise in image quality compared to shooting at a lower ISO. the 1 stop difference between 2.0 and 2.8 is nice. something overlooked in the ISO battles.
as Alfons mentioned, selective focus and bokeh is also part of the desire for a 12mm f2.
OlyDude
12 months ago |What is really missing is a fast 17mm lens (f/1.7 or f/1.4).
Which will cater to the segment of photographers who will actually benefit a lot from the compact form of Pen cameras namely photo-journalists, event, and street photographers.
Björn Utpott
12 months ago |An fast, f/2.0 12mm lens is certainly useful for the “establishing shots” you mention. I wonder, however, if it’s generally useful enough to carry around as part of a larger kit while traveling. I’d want to take the Lumix 7-14 f/4.0 for sure because when I’m shooting wide I usually want to be wider than 12mm. During a recent trip to India, only 6% of my photos taken with the 7-14 were at sensitivities over ISO400. So I rarely needed anything faster than f/4.0 for my wide angle shots. On the other hand, 82% of my photos taken with the 7-14 were wider than 12mm.
Of course that’s very personal, but an analysis like this helps me to determine my need for any given lens. Usually that means spending a significant portion of my time shooting at the limits of what my equipment is capable of.
Agent00soul
12 months ago |Good strategy. I’m often shooting at night in restaurants, historic centres, churches and such. I have rarely needed anything wider than the 12-60 (on my E-3) so the 12/2.0 seems like a better buy than the 7-14 for me personally. I’m often at a light level where I need f/2 to get hand-holdable shutter speeds (around 1/15 s) at 400 ISO.
blastingmill
12 months ago |I frequently shoot full wide with the 9-18, especially for architecture. I would love to own the 7-14 f4, as I prefer ultra wide. With architecture, the 9-18 is fine, but anything slower than f4, is too slow on subjects like bands and events with movement.
For the focal length, I welcome a medium wide like a 12, for photojournalism with people, as the distortion is not as great. Again, the f2 will be a huge and welcome difference over f4.
juavel
12 months ago |That would be intelligent.
KL32
12 months ago |Canon 50mm 1.8 tends to go for around $100. I doubt the image quality of the Olympus will be that much greater and it’ll cost five times as much. Sounds about right.
tmrgrs
12 months ago |I have the Canon 50/1.8 and it’s not a great lens. For the price, it’s good enough I suppose but there’s no way that a m.Zuiko 50/1.8 wouldn’t be superior in every aspect. The Canon 50/1.4 is probably a better subject for comparison with better/faster AF and much better optics & build quality and it’s selling at almost $400 I think.
The Other Chris
12 months ago |That Canon lens is the same design from the 70s. Olympus needs to design this lens from scratch, to optimize it for the sensor as well as keeping it compact with high image quality.
Chances are they’ll also be using a telephoto design, rather than a relatively simple to design double gauss used in nearly all “standard” focal lengths. Just because the Canon 50/1.8 and the new Olympus have the same focal length doesn’t mean the optical design will be just as easy or inexpensive to make.
Ulli
12 months ago |what do you mean with “telephoto design”, is that the formula they used to make tele’s more compact?
The Other Chris
12 months ago |Yes. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephoto_lens
Ulli
12 months ago |i remember yes…olympus was famous because of their om-300mm 4.5 being very compact.
Chris L.
12 months ago |40mm f1.4 for me, please. I’ve always been more comfortable with an 80mm than a 100mm on a 135 camera. Besides, 40/1.4 is classic “Olympus Pen” – a popular upgrade on the original camera from the stock 38/1.8. Or, if I want to dream big – bring back the 42/1.2. Yeah, I know the FOV is different on the current m43 PEN…
I wonder if, as part of the “Four Thirds” group, Olympus and Panasonic agree to avoid making overlapping products? So we won’t see a 20 from Olympus or a 17 from Panasonic? (They have to make similar kit lenses, of course.)
Paulus
12 months ago |…
Paulus
12 months ago |Dear Admin,
Thank you for your currency forecast.
I guess in your opinion the USD/EUR-exchange rate in late June (the expected release date of the new Olympus M.Zuiko 50mm) will be 1:1.
Actually there is a little gap in between:
http://money.cnn.com/data/currencies/
Thomas
12 months ago |Saying that the lens might cost 400 dollars and/ or 400 euros does not mean he is saying that the exchange rate is 1:1.
Agent00soul
12 months ago |Right. The european prices always include VAT, whereas in the US sales tax is added at the checkout.
Paulus
12 months ago |For a consumer it is only relevant how much to pay in the end of the day (US – price after checkout including sales tax).
As a Professional you may be entitled to deduct input tax depending on the fiscal law of the country.
MikeS
12 months ago |Regardless, he wasn’t implying that the rate would be 1:1. European prices are pretty much the US price with a € instead of a $.
For example, take the GH2 14-140mm kit.
Amazon.com: 1499 dollars
Amazon.de: 1550 euros
bobw
12 months ago |My hope is that these lenses will really showcase the advantages of m4/3 in terms of the system size/performance equation – a proper statement of intent from Olympus. The suggestion by Admin’s sources that the 50/1.8 (or similar) will be ‘very compact’ bodes well in this regard, and I expect that it will be of high quality. It will be interesting to compare it to the NEX 50/1.8 and the NX 60/2.8 Macro. I know we’ve only seen mockups of these, and that the specs of the three lenses will be far from equivalent, but they’re all effectively short tele primes. Both of the APS-C lenses look rather large, at least in the pictures released to date (the NX lens is supposed to be 74 x 84mm). Needless to say, the NX 85/1.4 is even larger.
Incidentally, if it does cost ~$US1000, the 12/2 will want to comprehensively outperform the forthcoming NX 16/2.4 – a fast-ish pancake with equivalent FOV due for release at just $US399.
Agent00soul
12 months ago |I think you can be confident that it will outperform the NX lens. But will it be more than twice as good?
drawingyourattention
12 months ago |I bought the 50mm f2.0 because you can make macro pictures with it, or close-up actually. If it would be faster with focusing, it would be a good (sharp!) portrait lens as well.
If you take of the adapter, and a little of the weight then I would be happy, it doesn’t have to be as small and light as the kitlens…
Alan
12 months ago |Those making the price comparisons with older “35mm” based 50/1.8 lenses are really comparing 2 very different animals.
These older ones are typically fairly symmetrical 6 element designs with quite poor edge performance wide open due to high amounts of coma and other aberrations. The new lens would probably be more like a shorter 85/1.8 lens (or a shorter fatter version of the OM 100/2.8), lenses with more even quality across the field, and probably using higher quality (I.e. more expensive) glasses. Significantly, smaller manufacturing quantities would very much increase the price. So instead of a £100 standard lens, think more of a £350 short telephoto.
Personally, I think that although m43 needs volume sales, it is crying out for quality lenses, and the 12mm and 45/50mm will likely make me go for the format in a much bigger way. (At present I have a GF1/20mm and just dabble).
The Other Chris
12 months ago |This. Yes. +1
Dan
12 months ago |I keep reading that the price is high compared to the Nikon and Canon, but keep in mind two things: The Olympus will most likely be smaller and if the Olympus produces excellent bokeh ( which Olympus is known for) the price will be justified. The Nikon and Canon 50s all produce pretty rough bokeh making them less than ideal for portraiture under most situations. That why most people spend over a grand for thr 85s. If Olympus delivers wide open goodness, I will happily pay the rumored price tag.
Anonymous
12 months ago |wow, i didn’t knew that. very interesting