(FT4) New Panasonic 45-175mm m43 lens to be announced soon?

FacebookShare

The image on top shows the Olympus 40-150mm lens against Panasonic wants to compete with the new 45-175mm.

I got this rumor from three different soruces. According to them Panasonic developed a new 45-175mm m43 zoom lens. Apparently the main characteristic of the lens are two:
1) Extremely compact design
2) Cheap in price
It will compete against the Olympus 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 which is priced at around $220 (250 Euro). You can check the price of the Olympus lens at Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay. But the Panasonic lens should be more compact than the Olympus. What I don’t knwo yet if that is the lens that will be announced in late August or not. Hope to get some more news about that soon!

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

FacebookShare
  • Woodent

    they will also have to make it stabilized. I wonder how they will manage to do so without compromizing on quality beyond Oly’s quite good 40-150

    • mpgxsvcd

      Panasonic knows that they must keep selling their new cameras for the format to survive. Those new cameras are all very small. Therefore, they need smaller lenses to still achieve a small total package.

      Unfortunately, that means the lenses that we really need are put on the back burner.

      There is a big difference between small and pocket-able. There is no way any mid to long range zoom is ever going to be pocket-able. Yet that is what the point and shoot consumers will expect. I don’t know why they would ever consider making this lens. It won’t help them sell cameras like the GF3.

      • mahler

        The big mistake is that they target the point & shoot consumers at all with a camera system with interchangeable lenses.

        The target group, who wants pocketable cameras, has likely only a small interest to invest in lenses. For them a small m4/3 camera, with fixed collapsible zoom lens is probably a better choice.

        To me, the miniaturization trends, we see with the G3 and GF3, which had already lead to a degradation in usablity, are the wrong way to go with m4/3 as an interchangeable lens camera system.

        Now Panasonic annoys many of us, with developing another superfluous lens.

  • Agrivar

    why do these 2 companies keep rehashing lenses? there’s already the 45-200 and now they want to produce a 45-175. Why? Better to focus on filling the gaps that still exist. like the bright standard zoom, bright wide zoom, bright tele zoom. More bright primes like perhaps a 85mm?

    • Mike

      +1

    • ha

      Oh, more compact an cheaper double zoom kits…

    • Duarte Bruno

      Why? Because it stinks! Like in Monty Pythons deadly joke.
      The 45-200 should have never gone beyond 150mm as I’d be better with digital zoom.
      I really welcome this Panasonic kit if they manage to sell it for less than an extra 100€ on kit.

    • New design = cheaper manufacturing cost.. last years trend
      Has nothing to do with customer demand.

    • Because they don’t care. They redid the normal 14-45 zoom too. What a waste of resources!

      I’m really sick of Panasonic lenses. The only one worth buying is the 20mm.

    • Anonymous

      for real +1! they need to make larger apertures and stronger zooms.

  • Maczon

    That would make sense if it would be bright. :/

    • Agrivar

      exactly ! Not the same old 3.5-5.6 or whatever..

    • oluv2002

      the 7-14 is a real gem too! it outclasses most other superwideangle zooms that i know!

  • Will

    Ha this will annoy those after the fast zoom that apparently should be ocming. Prime man myself but there are so many options for slow multi purpose zooms now. Boring.

  • “why do these 2 companies keep rehashing lenses? ” – I absolutly agree with you! and instead the foolish priced Fisheye nobody really needs, why the hell they did not already develop instead the wide-bright zoom 2.2-3.3 12mm – … ?

  • Agrivar

    just count the # of standard kit zooms they have between them.. 14-45, 14-42 from panny, 14-42 MkI, Mk II, IIR. 5 zooms that cover the same range.. something’s messed up with their product development teams..

  • Redkite

    What a waste of effort. I have the 45-200 and wouldn’t need or buy this lens.

  • I hope this rumor is wrong. Such a lens would be designed specifically for the GF3, a body too small to accommodate the 45-200. Compact + cheap = relatively poor IQ.

  • what a pitty,
    i hoped for a 35-100 BRIGHT telezoom… not this standard tele again :/
    Its cool that its compact, yea, but i rather buy a bright tele then this :/

  • Lets politely say that I am perplexed by this one.
    The current 45-200 is a perfectly fine tele kit zoom.

    • Nick Clark

      lol nicely worded ;)

      idiots.

      • In abstraction to price/value/expectations, nobody call them names when they produce lens such as the 7-14, the 14-140, the 1.7/20mm, the 1.4/25, the macro 45 or the 100-300.

        I am just not convinced that currently its the best idea in the “affordable segment”. But I could be wrong.

        • Nick Clark

          I own and love the 7-14mm, 14mm and 20mm – but they’re still idiots :)

    • ha

      > The current 45-200 is a perfectly fine tele kit zoom.

      Compared with Oly 40-150 it’s bigger. Esp. diameter hurts on GF2/3 and even on G1 there’s not much room between grip & lens

      Recent Panasonic mail line releases (GF2/3,G3) where all about size, so lenses have to keep up…

      • Yes I hear you.
        In my mind however, if I ever get any of those two GFs, zooms are the least of my worries.

        …admittedly, I am a G1/GH2 user…

        • lily

          Agreed. I’m planning on getting a GF3, and it will be a pancake-only camera for me. Otherwise, what’s the point of it being so small?

      • Miroslav

        Exactly. Add to that that the competition is offering dual lens kits, while they are not, and you’ll see why is this FT4 likely to become FT6. 45-200 for enthusiasts, 45-175 for Joe Average. No need to burn down nearby Panasonic factory because of that ;). While on that subject … where’s my bright wide :) ?

    • Duarte Bruno

      I’ll politely tell you that either you have an ubber copy of this lens or you have never used it beyond 150mm because beyond that it is a joke and it’s not even a classic one.
      I profiled one for PhotoAcute and the lens would give up on sharpness @ ~120mm… :(

      • It is not a stellar $2000+ zoom, we all have to agree on that.
        That said, I never had any problems showing my letter sized prints @200mm.

        • Duarte Bruno

          Perhaps. Perhaps we could all do with 6MP, but the issue is the lens was under-designed and is unacceptably soft. I expect the new one to work A LOT better.

  • Miroslav

    Obviously, that’s supposed to be a new kit lens meant for dual lens kits. Maybe joined by reworked collapsible 14-42?

    Nothing that would excite 43rumors crowd, though :).

    • Mr. Reeee

      What do you mean that this lens doesn’t excite the 43rumors crowd?!?!?
      We already have our pitchforks and torches and are set to storm the castle! ;-)

  • Ignacio

    Maybe panasonic phasing out the 45-200 in favor of a new optical formula and more compact lens :B

    i like the old panny 45 200

  • mFT ruins their advantage of being 2 manufactures that could (theoretically) push the system…
    They don’t. They compete more against each other than against Sony.

    • Not entirely correct.
      The recent prime announcements from both manufacturers demonstrate a degree of cooperation between them, with the future of the mount in mind. They seem to brutally compete against each other at entry level, but share a more common view at the higher end (at least as far as lenses are concerned).

    • bright wide angle

      +1.
      Sony/Samsung is just laughing at them…

      If they want small lenses for GF3 they could have released another budget pancake.

      • An0n

        Pablo?! Is that you?

  • Strange rumor – the Olympus 40-150 is really good within 40 – 100. Doesn,t have OIS though like the 45 – 200 which on the other hand is quite soft. Panasonic may want to ditch that and replace with something better. I have a G3 and an Olympus 40-150 – Even if there is an OIS version I would not change unless it is optically better than the OLy lens.

  • Duarte Bruno

    If it’s sharp (and I mean it should be in a whole different league than the 45-200mm) and it’s cheaper and it’s lighter I’ll have 2…
    The 45-200mm is too big, too expensive and too soft! I bet that outside of kit Panasonic is probably selling it 1 in 1000. For me it’s not even worth 100€ let alone the price they ask for it.

    • A sharp 100-175mm range would be nice.

      The 40-150mm is a tough competition. Sales drive this lens down to pretty cheap levels. I got mine for $112 from staples, and I’ve seen it for $150 a couple times afterwards. 40-100mm approaches prime-sharp levels.

      Still I don’t see a good cheap zoom as a bad thing. I’d rather have this available, than nothing new at all. Can’t assume it’s taking away from them producing something else yet.

    • Milo Hess

      The 45-200 too soft? I find the exact opposite. It is very sharp….in fact I use it on occasion for photojournalism.
      Not to mention the fact it a great value for the $.

  • jammur

    Swing and a miss. Bright zooms, please.
    …or at least tell us why you cannot make one.

  • Brod1er

    My preference would be a small fast tele prime. 70mm f2-2.8, OIS, collapsible, max 200g. This would extend the existing range of primes nicely and fit well with smaller bodies.

    • Henrik

      I’m in your boat. Even though, if you’d make it 1,8/85 OIS, i’d also help rowing. But such a lens i don’t expect any more.

      • Wish for OIS if you like, but don’t expect it!

    • nice suggestion, much better then all the boring zooms.
      But its probably not on the agenda of either olympus or panasonic.
      I think i continue my plans for gettin a mf 105 mm

  • Henrik

    Another dull low-specced run-of-the-mill cheapo.

    The lenses Panasonic and sometimes Oly churn out go all the wrong way, who’s has drawn that roadmap. Even though i admit some feverish anticipation towards the next rounds of “new” standard kit zooms.

  • Mark

    Maybe this will be a HG or SHG.
    I have the M. Zuiko 40-150mm and love it. :) So I wont need this one.

  • eM

    Completely useless, I bought my practically new 45-200 for about $200…

  • One of the best rumors of the year, panasonic clearly marches into right direction making lens much smaller then Sony, panasonic will always stay competetive only because such lens as 45-175, and primes like PL25, and will be sucssefull even thou the sensor is 2008 technology

  • grzybu

    If it will gave similar image quality, size and price to 40-150 but with O.I.S then it may be interesting option. Especially for dual kits.

    • WT21

      It already exists — it’s called the Panny 45-200.

      • grzybu

        It’s bigger and more expensive with in best case similar image quality.

      • Duarte Bruno

        It’s not actually. The 45-200mm doesn’t:
        * sell at kit price (even when included on a kit)
        * come close to the m43 zeitgeist in matter of size
        * look any good past 150mm.

        I really come to think that all these people defending the 45-200 never took the time to see how badly it performs beyond 120mm… :(

        And if you still wonder, then wonder no more: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic45-200f4-56g/tloader.htm

        • WT21

          I had the 45-200. I also had the Oly 40-150. Not that much of a difference. The 45-200 is bigger, but not THAT much bigger (still can’t fit it in your pocket!). The 45-200 is very cheap street/used price. Oly’s 40-150 is a cheap piece of junk. Nasty plastics. Very stiff zoom (supposedly to retard zoom creep — hard to operate). I had it for a couple of days, thinking it would be better than my 14-150, but returned it because of build quality, and results were not noticeably better. If Panny is aiming to make a lens SMALLER and CHEAPER than the Oly 40-150? That’s scary.

          Finally, we know nothing of the ACTUAL performance of this new, rumored lens, so we should be careful comparing it to known lenses. For all we know, it could have a smaller f/stop (to make the lens smaller) and just as poor performance.

          But the question is — do we REALLY need another zoom lens (let alone a cheap one).

          How about a native 100 or 150mm bright prime? Now that’s something I could use. How about a native 100mm 2.0 or 2.8? That’d be cool and more useful, IMO.

  • WT21

    MORE CHEAP ZOOMS!
    MORE CHEAP ZOOMS!
    MORE CHEAP ZOOMS!
    MORE CHEAP ZOOMS!

    HOORAY!

  • Mr. Reeee

    Oh joy! Another junky kit zoom!
    M4/3 is choking on them already!

    Hopefully, this is only a rumor.

    If the thing is supposedly compact and collapseable, will it have OIS? All of Panasonic’s current crop of OIS lenses seem to be bulkier than similar, non-stabilized lenses. That is, unless Panny has managed to redesign and miniaturize OIS, which would really benefit all of us.

    @WT21 Exactly. There already is a 45-200m. +100

    • Duarte Bruno

      Actually I hope it’s the opposite. Junky kit zoom is the current 45-200mm. I hope it dies of natural death when this new one comes out…

  • maxter

    a cheap and small 14-100something I might be tempted although I’m not much of an zoom shooter anyways. For me it really only makes sense as a smaller replacement for the 45-200 zoom lens

  • harryz

    Hey, Panasonic!
    WTF?
    Where are fast zooms?

    • M

      If you want bright zooms and quality optics, buy a DSLR.

      Panoly have no bodies (yet) that would be able to support such lenses.

      • Agrivar

        Not true. The 4/3 oly 14-54 mk2 fits, balances and works very well with my GH2.

        • Boooo!

          I have a 14-54 and a (borrowed :( ) 12-60, and both of them are – IMHO – awkward to use on my E-510, which is a little bit larger than your GH2. On my E-3, they are both very good, balance-wise.

          The 14-54 is about 450g, the 12-60 is close to 600g.

          The GH2 is 450g, the E-510 is 470g.

          The 45-200 is 380g, the Oly 40-150 is 190g.

          The Oly PENs and Pana GFs are slightly above 300g.

          As soon as the lens overweighs the body, you’re in trouble with the grip, ergonomics and general usability because the centre of mass is outside the camera, tilting it forward and straining your wrist.

          ideally, the lens is no more than 2/3 of the body’s weight. That’s probably the reason for this redesigned Panasonic lens – I’d say it’s in the 200g ballpark, and can thus be paired with the 300g bodies.

          So yeah, I’d second the thought above – it’s very unlikely that there will be any bright zooms when the current goal of both companies is miniaturization and targetting the “second system” or “P&S upgraders” crowds. The current crop of m4/3 bodies, save for the GH2, which I’d honestly like to have, seems more like a “prime” platform. The zooms are going to be quite bad and slow simply because of the weight and pocketability.

          Once the entry-level gets taken care of, I’d say we’re going to have some much bigger and heavier pro bodies, and glass to match it.

  • Thomas S

    Maybe they could go to f/5.6 – f/8 and make them even smaller (wait a minute, Oly did that already…). The next step would be using the body cap as a lens, for ultimate compactness. ;-)

    Oly and Pana listen up: WE WANT FAST LENSES! Well, to be fair, we’ve got our share recently: 25/1.4, 12/2.0, 45/1.8.

    • You can, its called pinhole lens

  • Steve

    Looks like we may also see a new smaller 14-42mm as well.

  • Unfortunately another slow zoom that (again) overlaps in range with existing lenses. Boooooring…

  • NickNeeds

    Maybe it will be tiny, cheap, and take amazing photos. No one will know until a year after it is released and it finally starts shipping. :)

  • twoomy

    As others have posted, BLAH! BORING! Well, I guess that any new lens adds to the system, but that rumored 12-50 (a bright normal zoom) is much more desperately needed than yet another mid-range cheap telephoto.

    • Martin

      > SNIP… rumored 12-50 (a bright normal zoom) is much more desperately needed than yet another mid-range cheap telephoto.

      Please do not confuse ‘is needed’ with ‘I want it’. If some 43rumors readers want fast zooms, it really does not mean that there is a GENERAL demand for such lenses. Remember what is the basic philosophy behind the m43 system? I’ll remind you: interchangeable system in SMALL package! And guess what.. Fast zooms will not be small by any means!

      Even though I understand such demands and that it would be nice to have a wider choice, it is a bit absurd to shout at the m43 companies ‘Fast zooms are needed!!!’ when you have actually no idea if it’s not only you who needs it..

      Of course, as the system will be maturing, a general need for such lenses will become a reality, but as for now it is still more useful to choose a DSLR if you need big lenses than bitching about their absence from what is basically a SMALL system.

      • Esa Tuunanen

        > Remember what is the basic philosophy behind the m43 system?
        Looks like pretending to have endless supply of P&S upgrading average consumers and permanent lack of competition.

        Don’t confuse advertising of small to real pocketability:
        Cameras with sensor of this size will never be really pocketable except with pancake primes so this obsessive making of only unergonomically small bodies and slow low quality lenses isn’t good plan to get this system going forward fast enough to keep its headstart into fully digital mirrorless era when competition really heats up.
        If you want small easily carried pocketable SYSTEM then you need still smaller sensor and if it doesn’t fit into pocket then precise size isn’t anymore so important.

        Sony’s NEX came later and notice how well it has sold despite of very lacking line up of lenses, which are mostly big because of APS-C sensor.
        And with their religiously big brand names Canon and Nikon will have easy time for grabbing lots of future P&S upgraders when they come out with their mirrorless systems and from current mirrorless users big masses of average consumers probably have only kit lens (just like average DSLR owning consumers) making them prone to jump the ship easily according to fashion.

        So while targeting only the lowest end in new markets might sell lot in short term thanks to little competition its long term effect is very unsure and with soon three years from announcement it would be time to start diversifying system because you shouldn’t trust competition to play dumb forever. (though there are lot of ex-companies who did that… but lacked market monopoly for making that plan viable)

  • NativeFloridian

    Well, I’m actually excited about this rumor!… please don’t roast me. I am probably a more casual user than most on the forum here. I primarily take pictures of kids and family. I invested in the 20mm lens to get good pictures indoors. The only lens I’m truly missing is a telephoto for photographing the kids while playing outside (tennis, soccer, etc). Since I would primarily be shooting in sunlight, I don’t need the lens to be super fast. I’ve been eyeing the Oly 40-150 but have been put off by its size when attached to a PEN. If Panny can truly make a more compact zoom I am in for one.

    • Forget it: it won’t be smaller than Oly, because it must have OIS, so it’ll be larger.

      Suggestion: buy the new Olympus 45mm (or use the kit lens @ 45mm, if you have it and don’t mind its low brightness)

  • Olympius

    “I got this rumor from three different soruces. According to them Panasonic developed a new 45-175mm m43 zoom lens. Apparently the main characteristic of the lens are two:
    1) Extremely compact design
    2) Cheap in price”

    Makes perfect sense to me, it really does. Panasonic and Olympus make a TON of money selling to entry level users, as that’s where all the growth in this market is. If they could make money having a 5-500mm f.1.2 zoom, we’d have ten of them by now, but they can’t, so we don’t have any.

    No doubt Panasonic wants to follow Olympus’ strategy of the twin kit lens deals, but they need a really cheap, small telephoto zoom to pull that off, so that’s what we are getting. I hope to see a new, smaller, 14-45 to go along with it, hopefully of a collapsible design like the Olympus 14-42’s.

    Both Olympus and Panasonic tried, and failed, to market DSLR’s and high-end lenses FIRST with their E-1, L1 strategy. As a result of that fiasco, there are hardly any DSLR’s left between the two companies. They are not going to make that mistake again, that’s for sure. You can make a ton more money in the camera business selling cheap little 45-175 zooms than you can selling 300mm f.2 telephotos.

    The reason why both Panny and Oly are “dumbing down” their cameras into the realm of point & shoots is that they both know that’s where the money is. The smaller, cheaper, and better they can make those little micro 4/3 cameras, the more they will sell.

    But I guess, according to the folks who post to this forum, that Panasonic and Olympus are only allowed to make products that cater to the enthusiast market, otherwise they are complete failures. Good thing none of you run a camera business, as you would all be already bankrupt.

    Olympius

    • safaridon

      +1

      Note the new 45-175 lens reportedly will be smaller than the Oly 40-150 which was a remake of earlier 4/3 lens. I have a very small Pentax 50-200 lens which is not much larger than my normal FF 50mm lens so the Pany version for m4/3 should be even smaller and less diameter. Only hope it comes with OIS. With the excellent high ISO performance of latest Pany cameras like the G3 IS may not even be necessary as one would be using a shutter speed of at least 1/100 ft/sec to 1/500 ft/sec anyway?

      Until this news I also was very tempted to buy the inexpensive Oly 40-150 for my GF1. Optically it should be good as is easier to design for higher quality with the reduced focal length at the tele end but expect this lens will have cheaper plastic mount but I hope they use a metal mount for all their new lenses. I also agree it is very likely that Pany will come out with smaller collapsible version of its kit zoom to match Olys size which is a selling point to many. As others have mentioned double kit cameras have become very popular in most countries so this move makes a lot of sense not in lieu of the fast zoom and primes to come but in addition.

    • Agrivar

      then.. explain why there are 5 14-4x zooms between the both of them. WTH needs 5 run of the mill kit zooms? isnt that wasting R&D $$ that can be used to R&D better lenses? I really think their product management is screwed up.

  • Luke

    Boo! The 45-200 is excellent (for it’s price point……which is already cheap). This lens has no reason to exist. I hope they choke on it.

    • Duarte Bruno

      You surely haven’t handled one (I’ve profiled one) and you don’t go the same places I do…
      like here: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic45-200f4-56g/tloader.htm
      It’s the 45-200mm that will no longer have reason to exist. Just watch!

      • Luke

        I’ve handled one plenty….and I use it quite a bit. I don;t look at graphs and charts…..I look at photos. The ones I take with it are sharp and have nice contrast. The only lens I use more often is the excellent 20mm. I would love to have a bright high performance zoom, but I don’t see the point of putting out a marginally better version of something that already performs adequately well for its’ price.

  • Mr. Reeee

    Zoom Schmoom! Let’s hope Voigtländer brings out a few more native M4/3 primes!

    Let junk lenses for mall crawlers finance better bodies for us!

    • TR

      Yes, I’m hoping for a 17mm 1.4 from Voiglander

    • Milo Hess

      I agree. Not sure what Duarte is smoking….Seems like a vendetta against the 45-200. Meanwhile no editor has ever complained when they publish my images. LOL

      • Duarte Bruno

        I don’t smoke mate! But the copy I tried to profile for PhotoAcute was so badly soft that they refused my profile thinking I had made a serious focusing mistake… :O
        I lost a lot of time on that lens and I though I indeed was dealing with a bad copy, that was until I saw SLRGear’s sharpness graph. I don’t know what they were smoking either because their graph reflects what I saw.
        If your copy gives you enough per pixel sharpness to publish prints all the best for you, but I do admit I hate that lens like the plague and I would never keep it should it belong to me and not to a co-worker…

  • Alexander

    why 40-150 when there ist 15-150 with the same size???

  • shep

    The most important new thing here is “the Panasonic lens should be more compact than the Olympus.”
    Up to now, Olympus has been streets ahead with compact lenses. This rumor suggests that Panasonic is getting the idea at long last.
    Unlike Sony, who appear focused on credit card-size cameras with Nikon-size lenses.

    • WT21

      Yeah, but what if it’s f/7.2 at the long end to get smaller!!!

    • Mr. Reeee

      Compact lenses do have their downside, as in lower image quality. Panasonic’s lenses have had better IQ, on the whole, than Olympus’ lenses. Aside from the 9-18mm, the only compelling Olympus lens is the 12mm, the rest have been middling.

      So, now Panasonic is joining the downward spiral?

      For me, I’d choose a lens with better IQ, regardless of size…. within reason, of course. ;-)

      • WT21

        I agree. I just noticed that though I have an EP3, I only have the Oly 14-150 (I find, for a superzoom, this is more compelling than Panny’s when I have IBIS). Other than that, it’s mostly legacy and Panny, and the next lens I’m looking forward to is the 25/1.4.

      • shep

        You can get some superb Olympus 4/3 (not M4/3) optics with big apertures for your M4/3, if size is no object. There’s a place for everything. But we can’t have small size, huge apertures, light weight, and low price, all at once!

  • Robbie

    the ZD 40-150 and MZD 40-150 are really excellent cheap lenses
    no wonder Panasonic wants to have a share… but why now

  • MichaelKJ

    Given Pany’s recent small cameras, it had to develop smaller zoom lenses. As others have noted, quality and the ability to have acceptable OIS are question marks. If Pany can make a very compact 45-175, I assume it is developing a smaller 14-42.

  • MP Burke

    If you look at the test data for the 45-200mm lens on sites like Photozone or Diwa labs, it looks relatively weak at the 200mm end and overall a worse performer than lenses like the 7-14mm and 20mm f1.7.
    One of my major interests is the photography of dragonflies, which will often be perched some distance away, such that a tele-zoom can often be more useful than a macro lens. Thus I would welcome another tele-zoom, provided it with high resolution at the long end and at f5.6, combined with O.I.S.

    • Agrivar

      I doubt this will be optically superior to the 45-200. It’s meant to be cheaper n smaller. For the G3 & GF3. So cheaper=crappy IQ

    • Buy the 75-300 then.

    • MichaelKJ

      Based on posts on dpreview, the 45-200 varies quite a bit in quality. I’m very happy with mine and consider it a bargain. Michael Reichmann on LuLa made this comment in his review of the GH1:

      “The other lens which works well with the GH1, and once the firmware is updated autofocuses during video, is the 45-200mm f/4 – f/5.6. This is the lens that I’ve used more than any other on the G1, and now on the GH1. Because of its equivalent 400mm at the long end, and very narrow depth of field at wide apertures, it continues to be a favourite.”

  • aaiek

    The positive from this may be that Panasonic has realized that one of the main attractions to M43 is size and weight. Many M43 users steer towards compact prime lenses to reduce weight and size. Realistically an Ep-whatever with a 45-200 zoom attached is very similar in size to a DSLR.

    Whilst it’s main competition (Sony) continues to struggle with manufacturing or obtaining lenses shorter that the length of a toilet paper roll, the M43 makers try to reduce size of components. M43 struggle to compete in image quality with compact larger sensor cameras, but in overall package size they win.

  • Panasonic = confused

    Small compact zoom is actually exactly what M4/3 needs. Only if they could make a 14-42mm super compact lens (perhaps thin as 20mm). To make the camera pocketable. That would be amazing and put the M4/3 exactly where is should be, professional camera in your pocket.
    14-150mm and 20mm are the only lenses I need anywhere.

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