(FT5) The Kit lens! M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 ED.
The kit lens will be the 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 ED zoom lens.
It is very compact for carrying (around 4cm when restricted).
The exact name is M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 ED
Should come in two colors (silver and black?)…
Bu
5 years ago |f3.5-5.6? So much for speed…
Simon
5 years ago |Why not a 12-28mm f2.8-3,5? The popularity of the Pana LX-3 showed that consumers wish to have fast lenses, even if it has a limited reach. Or what about a decent 14-120 zoom? Nobody really needs yet ANOTHER slow kit lens with a boring standard zoom range. Another point is when I buy a small camera like that I don’t want to lug around tons of additional accessories (viewfinder, flash) and lenses.
Chris
5 years ago |Hey, its a kit lens. F3.5 is better than F4. And yes, it would be nice to see some F2 or better stuff on the 9th.
pebachter
5 years ago |f5.6 on the “long” end. Not really something to spend much money for.
Traciatim
5 years ago |That’s just the kit lens, I’m sure more will be coming for the m4/3 format.
Ranger 9
5 years ago |Yawn, another Micro Four Thirds “pinhole” lens.
Yes, Chris, f/3.5 is better than f/4 — but not by much! Even the rumored 17mm f/2.8 ‘pancake’ lens doesn’t do much for the indoor/low-light photographer.
When is some lens maker going to have the guts to step outside everyone else’s footprints and bring out some lenses with more aggressive specs? Adapters for “big” Four Thirds, M-mount, and C-mount lenses do help fill the gap a bit, but none of them really let us cash in on all the advantages Micro Four Thirds is supposed to have.
Peter F
5 years ago |Is that VF slip onto the hotshoe? Or, does it pop-up like some flashes do?
admin
5 years ago |On hot shoe!
pasha
5 years ago |it would be much bigger if it were say 2.8-3.5.
there is 14-35 f2 lens, which cost 2k$:))
Chez Wimpy
5 years ago |“When is some lens maker going to have the guts to step outside everyone else’s footprints and bring out some lenses with more aggressive specs?”
A *4cm* long standard zoom is… non-aggressive?!?
“none of them really let us cash in on all the advantages Micro Four Thirds is supposed to have.”
the only advantage it has is size. Looks like they are going straight for the jugular.
zuiko
5 years ago |well, the original pen lenses are adaptable as well, so there will be nice compact 80mm f1.4, 85mm f1.2 and 120mm f1.5 equivalent lenses. But we’ll just have to a bit more patient! the camera isn’t there yet, and there will be more to come. At least some f2 lenses I suppose. First very compact, then a bit larger. They learned the hard way with the 4/3 system, where they started out large and went small afterwards! Designing a good compact fast lens has never been easy!
morgan
5 years ago |Is that the only kit available? Or will there be an option with the pancake 2.8 or no lens at all? If it’s only the zoom, then that’s a non-starter for me, at least at the 1k pricepoint. $600 maybe, but not 1k. This is a little depressing for me, even though the 2.8 is no speed demon, it’s usable. But now, I don’t know…
tk
5 years ago |original reports said kit would come with two lens so I assume the pancake and this one.
good review from dpreview for this lens
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_14-42_3p5-5p6_o20/
morgan
5 years ago |Thanks for the link TK.
chris
5 years ago |do you mean that they will deliever both (!) lenses together with the body…
or do you mean there will be 2 different combinations: zoom + body and prime + body as a combination?
bish
5 years ago |@tk
actually that’s not the same lens, it will be a m4/3 version with the same zoom-range, but it’s not that lens. but i assume the qualitiy will match the original 4/3 lens.
Bu
5 years ago |The very notion of kit lenses needs to be redefined. So much time and effort into developing this product, but so little attention to detail by offering at least one fast lens f1.4 or better. Appreciate the need for small, but certain product development decisions really do conflict with the wisdom behind the product’s ability.
Rob-L
5 years ago |Well, that kit lens isn’t going to set the world on fire, but the specs are fairly typical for a kit lens. Olympus, Nikon and Canon (and others) also have short zoom, mid-range kit lenses that start at around f/3.5 as well so I don’t find this lens disappointing, just typical.
Also, many companies offer different kits of the same camera, body, single lens, two lenses. I’m guessing the E-P1 will be a similar case.
tk
5 years ago |@bash
understand its not the same, but I bet it is pretty darn close.
@ chris
from a previous post see note 7. percentages state accuracy of prediction.
1) 12MP sensor (effective megapixel) 99%
2) BodyIS 99%!
3) 3.0 LCD and no swivel 85%
4) New liveview which works very well with the BodyIS 99%
5) ISO 200-3200 50% . Other option is 100-3200 50%. May this will depends from the final firmware.
6) Two colours – Silver (with black parts) and White/beige 99%
7) 17mm 2.8 and 14-42mm lens 99%
8 ) The 17mm will come in two colors (silver and black?) 60%
9) One more lens to come? Maybe a second zoom? 35%
10) Same autofocus as the Panasonic G1 50%
11) Video 720p ( Video Record can use 6 ART Fliters, and there is audio recording) 99%
12) Size 120×70×35mm 70%
13) SD/SDHC cards
14) The E-P1 can control an external flash (the FL-XXR)
15) 990$ body+kit lens 70%
16) New converter 43->M43 (with autofocus with normal 43?) 90%
17) external flash FL-xxR ? 75%
UPDATE:
18) 17mm external viewfinder 70%
Rob-L
5 years ago |Bu,
Kit lens typically means “starter lens”. I’m sure more lenses with better specs will be coming in the future. And remember, we’ll know more on Tuesday. Don’t get too down yet!
tk
5 years ago |sorry, that should say @bish not bash:)
Peter
5 years ago |Just what the world needs, another boring, slow, 14-40ish zoomlens.
While I really like the idea of mFT (when traveling on a bicycle size and weight are important), I won’t buy until there are some nice lenses available. Like a high quality, wider/faster zoom (think 12-30mm f/4) and/or some f/2 primes in the 12 – 60mm range.
Bu
5 years ago |Rob, trying to be optimistic. Just seems a shame that a new system with so much potential is being let down by adhering to the status quo instead of actually being different and delivering a higher standard. Sure it needs to be affordable and for most the kit lens will be more than adequate, but for those of us waiting patiently… sigh. Here’s to hoping that a lens faster than f1.4 or even f2 isn’t too far away…
morgan
5 years ago |I’m much more a prime lens guy, but I have to say, when I shoot my canon 30D with the 17-55 2.8 IS, it’s pretty awesome. But I use my R-D1 and film rangefinders way more, and just love primes. What I’d really love is fast EFL 28, 50, 85 – 1.4 or faster and call it a day.
Bu
5 years ago |And with that OVF, where do you place the flash… Far too fidgety.
JD
5 years ago |*Kit Lenses – Normally Slow*
I have no problem with Olympus starting with a “standard” kits lens. As <Rob-L said, its seems Canon/Nikon/Pansonic (except for GH-1) all bundle fairly slow lenses with their “kits”. It makes some sense that you want to put out a price-competitive product, and fast glass seems to cost a lot. Take the 35-100mm F2 Olympus four thirds lens, it’s lovely but it cost me more than any camera I have ever purchased.
*LX3 as Comparison*
Simon brings up a good point about the LX3 having fast glass and being very popular. However, and somebody correct me if I’m wrong, with the larger sensor of the E-P1, a 24mm-60mm (35mm equiv) F2 lens like the LX3 has would be pretty large and hefty, probably not the image Olympus wants to promote for their flagship small and light camera.
*four thirds for fast glass*
.
Also, if the rumors of full autofocus for all four thirds lenses (with adapter) are true, then Olympus may feel that for now if somebody wants a 24-120mm (35mm equiv) lens they should get the 12-60mm four thirds, or another faster option is the 14-35mm F2 four thirds. I am crossing my fingers on this one b/c I would love to use all my old glass with full autofocus on the m43 system, as my Pany G1 cannot
*economy*
With the current global economy I can’t fault Olympus if they had the choice of offering a $700-$1000 “kit” versus a $1400-$1800 “kit” [I don’t know what the actual price will be, that is simply my guess). Hopefully this camera will appeal to camera buyers of all levels, i.e. beginners seeking a compact high quality solution and “pros” seeking a small take-everywhere companion to a larger DSLR. Since micro four thirds has the widest legacy lens compatibility that I know of, I am not worried if it takes Olympus a while to put out some new fast glass for the system.
*I feel your pain*
.
Sure, I feel like a lot of you guys that want to see some amazingly fast glass at a low price, but lets give Olympus some time to announce their system and develop their lens roadmap before we call the system dead
*
response*
Thoughts???
Olf
5 years ago |Just to say that Panasonic has a 20mm f1.7 pancake in its roadmap… (and a 45mm f2.8 macro)
Godot
5 years ago |If Olympus hopes to snag some Panasonic G1/GH1 users looking for a second body, they’d better offer a body-only kit.
The size reduction is nice to have, but a second slow zoom with almost the exact same range as the G1 kit lens will not be welcome to me. The 17/2.8 is somewhat more interesting, but something I’d rather have the option of buying on its own (after waiting for the price on the Panasonic 20/1.7, a much more desirable lens in theory, but who knows how much more expensive).
Mike
5 years ago |If it’s true that will be silver/black option of Olympus mFT lenses then I’m practically sure of Olympus camera body colours – silver /black and fully black finish (so wait until 16th). Btw the optical view finder is pretty big so I’m expecting high quality framing through this one.
Jón
5 years ago |Well, it seems that Olympus is aiming for compactness at all cost. The 14-42 is 2cm shorter than the Panasonic 14-45, which is about 6cm… Not bad…
Rokubungi
5 years ago |I just don’t get people complaining about relatively slow compact zoom as a kit. E-P1 with 14-42/3.5-5.6 is equivalent to LX3 with 28-84/F1.8-2.8 lens in similarly sized package, but much faster focusing and the main thing – ability to change lenses, so you’re no longer restricted with range.
wimdows
5 years ago |If you are coming from an SLR 3.5-5.6 seems decent enough. If you are spoiled by some great fast compact lenses (as are to be found on the Digilux 1, the C8080, and the GX100) 3.5-5.6 is quite a big step-down.
Ah well, there is always the higher ISO’s, I guess. No such thing on the older compacts.
Bu
5 years ago |That 2 cm reduction is size is great, but why bother with such a boring lens. So many have been and still are excited about the compact body, shame Olympus has stunned that anticipation with a rather drab off the shelf offering with the kit lens.
Chris
5 years ago |If the kit lens is good enough there is not much desire to upgrade. BTW, do realise that 4/3 with F3.5 is still nearly a stop more light than 1/1.6″ with F2.
That said, I think that wide and fast is the real area of advantage for µ4/3, so I expect that these will appear. I expect a string of primes will be announced, some of which will be very fast.
Something like a 10-30 F2.8 and a 25-100 F2.8 might suit µ4/3 as faster zoom lenses. But.. these two lenses don’t suit this particular camera and the statement Olympus is trying to make.
brew
5 years ago |tk says:
“Original reports said kit would come with two lens so I assume the pancake and this one.
good review from dpreview for this lens:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_14-42_3p5-5p6_o20 ”
Yes good review about an average lens!
cherrytree
5 years ago |Some very funny comments on this article. People clearly don’t understand how big the lenses would have to be to make the lens faster and keep quality.
forester
5 years ago |Does anyone know how much the 17mm 2.8 is going to be. Is there a chance at the 17mm being sold in a kit with the lens? I how that view finder comes with it, and not a $150 extra.
Chris
5 years ago |The 10-30 and 25-100 mentioned above would be reasonable size lenses, but not prohibitive. It’s just that they would be big enough that they don’t really match the E-P1, especially not for launch when Oly are trying to make a point about how small the camera is.
Erik from Sweden
5 years ago |A faster zoom would obviously be longer and more expensive. The former is bad for the Micro format, the latter is bad for a kit lens.
I wish they put some effort in making faster primes in the 12-70 range, though, like the Lumix 20/1.7. And compact ultrawide primes (which may have to be slower).
Agent00soul
5 years ago |Yes, as much as I want a faster zoom, I think it’s a wise move to go for a maximally compact zoom first. I just hope a higher spec normal zoom will not be too far away.
HoodedOne
5 years ago |I know the image above is very small. But if the lens in the image is indeed the 14-42. I must say, it looks remarkably like some voigtlander lenses.
Like this 35/1.2 Asph. Nokton (image from Camera Quest)
http://www.cameraquest.com/jpg6/VC%2035%201.2%20c.jpg