43 Rumors

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.

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.

*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???

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).

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…

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.