Patent: three wide angle fisheye zoom from Olympus (all starting at 8mm)
Egami (Tranlsation here) spotted a new Olympus patent describing the design of three new wide angle lenses:
8-20mm f/2.8-4
8-35mm f/2.2-4
8-74mm f/2.8-4
From the description you will notice that this are actually Fisheye lenses! Right now only Canon (with the 8-15mm) and Tokina (10-17mm) have this kind of lenses on market. Is that something we need for the Micro Four Thirds system? Certainly not a priority lens but it’s always nice to expand the lens horizon.
YouDidntDidYou
9 months ago |Actually fisheye lens could prove a lot more popular than they are provided they are marketed well as using them really opens up your creative eye http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/sets/72157627429387453/ maybe these patents are why Olympus let Panasonic bring out a 8mm mft first….
fefg
9 months ago |I think that fisheye lenses are little more than gimmicks and when you have seen one image you have seen them all. Every so often you get a spate of them when someone thinks look what I can do lol. Beyond their original purpose they are the carnival mirrors of the camera world , one second of fun and a lot of boring
Jon
9 months ago |That would be really nice to have. I could see getting one.
end user
9 months ago |….
end user
9 months ago |So its boring because you can’t see creatively through one?
ytryry
9 months ago |Fisheye lenses are about as cliched as you can get creativity lol.For underwater use amd their original scientific purposes { skies} cool. But when you have seen thousands of distored BS images which do not show any creativity. The response from the vast number of viewers is that doesnt look right. The guy posting the link to wedding shots must be having a laugh
YouDidntDidYou
9 months ago |@ytryry
ALL LENSES DISTORT AS NO LENS SEE THE SAME WAY AS THE HUMAN EYE
” But when you have seen thousands of distored BS images which do not show any creativity. ” you could say this about any focal length or lens…
“The response from the vast number of viewers is that doesnt look right.” the response from clients is those images get ordered…
You must be an old man you can’t even remember his online identity.
Fabian
9 months ago |This is perfect for underwater photography! I’d buy one of these on the spot. Hope it gets announced soon.
Bobafett
9 months ago |I hope oly’s gonna release these lenses soon, let’s say by mid 2013! They’re gonna cost a fortune, but might be worth it. M43 is definitely growing strong
gzo
9 months ago |Exactly what I need!
Gaytan
9 months ago |Is a 8-74 mm fisheye usefull? Instead of a this fisheye zoom, I would prefer a 12-75mm f/2.8-4 weather sealed.
Matthias
9 months ago |+1000
Chris K
9 months ago |Built-in defishing in a camera with that 8-74 could be very cool. Does a 16-148/2.8-4 with a “built-in fisheye” sound attractive to anyone? Sounds spectacular to me. That could do the job of my Rokinon fisheye, 9-18, and 14-140, all with a faster apertures.
It’s pie in the sky right now of course, but with proper support in the camera body this could be a system-seller, even without the option to turn the fisheye correction off for a “free fisheye”.
Esa Tuunanen
9 months ago |Sounds more like someone having failed in homework of logical thinking.
Fisheyes won’t ever replace rectilinear lenses:
Take uninflated balloon and draw some figures/pattern on to it.
Then inflate balloon fully and look again that what you draw into it.
That blurring and stretching is the image quality you’ll get when software correcting fisheye distortion.
zebarnabe
9 months ago |Hmmm… this design is prolly not for micro four thirds… and for a fisheye, the Samyang 7.5mm does wonders for such a low price.
About de-fishing a 7.5mm:
https://picasaweb.google.com/113342388960491676361/DeFishing?authuser=0&feat=directlink
Charles
9 months ago |With those specs I guess it would be a fisheye to normal zoom lens with what I’m assuming would be a mix of exotic glass and software corrections. It certainly sounds interesting and might make an amazing and unique lens. We wanted the 12-60, but we get some more interesting lenses.
Miroslav
9 months ago |+1
I’d like to have 8-35mm F2.2-4 fisheye to normal zoom, interesting indeed.
OTOH, focal lengths correspond much better to XZ-1 sized sensor, so I’m afraid these may not be for m4/3.
Le frog
9 months ago |I do not see much correspondence to an XZ1/2 sensor, not even to a 2/3″ sensor (8mm would be 32mm equivalent, even for a 2/3″ sensor). On the other hand, with an 1″ sensor you get a 22-200mm mouthwatering equivalent…
Milan
9 months ago |Yes, pretty weird specs. A fish eye 8-74 f/2.8-4??? That’s roughly a superzoom (close to 10x) with fast aperture all along. And from fisheye to mid telephoto. Science fiction?
amalric
9 months ago |Fisheyes? Well it depends from the mount of distortion correction that might happen in camera, doesn’t it?
I don’t see the usefulness of pure fisheyes, and zooms with that. Instead they might be new formulas for UWA. And that would be far more interesting.
The absence of corrective elements might even make them less expensive than traditional UWA zooms.
fefg
9 months ago |“I don’t see the usefulness of pure fisheyes, and zooms with that. Instead they might be new formulas for UWA. And that would be far more interesting”
That would be far more useful and a bit easier to sell
Gianluca
9 months ago |we need 12-60mm!!!!! pls Oly…make it happen!!!!!
Anonymous
9 months ago |Let’s not forget folks, these are only Patents, very often placed only to protect a certain design idea rather than an actual build.
Frederic Hew
9 months ago |f/2.8-4 sounds like a 4/3rds HG lens, hmmm.
tet
9 months ago |Get with the program you will “never” see another native FT lens again, just pray that they can come up with a high end mFT body that can focus our lenses properly
Ulli
9 months ago |8-74mm f/2.8-4 sounds very impressive!
JF
9 months ago |Not interested at all by fisheye, make a 8 mm f2.8 weathersealed tack sharp prime !
JF
9 months ago |Rectilinear I mean, of course…
Ryan
9 months ago |No thanks.
Samyang m4/3 8mm fisheye lens serves me very well with proven, superb IQ. And, its cost is a steal !! This cost of Samyang lens is just a friction of Pana fish eyes lens.
Fred75000
9 months ago |No thanks.
Need UWA LINEAR, around 8mm to 10mm
ph
9 months ago |+1
Make it a 9 or 10mm. We already have two fisheyes in the m43 lens lineup. We need a UW linear prime!!
amalric
9 months ago |They might be LINEAR UWAs.
You can’t tell from the picture, because the correction to linear could happen in camera by FW.
As noted above it makes no sense to make other Fisheyes when there are already some, and the Samyang one is so convenient.
dunsun
9 months ago |Not interested in.Rather make 8 mm linear prime or 12-60 mft lens.
TheEye
9 months ago |I’d be happy with a 9 or 10 mm prime.
The last thing I want is a fish-to-tele zoom. A fast(ish) 10-50 mm would be nice.
rrr_hhh
9 months ago |Boooh, what we need is a shift wa of 11-12mm, not fisheye lenses : there are already two of them, the 7.5 Samyang and the 8mm Panasonic.
Edit : why are my comments always subject to moderation ? I’m not a vindicative poster and never spammed for anything ? Can’t you solve that problem once and for all ?
YouDidntDidYou
9 months ago |@rrr_hhh
maybe previous use of swear words?
M43Photo
9 months ago |If the zoom went from 4-8mm, then it could be useful. That could be a circular fisheye (4mm) and a full frame fisheye (8mm) in one lens.
But starting at 8mm? That sounds very odd. Why would you want a fisheye lens at 35mm? That is simply a short tele lens with a lot of distortion.
I’m guessing that these are not fisheye lenses, but rectilinear zooms. That would make a lot more sense.
But making a 8-74mm zoom with an aperture of f/2.8-4 sounds “impossible” for this system.
Agent00soul
9 months ago |Maybe the lenses are totally uncorrected and rely on software correction for a rectilinear output? That could make sense, if it enables Olympus to produce such an attractive focal length range at an acceptable price.
JF
9 months ago |corners would be very soft…
Esa Tuunanen
9 months ago |Not only corners but basically everything outside center.
Jaussi
9 months ago |answert to: “Not only corners but basically everything outside center.”
Well thats been a correct answer for decades now, sure.
Might not need to be true in the future: Image resulution ist a function based on lens resolution and sensor resolution (+aa filter and such..)
In the past sensor MPx were limiting .. more and more it’s becoming the lenses. In-Lens-Correction cost resolution as well.
Might be a excellent idea for a 2015..2020 lens.
Think twice about it!
ácfan
9 months ago |With in camera distortion correction maybe you have the option of fisheye or regular image. Is this possible?
Harold GLIT
9 months ago |Having the lens start at 8mm (16mm ) equivalent is going to make the lens bigger and optically more complex for a focal length that is not that useful and already available in the 9-18mm
Olympus would be better inspired having a top notch 10-20mm
Marck
9 months ago |I would happily pay 1000€ to have a good quality and weather sealed 8-35mm f/2.2-4 !
Es
9 months ago |For those asking for a 7, 8 or 9mm prime lens – such a lens would be basically the same as the 7-14mm or the 9-18mm for their respective focal lengths. The fact that the 7-14mm zooms to 14mm is just an added bonus that takes up very little space or weight.
TheEye
9 months ago |I never liked WA zooms. I prefer one standard WA-tele zoom supplemented by WA and tele primes.
Fred75000
9 months ago |Prime linear WA, could be very different than the WA zoom, in price (lower), aperture (f/2,8 would be perfect), and in size and weight (smaller / lighter).
I miss a so much a lens like a 9 or 10mm, linear, F/2,8 or even F/3,5, same size as the Samyang FE
Esa Tuunanen
9 months ago |And you’re going to keep missing it because it’s impossible to make wider aperture rectilinear ultra wide angle in same size as fisheye.
ph
9 months ago |Considering the dimensions of the Nikkor AF-D 20mm/2.8 (69×42.5mm) and the Nikkor AI-S 20mm/3.5 (63×40.5mm) I find it hard to believe this is impossible.
mma173
9 months ago |I would consider any of them provided that it is ‘rectangular’.
peevee
9 months ago |8-74mm f/2.8-4…. Please please please please… correct the fisheye effect in firmware in E-M5.
Guy Harrison
9 months ago |Any of these would be an underwater photographer’s dream! The OM-D is probably the hottest camera right now for underwater photography, with housings and lens ports on long back-order. The small size, light weight, high performance, and great viewfinder is making many U/W photogs re-think traditional DSLRs. The system is half the size and weight of traditional slr systems and housings, which makes a huge difference in shooting. So, even though these are specialzed lenses, there is real market for them. Tokina has sold tons of its 10-17 fisheye zoom in the u/w market.
rpm40
9 months ago |I think the posters wondering if this is for a smaller sensored cam might be on to something..
Oly XZ-1 – 6-24m f1.8-2.5
Fuji f10 (2/3″ sensor) – 7.1-28.4mm f2.0-2.8
Oly c8080 (2/3″ sensor) – 7.1-35.6mm f2.4-3.5
Sony rx100 (1″ sensor) – 10.4-37.1mm f1.8-4.9
This looks like early patents for larger sensor compacts if you ask me.
matteo
9 months ago |8 mm is not a fisheye focal lenght but a ultra wide angle lens. IMHO
is a 8-20 mm like 7 – 14
CIP
9 months ago |This kind of lenses are the most used lensesin underwater photography…..so it would be very useful for me….now I use the pana 8mm….take a look at: facebook.com/Catalin.Ienci.Photography
Dugo
9 months ago |“…. this are actually Fisheye lenses!”
Not quite sure how a zoom lens at 35mm and especially at 74mm focal length is going to be “fisheye” on a M4/3 body?