skip to Main Content

(FT5) New Olympus 75-300mm MFT lens and XZ-10 (with specs) coming at CP+


I finally got some bits about the next Olympus announcement that will be made right before the CP+ show start in Yokohama (January 31th). The discontinued Olympus 75-300mm MFT lens (at BHphoto) will be replaced by the new 75-300mm II F4.8-6.7 ED lens.

And there will be a a new Olympus XZ-10 that is smaller and lighter than the current XZ-2. It has a f/1,8-2,7 lens and will be cheaper than the current XZ-2 model (here on eBay).

Major new MFT stuff from both Olympus and Panasonic will come in March-April. It’s when also Canon, Sony and Samsung will announce their new mirrorless cameras…

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

  • NtT

    admin, is it only a cosmetic update there on this “new” lens?

  • matt

    yes! more slower and bigger zooms! we still don´t have enough of them! (omg)

    • Mark

      Matt, please tell me more about m4/3 zooms that go to 300mm (600mm on ff) and are only 430g and quite small.

      • pete


      • hans kloss

        yessss….and quite fast….if we compare to oly 15/f8 ;-)

    • Esa Tuunanen

      Think positively: At least it didn’t get any slower than discontinued model!

      • Anonymous

        At f/6.7 – difficult to imagine how!

  • Reza

    Xz-10 could be interesting, if it’s as small as canon S100/110.

    • W. C.

      How is XZ-10 interesting? A lower model compact to sit below a low model (overpriced) compact (XZ-2)?

      The market is done with 1/1.7″ sensors. The cameras are not selling and the camera makers are getting desperate to salvage their once lucrative compact markets.

      These one time high end compacts are not so high end anymore. They need to fall in price to under $300, like the Panasonic LX5 did recently. Their traditional price bracket $400-600 has been taken over by entry level to even mid tier ILC mirrorless and larger sensor compacts (Sony RX100, Canon G1 X).

      Olympus, Panasonic et al need to step up and compete with Sony RX100 with the same or comparable sensor (Toshiba could be a good source) within the next 12-18 months. The sooner, the better, since we’ll have more competition and prices will go down. RX100 price has pretty much stayed at RRP since it was launched, such is its popularity, combined with the lack of any real competition, causing this static (and high) price. Once there is competition to RX100, the 1″ sensor compact with fast zoom lens market will then settle to $499 RRP. Then there will be a clear distinction between the markets. At the moment, we still have 1/1.7″ compacts going for up to ~$600, entry level mirrorless m4/3 and APS-C NEX for ~$500, and mid-tier ILC mirrorless price is also getting very competitive, especially with the many discounts and rebates going on.

      I’ve been following the compact camera market for around a decade now. Up till now, I’ve only ever used compacts and m43 cameras. People now expect more for $500. 1/1.7″ doesn’t cut it anymore. This sensor size needs to go to sub $300 market quickly before they all end up on the scrapheap. At least they will have a better chance of selling there as people look for a cheap pocketable carry around camera. However, there is still a use though for the 1/1.7″ sensors. They can put it in their camcorders, as 1/1.7″ is larger than even what a prosumer camcorder uses.

      I was actually hoping the Olympus XZ-10 would be the RX100 competitor. It obviously won’t be according to this FT5 rumor. So it looks like we’re still a long way off from that. Maybe 2014-15?

      • BG380

        Not all that glitters is gold…

        The RX100 may have a larger sensor, but it has a mediocre lens that is very soft in the corners. I’m for the concept of larger sensor compacts, but not in the iteration the RX100 comes in.

        • W. C.

          That’s why we need the competition. More choices besides RX100. And to see other camera makers’ interpretation of the concept. They can’t leave that market all to Sony.

          • spam

            The 1/1.7″ sensor cameras are still competitive IMO, better corner sharpness is one factor, but several models also have much faster lenses in the tele end. Actually fast enough to compensate for the differences in sensor size, at least when it comes to blurring the bacground.

            But I’d certainly like to see more cameras based on 1″ sensors too, competition is good and at least one model with viewfinder and better aperture in the tele end would be great.

      • Reza

        What I want from an XZ-10 is a SMALL and pocketable camera, such as Canon S100, with FAST lens on the tele side. If it is 1/1.7″, then be it. I also like Olympus colors more than other brands.

        The Sony RX100 is not fast on the tele end, and doesn’t fit in the pocket as easily as Canon S100.

        See, not everyone wants the same thing.

  • Yun

    I like the focal length but not the aperture of the lens . Such slow lens only limit in daylight shooting , not suitable to me . I think this is more on consumer standard . Definitely will skip it .
    What is next Olympus ?
    Give us more fast lenses , the 150mm F2 m4/3 version .

  • feederico alberto

    I’m the happy owner of the Panasonic alternative, the Lumix G Vario 100-300mm f/4-5.6 ASPH. Brigher, with a sharper IQ and for about half the price, is barely 90 grams heavier than the M.Zuiko, mostly due to having OIS. It proved more than adequate last Summer 2012 during the London Olympics…

    • Wt21

      I also have the Panny 100-300 and see no reason for the Oly (I shoot an Oly body). I would be interested to see if they improved the bokeh, but it would take a lot for me to switch from the Panny.

    • Mr. Reeee

      Ditto! I just spent a couple of weeks in Puerto Rico and shot quite a bit with my 100-300mm. I’d never really warmed to it, but shooting everyday with it gave me a real appreciation for it. Very good image quality and reaspnae speed for a great price.

      The Oly 75-300mm, with nearly identical IQ, simply doesn’t compete at 1 stop slower and nearly twice the price. I don’t know what this “improved” version will bring that makes it worthwhile… marginally faster AF?… especially with the same slow aperture. If they’re bothering to update, make it dramatic.

      • But it isnt a stop slower is it?

        • spam

          No, the difference is more like 1/3 to 1/2 stop, still everything counts. The 75-300 is maller and lighter though and I guess that’s important for some. I chose the 100-300 as it has OIS in case which is important in case I get a Panasonic body too.

        • Mr. Reeee

          f5.6 vs. f6.7? Sounds like one stop to me.

          • Far as I am aware, 1 stop from f5.6 is f8. F6.7 is a half stop, so shooting ISO 400 vs ISO 320, or ISO 1000 vs ISO 800… It isnt the big deal people make it out to be, and it saves on size and have a slightly longer range.

  • Stanislav

    F/4.8-6.7 Why so dark? Even my 30-year-old Vivitar 85-210 has constant F/3.8. Full-frame by the way..

    • Michael Sims

      To keep it small

  • Salty

    Oh Olympus you tease, with this new F4.8-6.7 lens you are really spoiling us….

    I hope a price drop will come with this new lens. Or weather sealing…or you know…something….the old one sells for far more than I’d be willing to pay for slow aperture, no weather sealing and average optics.

    The Panny 100-300mm is faster and a lot cheaper and it has OIS which I don’t need but must add to the cost.

    • digifan

      Sorry to say Salty the 75-300mm may be a half stop slower than the Panny 100-300mm aperture wise, but it’s AF is reacting faster than the Panny and in MY opinion the 75-300 is sharper on the tele end too. On the bright side (no pun intended) it doesn’t hunt when light levels drop a bit.

    • YanT

      Panasonic 100-300mm not sharp at all at tele end , worthless for birding …believe me. I made some comparaison in store with the panasonic fz200 and fuji X-S1, both bridges was so much sharper than the pana 100-300mm at tele end . Can’t wait to see what olympus will come to, maybe a 75-300mm f4.0-5.6 wheather sealed and sharp at 300mm, who knows ?

      • spam

        I’ve also compared the 100-300 with superzooms, the 100-300 is not a great lens, but it’s certainly better than the cameras you mention. Must be something wrong with your copy, reviews also agree that it’s a decent quality consumer grade lens.

        • YanT

          Sorry but i try 2 lens, just in case, with a panasonic GH3 and the fz200 is way sharper ! Maybe the DR is not as good or the high iso but it is sharper , go see yourself ! I really wanted to buy the 100-300mm but after this test i could not , did not buy the fz200 either. maybe the new Oly !

          • YanT

            Don’t forget that the Fz200 it is a f2.8 at long tele it is a different kind of beast than the other superzoom that you compare with . The Fuji x-S1 is a good one as well. under 600$ for birding, i will choose the fz200 before a pana 100-300mm anytime !

          • Esa Tuunanen

            Lots of sharpening is different thing than real sharpness like in actual resolution.

            Pixels of tiny sensor ultrazooms are so small Airy disk’s are partially overlapping already after f/2.
            That with medium noise reduction at low ISOs destroys smaller lower contrast details… While FZ200 with not so exaggerated pixel count is definitely among better superzooms.

            Though Fuji X-S1 with reasonable 12MP in decent sized for compact 2/3″ sensor gives quite big pixel so it has decent changes for pixels being real information.
            Of course that was too good to last so succeeding models have smaller sensors and more Marketing Pixels for fuzzier image.

            • YanT

              Real sharpness as nothing to do with resolution, pixel count ! Sharpness is details that your able to see on a image compare to a other ( on screen or on prints ) . And with the fz200 you can see more details on the same image than the fuji X-S1 and a lot more than a panasonic 100-300mm ! It is like i saw 2 prints of the same pictures from a nikon V1 10mpx versus a nikon 5100 16mpx with same focal and same FOV aperture setting and the details of the V1 was so much more. One factor is that, the closest the sensor is to the lens the better it help in terms of sharpness. The sensor of the fz200 is closer to the lens than GH3 with 100-300mm.

  • Lily

    *sigh* here comes the broken record: When are we getting a weather-sealed telephoto zoom? Ever?

  • Bob B.

    But…it was a bad idea the first time?

  • Dave

    Olympus wtf is with your crappy dark telephotos? And charging a ridiculous, yes ridiculous price for them.

  • Blinkered

    Hey – this new version of the lens comes with a lens hood – that’s the ‘upgrade’ from the old one!

    • Dunne

      Maybe a black limited edition?

  • Ton

    I think this new 75-300 II was redesigned to be manufactured cheaper than the original version. $500-600?? Maybe same design/ cosmetic like the 12-50 with weather sealing & maybe with snap on feature for macro or infinity focus mode. Available in silver or black.

  • Narretz

    I bet the “update” is easier and cheaper for Olympus to produce and will bring no improvement in image quality.

  • Nawaf

    The same crap aperture. I would pay for faster glass, if only it was a f/5.6.
    I might be forced to buy it though.. I need a telephoto lens asap.

  • too bad they spent the resources to make such a slow lens, but i can imagine there are people who dont need lens speed but just the reach (hallelujah for high isos).

  • W. C.

    If you’ve been following m4/3 since the beginnng, you will notice the trend of Olympus slow zooms. I think the reason for this is they have always believed in transitioning the use of the 4/3 glass to m4/3. Therefore, if you want the best glass and the best zooms Olympus has to offer, they want you to buy the 4/3 versions. Their m4/3 zooms especially are very consumer oriented. You can see that in the 12-50 with its macro and EZ zoom functions. Many enthusiasts are still appalled by the 12-50 while some have grown to accept and use the kit zoom within its limits.

    Something that doesn’t often get reported in reviews and blogs etc. is that part of the success of the OM-D E-M5 in bringing in new users, particularly non-enthusiasts is the 12-50 kit zoom. The fact that it is weathersealed has a lot to do with it. Also the range and features is more than what you get with a typical plastic mount 18-55. And it doesn’t add much to the cost of the OM-D when purchased as a kit. So while many enthusiasts and gear heads bemoan the lack of fast(er), quality zooms in m4/3, particulary from Olympus, many average users just don’t care. They purchase and use what’s available and supplement their kit with one or two or more primes to make up for what the zooms lack. So Olympus will keep making slow zooms because it’s easy for them and the majority of real world users just don’t care. Especially the “small and light is everything” people.

    • jogvki

      @WC , sorry but I think that your opinion is down the toilet, the vast majority of mFT users very specifically want small lightweight cameras. Even if/when they fix the AF of FT lenses on a future mFT body/adapter unless you already own these lenses many are too heavy, too large and some are bloody expensive .
      look at the OLympus 35-100 compared to the Panasonic 35-100 sure it is about a stop faster it also costs 2.5x as much , weighs nearly 5 times as much and while I am sure at 200% magnification it may well be marginally better .the fact is that the Panasonic lens is getting good reviews is fast to AF , light,and relatively small. Honestly if I was considering carrying that weight, and spending that amount of money , I would have a Nikon 70-200 bolted to the amazing D800. though for me I wouldn’t consider it I love the compact nature of my mFT gear.

      For anyone not already owning some of the FT lenses especially the HG and SHG options .The thought of buying a heavy lens that needs to be mounted to an adapter before putting it on even a new high end body has zero appeal. Olympus missed the bot with FT in part due to the disproportionate size of the mid and higher end gear compared to the size of sensor. An E5 + 12-35 costs as much and weighs as much as a FF body and fast standard zoom

      The bulk of mFT users want smaller lighter gear and with the likes of the 12-35 ,35-100 ,60mm macro the companies have shown that very good small, good quality weathersealed gear is perfectly possible. It s a fantasy of FT users that there will be a horde of folk waiting to jump on SHG lenses, the world has moved on , and it wants small. I have seen it mentioned many ties and I do not know if it is fully correct but the talk was that Olympus lost money on every single SHG lens they sold

      • I think both you and W.C. have good points.

      • W. C.

        I’m only expressing what I think may be Olympus’ thoughts on their own formats. It’s not necessarily what I approve of or what I would suggest for m43 users.

        I don’t have the time or money for the very heavy and expensive SHG glass either. But I think there are some still affordable and very good options from 4/3 that can be transitioned to m4/3 with Olympus’ forthcoming pro camera. Some folks may be interested in this.

        The fact is is that it’s five years since m4/3 started and 4 years since Olympus first m4/3 camera, and there is still no fast aperture zoom from Olympus. There is nothing on the roadmap either, only some patents for some slow zooms similar to the 12-50. So there is some thinking at Olympus that is preventing the rollout of fast high quality zooms for m4/3 at this stage. We could be surprised this year with something, who knows? But it may be more of the same. It could be a marketing decision that there is more money to be made from regular releases of fast primes in m4/3 rather than all rounder zooms.

      • mring1

        Jogvki…gotta tell yuh…your response was just discourteous. Disagree with WC if you wish, but it doesn’t make you more credible by being disagreeable.

        Frankly, the folks who post in this forum are a distinct minority of a small group. We’d all like more HG-level glass from Oly, particularly an m4/3s equivalent 12-60 or at least 14-54. But Olympus learned their lesson. They produced great glass to put on bodies that were 1-2 years behind Canikon on the day of their release. They’ve fixed the body and sensor issues and they are selling lenses that a lot of people will buy…even if it’s not us that’s buying them.

        For all out sakes, we’d best hope that those slower and not as sharp lenses draw a lot more folks out of the woodwork. That’s the only hope we have for ultimately getting the HG zooms we want that mostly don’t exist right now.

        And one more thought. I’ve learned the limits of my 12-50, and if you work within them, it’s a surprisingly capable kit lens. I use my 14-54 Mk I as a complement.

        But, as they say, YMMV.

    • The 12-50 would be nice if it would be more sharp… In fact, the E-M5 and the 12-50 make pics with an image quality much more better then per example the E-620 with Kit Zooms, but with better m43 Zooms the result could be even better. And without some nice, sharp and fast Zooms, m43 isn’t a system for ambitious amateurs.

      • MikeH


        There are now nice, sharp, and fast zooms for m43. How much faster would you like them to be than 2.8? There are plenty of fast primes as well. Just because Olympus doesn’t make any fast zooms for m43 doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

        I would like to see some faster zooms past 100 too and will probably have to wait for Panasonic or Sigma or someone else to make them.

  • Alex

    Is this the “new lens” announcment you mentioned yesterday ( ) or will there still be an announcment for a real new lens shortly after CP+? Just a bit confused…

    Thanks in advance

  • Alfred

    Olympus must realize they make too much of 14-42 and now switching their efforts to manufacture 7X-300 mm lens

    I just don’t know why they will make F6.7 zoom lens that even Tamron will only goes to F6.3 on their super zooms.

  • Bollox

    Fabulous. I would have made it F6.3-9.5 tho, and doubled the price because it’s small.

    • jogvki

      @ bollocks luckily there are enough only fanboys who will buy any old crap and declare it wonderful , on a system with poorer high Iso and DOF control , combined with slow AF of moving subjects a lens that is F6.7 is beyond a joke. I wonder what the canon or Nikon fanboys would say if either company released a zoom that was F13.4 at the long end.

      I hoped that Sigma would have released at least a couple of decent lenses , the 50-150f 2.8 could be very attractive on mFT giving us a fast 100-300mm option.

    • jogvki

      @ bollocks luckily there are enough only fanboys who will buy any old crap and declare it wonderful , on a system with poorer high Iso and DOF control , combined with slow AF of moving subjects a lens that is F6.7 is beyond a joke. I wonder what the canon or Nikon fanboys would say if either company released a zoom that was F13.4 at the long end.

      I hoped that Sigma would have released at least a couple of decent lenses , the 50-150f 2.8 could be very attractive on mFT giving us a fast 100-300mm option.

      • Bollox

        Sure. Or a simple 300 F4 with small (one quarter) image circle, for say 500 EUR? It’s a good job we have Canon and Nikon for proper stuff.

      • “F6.7 is beyond a joke. I wonder what the canon or Nikon fanboys would say if either company released a zoom that was F13.4 at the long end”

        prob they wouldn’t say anything because of their 2 stops advantage ? ;-)

        • YanT

          Maybe 2 stop advantage in DOF the way you see it , but for sure at 13.4 is 2 stop disavantage in light gatering so it means 2 stop more in ISO . Plus at tele end for birding you want deeper DOF as possible. Not everybody and not every apllications needs shallow DOF so it is maybe 2 stop advantage in DOF as well …

          • Yan why you always give serious reply on my not so serious comment? :-)

            • YanT

              Sorry :)

  • Walter

    This is a bit of a disappointment. I was hoping for more aperture at 300mm, perhaps 300mm f/4.

    We know Nikon can sell such a lens for $1000 (and has for years), and it’s plenty sharp enough to be used on the smaller m4/3 format. Olympus surely should be able to do the same thing with modern technology, maybe increasing the price a little bit for the required focusing motors if they’re more complicated than Nikon’s ultrasonic motors.

    Yes, it won’t be a small svelte lens, but if m4/3 is to be a true “do everything” camera system (which I think it has the potential to be!), it needs both small high-performing lenses like the 45/1.8 and 60/2.8 that it already has and larger higher-specified lenses like fast teles.

  • avds

    I feel a little sorry for this lens being smashed for its darkness. As a happy owner of the Panasonic 100-300, which is a fun lens thanks to its great OIS, I think this darker lens could be a good match for the latest Olympus/Sony sensors since they allow for pretty high ISOs. It’s smaller/lighter and reportedly a tuny bit sharper at 300mm than the Panasonic, and doesn’t need its own IS on Olympus bodies. That said, that price is hard to justify…

    • lpotv,

      @avds the best sensors in mFT EM5/GH3 are less than a stop better than the previous GH2 and their high ISO is very far from good , so pushing dog slow lenses is nonsense. EVF,s even the best work better with more light coming in the lens, a faster lens makes both AF and manual focus .

    • Pretty high iso? Sorry, I can see a difference between ISO 200 and ISO 320, if you want the best image quality then you need to use ISO 200…

  • Borbarad

    Woa.. another useless lens with a performance just above a coca cola bottle.

    What is Olympus actually thinking? On the Prime side there a now enough really really good ones available covering the classic VOF – perfect!

    Now what we (I) need are lenses for wildlife and outdoor. This means at least a 12-60 2.8-4 SWD equivalent and a 300mm f4(or even better F2.8) plus a EC14 (all weather-sealed). In addition a good 50-200 would be welcomed as well. For the 300mm F4 I would easily pay 1500,- to 2500,- Euros if its delivering the performance required at F4

    But noooooo… we are getting a F6 point whatever…..


  • Anonymous

    Cut the crap Oly

  • Boooooring. Nuff said.

  • YanT

    Panasonic 100-300mm not sharp at all at tele end , worthless for birding …believe me. I made some comparaison in store with the panasonic fz200 and fuji X-S1, both bridges was so much sharper than the pana 100-300mm at tele end . Can’t wait to see what olympus will come to, maybe a 75-300mm f4.0-5.6 wheather sealed and sharp at 300mm, who knows ?

  • buy the upcoming Speed Booster and tranform it into an f/4.0-f/5.6 :-)

    • well thats prob my first smart comment this year……

    • YanT

      Speed booster will transform it to a 52-210mm as well ( 0.7 X ) and you will get vigneting as well , cause it is made for fullframe and APS lens only to M43 body

      • yeah we cant have it all i guess?

  • homer

    it was a not funny joke the first time, its even less funny now

  • I’ll give you my recipe: if you want to keep the system small and fast, don’t buy above 150mm.

    The rare birds I shoot, can be approached naturally if you don’t disturb their habits. Just take your time and get closer.

    Or perhaps my interest for the very far and the very close is shrinking. Leica range is where I am at.

    • Ross

      I’ll give you my recipe: if you want to keep the system small and fast, don’t buy above 150mm.

      The rare birds I shoot, can be approached naturally if you don’t disturb their habits. Just take your time and get closer.”

      Except when they sit up in the tree above you & I can tell you that I cannot get too near birds on the ground like the Wonga Pigeon (Australia) or the Bronzewing Pigeon as they just move further away until they just fly off. 300mm is a needed focal length & longer sometimes. Other birds are easily enticed with seed & will even eat out of my hand (King Parrots).

      • Well I had gone 300 mm, simply by buying a Pentacon 135/2.8 and a 2x adapter, v. cheap and good IQ, but then you ran in all sort of innatural problem, related to size and focus. Not reactive enough.

        As some said one could have a dedicated camera for that, a superzoom even.

        City birds are more approachable than people think, if one learns to fit in their picture, they also have their own curiosity – perhaps in my area kids simply show more respect.

        We have a colony of black cormorants and those can be shot from a bridge above the river where they fish. 4/3 proper was much better for that, so perhaps it could be time to get a discounted combo.

        But putting massive glass in front of a m4/3 camera is running against its present ethos. It will be interesting to see what 4/3 lenses are worth adapting to the pro camera coming by the end of the year. It’s there that you have your fast, long zooms.

    • RF covers my range too, prime wise.
      Regarding to compactness,mft fixed focals are 1st choice, but i like the taste of more exotic stuff too; i finally got myself an Helios 40 (85 mm f/1.5)again… it adds 800 gr. to my OM-D, in return I get image rendering not available with today’s optimized lens technology. Thats why I always say that imho MFT is actually not about compactness but about flexibility.

  • Steve

    What a waste of a lens. Who wants a lens that slow? You’re going to have to stop it down a bit because it sure won’t be sharp wide open at 300mm, so you’re looking at 300/8? Worse?

    Worthless. At least the Panasonic 100-300 is faster.

    How about a replacement for the 4/3 50-200? THAT is a useful, sharp, reasonably fast lens.

  • Dwaine Dibbly

    Will it at least have a tripod mount?

  • Ronan

    F4.8-6.7?? Nar will use my Canon glass and the Metabones Speedbooster when it arrives….

  • Chris

    Plain and simple, Olympus needs to make a profit. The 0.1% of buyers who lurk and troll on these boards demanding 300mm F/2.8 options for $499 do not represent the overwhelming majority of people who are buying into µ4/3. The real-world mass of buyers want portability. For Olympus to create your dream lens, they’d lose a crapload of cash because people aren’t going to pay what it’d cost to get it for a huge, heavy hunk of glass that they don’t want to have to carry around. Obviously people will pay $900 for a dark but long and light lens as it’s been a successful item for them for 2 camera-generations.

    “Blah blah what would Canon and Nikon owners say with such a slow lens blah blah…”. I dunno, but when Canon or Nikon owners have a 600mm option for under a thousand dollars I suppose we’ll see what their comments are. I suspect “yippee yippee we’re the most amazing system anywhere and we’ve never dreamed of it being so cheap” as a response. Their current 600mm options are $10-13,000.

    You want faster and cheaper? My Canon FD 100-300 f/5.6L cost me $170 in LN- condition. Reasonably light and portable though still a bit unusual-sized for the system. Beautiful pictures.

    You want heavy with a ton of glass? My Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5 has 420mm of reach and can be had in dream condition for less than $50. Amazing sharpness and colour.

    You want some combination/compromise of features/size/focus-systems? Most of the people Olympus is selling to seem to like when boils down into this lens. If you’re not one of them, spend your energy looking into your alternatives rather than angry, online bitching.

  • I’d lay money that the whingers are the same ones that whinged incessantly about the 12-50 zoom, when it came out. That lens is excellent and very useful. An f2.8 maximum aperture would be lovely but not at the price, both financial and weight, that we would have to pay. The specifications expected are 1.5 – 2.5 stops slower than the magical f2.8 and my E-M5 is useable at, at least, 3 stops higher ISO setting than my E-P1 was. In situations where a 2.8 would have been necessary on the earlier cameras it is not necessary on the latest ones. There may be occasions where a user might want the shallow DOF of f 2.8 and there I concede you are limited to having to resort to post processing software to achieve your result. However I don’t believe that’s what most of the complainers are talking about. They just like numbers! MFT is a compact system (remember CSC?) C-O-M-P-A-C-T. That’s it’s advantage. If you want to carry a bag of lenses that weigh 2kg each then buy a Nikon D4.

Back To Top

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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.