(FT5) New Olympus lens is “similar” to the Four Thirds 12-60mm zoom. Coming before Christmas?


I am still not sure WHEN Olympus will announce the new lens but I a sure it will be soon and probably before Christmas!  Two sources told me that the new m43 lens is very “similar” to the  Olympus Four Thirds 12-60mm f/2.8-4 zoom you see pictured on top of this post. But there will be differences. My guess is that it will have a different aperture. A trusted source told me that it is a High Quality lens with super fast autofocus like the Olympus 12mm f/2.0.

One more thing. There will be NO new camera announcement yet, but I have been told we don’t have to wait too long… :)

Stay tuned!

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

  • N!co

    Good news Admin !

    When you guess different aperture and then refer to the 12 2.0, do you mean that the MFT 12-60 will be faster than the FT ? (not 2.0 of course but maybe 2.5-3.5 ?) Or will this lens be slower but a high quality anyway ?

    And do you have any idea about the price ?

    It’s funny that we saw many kit lenses (14-45, 14-42 x 2 for Panny and 14-42 x 2 for Oly) and then we’ll get 2 fast lenses : 12-35 and 12-60.

    Wich one to prefer ? The faster one or the more versatile one ? As I’m committed to Panny’s body, I will have some hard time to chose a 60mm 4.0 without OIS anyway.

    And as I work in marketing, I can’t help but ask me why aren’t they talking about thoses lenses ? It’s christmas time for god sake, unveiled everything you can even if it’s not 100% ready.

    • Klaus

      “And as I work in marketing, I can’t help but ask me why aren’t they talking about thoses lenses ? It’s christmas time for god sake, unveiled everything you can even if it’s not 100% ready.”
      It is because the marketing departments of Pana and Oly really suck. This month is the first time I EVER saw advertisment for a mFT cam (the G3) out in “real life”.

      Its like Pana´s statement, that the GX1 wont be for mass market and dont need to be sold for christmas…
      Sometimes I have the feeling only idiots are working there ;)

      • Stravinsky

        I always thought that Summertime is the peak selling time for these companies. Tax refund, summer vacation, great weather etc. It’s when I Always buy cameras, if they get announced during or after Holidays, it’s a sure thing you will want it by the summer…

    • Martin

      I actually expect it to be either of a shorter range (e.g. 12-45mm f/2.8-3.5) OR a bit slower than f/2.8-4. With the new design, they have certainly had a significantly smalller size (than the “original” 4/3 12-60mm) in mind.

      • spam

        Seems reasonable, 12-60 is already pretty big. Better spec than the current model seem unlikely. I’m afraid it’ll be slower to get the size down.

        • ha

          If Oly uses a design similar to Pana 45-175 with internal zoom keeping and keeps the size like 12-60 would be fine with me.

        • I don’t think it will get slower, but remember m43 uses software correction, and that helps them keep things small. The 4/3 12-60 is a complex design that uses optics to correct, and there’s still mustache distortion at the wide end.

      • nobody


        It couldn’t be much smaller than the four thirds lens if it is 60mm and f4. IMO, that is just too big for all the Pen cameras.

        12-45mm f2.8-3.5 would make sense. Add a 45-150 f2.8-3.5 and you have a great two lens solution for many situations.

        • Mar

          12-60mm is not big because it’s 60mm at the long end, but because it’s 12mm at the short end (on a DSLR).

          Since register distance is much shorter on the m43, 12-60mm could be quite small on m43, possibly the size of the ZD 14-42mm kit lens (for DSLR).

          • Scott

            The 12-60 is not big!!! Compare it to the competition. If you look at the 4/3 50 2.0 vs the new m4/3 45 1.8 you can get a feel of what they can do with it

          • nobody

            Actually, both ends matter. The 11-22mm ZD is a bit smaller than the 12-60mm allthough the short end is shorter. It can be smaller because the long end is much shorter, too.

            But for a focal length of 60mm the shorter register distance is definitely not an advantage, rather a disadvantage. Note that the 40-150mm for m43 is longer than the 40-150mm four thirds lens.

            To have the size of the ZD 14-42mm kit lens, a 12-60mm m43 lens would have to be very slow and maybe have a collapsible construction.

          • Martin

            “size of the ZD 14-42mm kit lens” sounds a bit too optimistic to me. Possibly if the lens is slower or smaller focal range. Shorter register is certainly a nice thing, but it’s not the only factor in such a complex design as the 12-60mm f/2.8-4.

  • Great news admin

    Do you know if this lens will be weather sealed??

  • Thomas

    hopefully 2.5-3.5 or something like that. then it will be the 12-35 killer ;D
    But i rather think it will be 2.5-4…

    still, im rather interested in the 35-100/2.8.

    • Martin

      It won’t be any killer, as it isn’t going to have OIS (so disadvantaged with Panasonic bodies). And probably it will be also slower. Think quite 2 different lenses (although they will certainly compete to an extent.)

  • Steve

    I dont believe it will be optical good dont even think of better than 12-60. Look at the Olympus 12mm prime lens – its a peace of crap compared to the 12mm of the 12-60 ft zoom. Also the 11-22 is much better!

    The only mft lens which is optically as good as the ft lenses is the 45 1.8 which compares quite well against the 50mm 2.0 ft prime. But everything else:

    – the mft 25 PanaLeica isnt as sharp as its ft pendant
    – the 12mm prime is a joke considering its sharpness
    – the 9-18 mft is worse than the 9-18 ft

    So far as miniaturising goes you can summerize so far: considering sharpness from edge to edge and optical correction – FT still rules.

    I dont expect too much from an 12-60 mft pendant.

    • Jim

      I dont think anything will ever beat 4/3 for corner to corner sharpness!

      • There is a whole bunch of lenses that beats 4/3 out there, maybe not always as expensive as Olympus, but with better IQ: Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, Canon…..

        • Mar

          Please name one?

          • lnqe-M

            Is not made yet. :-D

          • Jim

            If you pull out the big guns – There is no lens made by anyone as good as the F2 zooms from Oly for 4/3….

            even the 12-60 is in a class of its own – no other system gives the corner to corner consistancy of 4/3… none!

            If you want to compair “cheep” lenses – try finding a kit lens anywhere near as good as the oly 4/3 14-42mm …. good luck on that ….

            • Frederic Hew

              Right, but this is partly why 4:3 ultimately failed.

              Strict telecentric design requirements coupled with a smaller and technologically inferior sensor did not prove itself – neither in sales nor in IQ.

              The lenses are indeed sharp but bigger than their APS-C (in some cases even FF) counterparts and, mounted on the bad old Panasonic sensors, the overall package fails to impress.

              I really like 4:3 lenses. I have the 1.4/25, 2/50, 11-22 and the OM 2/90. Fantastic lenses no doubt, but corner to corner sharpness is not everything.

              • Jim

                yeh – I know what you are saying….

                In good light I feel the 4/3 system could hold its own very well…. alas ISO was never gonna be a strong point!… On a GH2 though they can shine a little more — I know the AF won’t be tip top tho….

              • Joel

                For me (ex e3 user) what killed the original 4/3 were the sensors, they could have got a Sony sensor (like Nikon used/uses) and cut it down to size, sacrificing some MP but maintaining the DR and ISO and they would have done much better… Hell even the Nikon 1 system impresses with DR and even ISO (see steve huff’s comparisons) despite it’s size..

                Don’t get me wrong I accept the compromise due to other factors and enjoy my ep-3 (though I ordered a cheap GH2) but there old average quality sensors almost negate their awesome lens advantage..

                • Esa Tuunanen

                  Panasonic’s marketing is still doing that killing of sensor performance.
                  Even Pentax Q (and Canon Powershot G12) achieves better base ISO DR than G3.

                  GH1’s new design sensor was notable step above that old 12MP sensor (still used by Oly) in both DR and sensitivity but then marketroids shrank those pixels in GH2 lowering performance which wouldn’t have been that bad for DR if stopped there but in G3’s sensor apparent high ISO only optimization crashed base ISO DR back to old.

                  So let’s hope that Olympus is going to use sensor made by someone else or then at least GH1 based sensor if Panasonic.
                  Actually Sony’s tech would give 16MP 4/3 sensor soundly beating all Panasonic sensors because pixel size of their 24MP sensor is very close to GH2/G3.

    • Andrew Howes

      From the brief time that I had the 12-60mm, I remember it as being pretty distorted at 12mm. Still an excellent lens, though.

    • JF

      unfortunately, I think you’re right. A mft 12-60 with same optical quality and smaller size would be my dream lens…

    • Pete

      ich hope, there was a change in olympus strategy. they took ft into grave and now mft is the prime oly system! lets hope for further good lenses, i like my 1,8/45 as much as the 14-54 before

    • Very firm views here:
      – the mft 25 PanaLeica isnt as sharp as its ft pendant
      – the 12mm prime is a joke considering its sharpness
      – the 9-18 mft is worse than the 9-18 ft

      The 25mm PanaLeica is not tested there – but is there any 4/3 pendant except the 25/2.8 wich is very average. I am pretty sure the Pana is far better + has 1,4

      But according to the excellent blur graphs the 12 mm is sharper than the 4/3 12-60 at all apertures (and the 12mm also has 2.0)

      9-18mm: I have owned booth and can agree to the m4/3 not quite as good. Very small difference though.

      The 40-150mm versions are the same, 4/3 slightly better.

      Obviously there is a risk that the next lens conversion will show the same trend: A bit smaller, a bit lighter, a bit less sharpness

      • Frederic Hew

        Actually your wrong.

        The new Summilux 25 (DG) has not been directly compared to the old one (D) but based on available data (Lenstip and others comparing the DG to the Nokton) as well as my unscientific tests (Summilux D vs Nokton) it seems the Summilux DG is actually sharper than the D across the aperture range (this is definitely the case at f/1.4).

        The DG has worse corners at f/1.4 but improves dramatically on stopping down. The Summilux D has soft corners at all apertures – stopping down does not improve IQ in this respect.

        Add to that reduced size and weight, much faster AF, nano particle coating and a 30-40% price reduction… the new Summilux D beats the 4:3 version in almost all counts (OK, it is not made of aluminum and does not have a distance scale). I own the older version but that does not prevent me from accepting the obvious (honesty, a very rare character trait nowadays).

        This is also the case with the Panasonic 7-14: it is sharper than the Oly 4/3 version yet smaller and much much cheaper.

        The 12mm is not a joke – it is an expesive luxury product with sub par IQ due to strict reliance on software correction (as opposed to a bit of software correction on top of optical correct). It holds immense appeal to wealthy gear fetishists and little appeal to anyone else.

        • Frederic Hew

          errr you were quoting Steve. Sorry, my bad.

          Dear Steve, please drop the agenda and get your facts straight. It may contribute to your credibility.

          • stopkidding

            I don’t know if I am wealthy, I definitely think not!, but I for one love the 12mm Oly lens. Its beautifully made and the images coming out it are remarkable on the EP3, focuses like a snap, have great colour and sharpness. Yes, it is expensive, but it certainly seems like a premium product that will last for a long time..

    • zuzu

      Please take a look at this lens comparison on the same body (EP3):


      The 45 1.8 is still no match to ZD50/f2.0 in any measurable respect.

      • ha

        ZD 50/2.0 about 650€
        mZD 45/1.8 about 250€

        To some degree optics is glass and glass is money.
        The mZD shows you can drop lot of glass (and metal) without loosing too much IQ.

        • rocky

          Thanks for link. Goes to show that 4/3 lens are the best.

      • Brod1er

        I thought the bokeh was more pleasant on the new lens. The old one is sharper. This is what you would expect given one is a portrait lens and one a macro. Both are great in their own right.

    • Anonymous

      Um Steve..where are you getting your facts?
      I posted the Sharpness comparison charts from SLRgear of sharpness for the Oly 12mm @ f/2.8 AND f/2 compared to the Olympus 4/3 12-60 zoom (@12mm f/2.8), here:


      According to them what you are saying is completely untrue. The 12mm lens is sharper at f/2 and blows the four thirds zoom away at the same f/stop of 2.8?

      So what is with the rant????…I own the 12mm 2.0..
      Its a GREAT lens..for shooting photos in the REAL world, too!


      • M

        are you seriously comparing a 10 mpx camera with a 12 mpx camera with a much lighter AA filter?

        The 12mm prime is probably the worst lens Olympus ever made. Vignetting -1.5EV, distortion -6%. That’s worse than most FF lenses.

        • Bob B.

          good…don’t buy one…I can enjoy mine that much…MORE~!!!!!!!!!!

        • Bob B.

          M…you have it backwards anyway…the 12mp sensor would show the flows of what Steve says is a HORRIBLE lens. If the lens is so unsharp and poor quality…that would definitely show in the SLRgear sharpness graph even BETTERer on a 12mp sensor….instead ….the lens gets excellent ratings. Duh.

    • Joel

      Do you own both PanaLeica 25s????

      I do, and the new mft one is slightly better, and certainly far better considering the price, it also stomps on the more expensive NEX 24/1.8…

      • Bob B.

        Joel, I don’t own both..but I have to say that the new MFT 25mm f/1.4 (which I do own), is a great lens. It really ads some nice choices for MFT when needing bokeh, or shooting in low-light or just wanting some nice, clean, sharp photos!!!! ..(if it was a little smaller AND had IS it would be an awesome lens….but I am just dreaming, here)…

  • As others have said, the lack of OIS will be a limiting factor for Panny users. If you want an all around zoom lens (for travel, walk around, etc), you’ll probably want to have some sort of stabilization.

    In any case, if its up to the quality of the “mythical” 12-60 of 4/3, it would be a great addition to the m43 lineup. I hope they maintain the black rubberized finish instead of going for the silver bling they’ve been so inclined to lately…

    • Miroslav

      “the lack of OIS will be a limiting factor for Panny users”

      or in other words ;) :

      The lack of IBIS is a limiting factor for Panny users.

      • I meant the lack of OIS in the lens.

        • Miroslav

          I know :), there are just different ways to look at the “problem”.

          • Pete

            haha, you’re right!

            but why should i pay an carry a ois system again and again?

            • Don’t get me wrong, i love IBIS, particularly for unstabilized primes, but:

              1) In lens IS is specifically tailored for that specific lens, so – in theory at least – it should work better.

              2) Oly’s IBIS does not work for video.

              Kind regards,

              • James70094

                Actually, the latest Olympus PENs do have an IBIS that works with video. It is a different system than used for stills and is not as effect, it does work. I would expect the next crop of cameras to employ IBIS that works better for video.

                • Joel

                  It doesn’t work well for me (and many others) with the ep-3, it causes a horrible jelly wobble effect….

              • Miroslav

                You’re absolutely right. If I could choose, I’d like all m4/3 bodies to have IBIS – for primes and legacy lenses; and all zoom lenses to have OIS – for video and better IS optimization. That’s why I bought Olympus body and I’m eying some of Panasonic upcoming zooms. It’s a pity the two manufacturers haven’t had a better cooperation IS wise.

      • Bob B.

        Miroslav, you had it right the first time!!!! LOL!

    • Mr. Reeee

      I have a GH2. The only lens I have with OIS is the 14-140mm. None of my other lenses have stabilization and somehow I don’t feel limited at all. I still seem to be able to use those lenses with my camera to take photographs.

      Maybe I’m doing something wrong and should just stay home and wait for stabilized lenses? I mean how could I or anyone possibly take photos without some form of electronic stabilization? ;-)

      If the build and image quality is high enough and is bright enough… that is, better than most of the M4/3 zooms… I might consider getting a 12-60mm. It seems to cover a nice range. I prefer 12mm to 14mm. It’ll be interesting to compare the upcoming 12-35mm. Either one could make a good general purpose lens.

      It should be a great year for M4/3 lenses.

      • Come on Reeee, what about video users? For instance, I shoot handheld video extensively with the GH2, and OIS really makes a difference.

        Or what about gaining a couple of stops when taking pictures handheld by using slower shutter speeds? We all know m43 is not particularly the king of the hill with regards to high iso, so being able to use lower isos is always a bonus.

        No need to be sarcastic…

      • BLI

        Regarding OIS/IBIS:
        * my impression is that there is little to gain from OIS/IBIS in focal ranges below 50-100 mm in the APC-S/DX format, at least that’s what the common wisdom seems to be in the Nikon camp; the decision to include OIS (VR II) type feature in the 105/2.8 mm micro Nikkor was questioned in reviews. The 105 mm in DX format translates to a 78,75mm in the 4/3 format. OIS/IBIS is probably much more important in 75/100-300 type lenses.
        * I have never seen much improvement in my pictures taken with the 18-200 Nikkor lens even at 200mm with image stabilization. Of course, that could either be because of a perfectly steady grip, or on the contrary that I’m shaking too much for the VR II system to cope.
        * OIS/IBIS is, of course, totally useless for (fast-) moving objects
        * If a lense is perfectly stiff, I don’t see any reason why image stabilization in the lens should be better than image stabilization in the sensor — theoretically speaking. Of course, in particular zoom lenses have some flexibility, where there may be something to gain. On the other hand — moving a light sensor must be much less power demanding than moving the entire lenses??

      • Bob B.

        Mr. Reeee…LOL! True…IS is nice to have…but it shouldn’t be an “image stopper”!

      • I wish I had steady hands like mr Reese! My camera shakes a lot for some reason :-)

        • Mr. Reeee

          You just need to drink more coffee. ;-)

          Really, I’ve been shooting with non-stabilized anything for longer than I’ll ever admit. From 35mm rangefinders to SLRs. Handheld, no flash, low light. I only use the flash in social situations or when documenting a design project. I do architectural and interior design and renovations.

          You learn tricks.

          I’ll rest my camera on things and sometimes use the timer. Lean a against a wall or tree or sign post. Press my camera or myself against something solid. Shooting from waist level is great. Using the viewfinder. Sometimes I’ll use a tripod, but don’t like to carry one aroind. When macro shooting I sometimes use a monopod. And I use manual lenses the majority of the time.

          It isn’t magic.

    • As a Panasonic user, the lack of OIS does not bother me. I seldom use OIS anyways..

  • M

    f/3.5-5.6 (maybe f/5), like the kit zooms. (this will be a kit zoom, by the way.)

    • nobody

      And your source is?

      • Miroslav

        probably nobody :)

    • lol

      lmao, i dont believe you.

  • bbernhardt

    Admin, pana or oly body?

  • HB

    PEN PRO please- I already saved my money for buying one ;-)

  • compositor20

    12-54 2.5-3.5 would be great

    • Anonymous

      The Pen -Pro rumor is actually true,.a friend of mine work for olympus-us just confirm that ,..damn we might wanna see it with built in view finder + new sensor

      • admin

        DO you have some mor einfo to share? :)

      • lnqe-M

        Is than water pro also ?

  • Pete

    great! for me 2.8-3.5 or 4 is enough, better not to big and not to expansive.
    if you don’t have to work for your money, buy the panny.

  • tooning

    Well , I hope it will be a very sharp lens , not too expensive and not too heavy . If it weight around 350g or more and if it cost more than 350 Euros i will stay with my APS-C dlsr gear .

    Something with very good IQ for a price less than 350 euros , and a weight around 250g will be perfect .

    • Neonart

      Here we go again.. Only if its 8-1000mm constant f.95, 15g, pancake design, for 12 Rupees! Then I’ll buy. And if it makes coffee too!

      Not going to happen.

      Good stuff is expensive. The Oly 12-60 is considered one of the best zoom lenses of any mount, not by Oly fanboys, but by many review magazines and sites.

      Here is DPReview:

      “Indeed the Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 SWD is quite simply a superb lens, which can lay claim to being one of the very best standard zooms currently available. This is a design which would have been almost unimaginable even five years ago; a 5x wideangle to telephoto zoom which, though the use of some exotic optics, manages to perform almost flawlessly across its entire range, and throws in some impressive macro performance too. The relatively fast maximum aperture (a half to a full stop faster than APS-C equivalents such as the Sony Carl Zeiss 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 or Nikon 16-85mm F:3.5-5.6 VR), coupled with the excellent wide-open performance, also allows the use of lower ISOs at equivalent light levels for maximum image quality.”
      “…Of course perhaps the biggest issue with this lens is its price; it’s far from cheap for a standard zoom, but this is a case where you really do get what you pay for. Indeed Olympus have managed to surpass the already excellent 14-54mm with a lens which is demonstrably sharper at all focal lengths and generally shows less chromatic aberration, whilst extending the range at both ends. For anyone wanting to get the best possible results from their Four Thirds camera, it’s therefore highly recommended.”

      • pete

        no no no! all i want to say is, that i prefer the 2,8-4,0 to take great quality pictures. i don’t want a 2,0 to be ahead the competition. and of course it is more expansive than 500€/650$

      • JF

        “Only if its 8-1000mm constant f.95, 15g, pancake design, for 12 Rupees!”
        You forgot macro 1:1 or more if possible :D

    • The 4/3 version costs almost 1000 dollars. I guess this will be probably in that range. Maybe a bit less if they cheapen the build quality.

      • tooning

        Sorry Neonart but I’m not totally agree with you .

        Ok , high quality is expensive , but some third party manufacturers can make some great products at unbeatabale price sometimes .

        Look at the Tamron and Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 , they cost 300$ and they can make very sharp and beautiful image .
        The same for the Tamron SP 70-300 VC USD , great IQ for 300$ . The pany 100-300 is good but not like the tamron and it cost the twice .

        Same thing for the UGA and prime Lens for the m43 , The pany macro for exemple is very expensive (800$) and you can have a much better IQ on DSLR for 300$

        The M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 is not too expensive but a prime lens with the same aperture by Nikon or canon cost 100$ less for the same IQ quality .

        I think we have the right to want and to have some good quality/price compromise (sorry for the exact term in english – (i don’t remember) )
        It’s just a reality that the M43 is very expensive at the moment and i hope Sigma can do some affordable good things ;)

        • Neonart

          Ok , high quality is expensive , but some third party manufacturers can make some great products at unbeatabale price sometimes .
          Look at the Tamron and Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 , they cost 300$ and they can make very sharp and beautiful image .
          The same for the Tamron SP 70-300 VC USD , great IQ for 300$ . The pany 100-300 is good but not like the tamron and it cost the twice .
          *** YES, THIRD PARTY. How much are high end zooms from Nikon, Canon, Pentax, and Sony?***

          The M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 is not too expensive but a prime lens with the same aperture by Nikon or canon cost 100$ less for the same IQ quality .
          ***The Nikon/Canon “nifty fifties” that everyone likes to compare ARE NOT same quality as the Oly 45. Not in build, image, or technology. A proper comparison would be the more high end 85s.****

          I think we have the right to want and to have some good quality/price compromise (sorry for the exact term in english – (i don’t remember) )
          It’s just a reality that the M43 is very expensive at the moment and i hope Sigma can do some affordable good things

          Yes, m4/3 is a little pricier, but not to the extent some are complaining. Is a Fuji X100 cheap? Leica X1? M8? M9!? Nikon V1? J1?

          I agree it’d be nice to get some third party support for m4/3 from Sigma, which may lower prices, but Oly and Pany have done a good job at getting us more lens choices than any other mirrorless system.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds like a good lens…I am not a fan of zooms but Olympus has the potential to deliver higher quality MFT lenses than most of their offerings to date. If this zoom is going to be on par with the 12mm f/2.0 then I think that Oly has the right idea to compete in the expanding world of mirrorless cameras.

  • bilgy_no1

    Nice news! High end lens announced before Christmas, High-end m4/3 camera announced at/around CES… I’m still waiting for the m4/3 follow-up to the E-620! Sort of a GH2 with IBIS, and an CDAF/PDAF sensor (finally an update from the 12MP sensor).

  • As I have a G3, I will look at the upcoming HQ(?) zooms with OIS from Panasonic before I decide to stay in m4/3 (hopefully) – or switch to Sony NEX-7
    (BTW: The Pana lens OIS is better than Oly in-camera IS. I tested with Oly E P-1 and Pana 100-300 and the difference was big…)

    • pete

      maybe it is better, but the oly is more then good and you buy and carry it once. make a four day frip with your tent in nature and you will love both systems. the guy with 10kg fx lenses is a poor guy. and he can not see the better quality, only if he looks 1:1 in monitor. have fun

  • tom

    There are going to have to be compromises somewhere. The original 12-60 was an excellent lens, but it was big when mounted on an E-3 and huge when mounted on an E-510. Something that size isn’t going to work for micro 4/3. Hopefully they’ll make aperture about a stop smaller and maintain the excellent IQ.

  • Agrivar

    Just read on sony alpha rumors that Tamron is releasing lenses for nex. Why isn’t sigma releasing anything for m4/3? Is sony nex that big a seller?

    • Agent00soul

      No, but as Sony don’t have many lenses to offer, there is a market opportunity for Tamron.

  • Ton

    Wow, my dream lens coming to reality. Combine this lens to ep3, then this will be a killer combo. Same versatility as ft e5 & 12-60..

    This kind of news might affect some purchase descision between this 12-60 & the 12mm f2 prime. I might hold off buying my xmas lens w/c is 12mm f2. Just hoping this 12-60 will be priced below $800 same price as the 4/3 version

    • Jim

      If this thing is F2.8 @ 12mm – kinda make the F2 12mm seem a little over priced… its only 1 stop, for the cost of a GH2…. which gives you that stop and a few other bits ;)

  • A new camera! Coming from Olympus or Panasonic ??

    • Agent00soul

      Both will surely offer new cameras. Eventually…

  • Bu

    Great! I just bought the 25mm f1.4! If they announced and released it I would have got the 12-60 instead!

    • Jim

      still F1.4 takes you places no other lens will go!….

    • Fan

      You need both

  • Bob B.

    Steve..I do not understand your rant?
    I posted sharpness comparison charts from SLR gear for the Oly 12-60mm zoom (@12mm f/2.8) compared to the Oly 12mm f/2.0 (@f/2.8 and f/2), here: http://www.dropmocks.com/mnwzP

    According to them the Oly 12mm is sharper than the 12-60 zoom at f/2 and blows it away at f/2./8. Also some people on the post here say that the 12mm end of the zoom is quite distorted?

    Also..(I own the 12mm f/2.0) I find the Olympus 12mm to be a great lens in the real world as well.


    So what is all the trash talk about????????????????????????????

    • digifan

      The rant is that some believe this loner, http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/11/olympus-12mm-review.html, more than the rest of the web.
      The guy rates the 12mm not that high and so everyone here believes it immediately and are dissapointed.
      He must have a godlike status.

      My personal view is that the 12mm is an awesome lens, the quality is really there (built and picture quality).

      • Bob B.

        I agree…I think it is one of the BEST MFT lenses to date!
        Also…I have read some reviews from the Online Photographer…….and the guy is just an angry idiot. He doesn’t know what he is talking about.
        This is a good site and there are lots of others out there too, though!

  • Eric

    ZD 12-60 is also too big on my E-620. For critical activities (mountain, caving…), I switch back to the 14-42 mm.

    Using software distortion correction, you can slightly reduce the size but I don’t think, it will be enough. So compromise. Extreme would be 3.5~5.6. Intermediate could be 3.0~5.0 or 3.0~4.5. I want a vote :-p

    • guest

      I think the problem of the 12mm f/2.0 (and many other mft-lenses, too) is that it actually sucks if it is not auto-corrected. The 12mm f/2.0 produces barrel distortion of 5.4%, which i think is a no go for a premium prime lens. The 12-60mm ft lens is actually better at 12mm (2.3%).

      You may not notice this most of the time, due to the auto-correction. But software-correction always comes at a price (e.g. FOV, border-sharpness) and I wouldn’t want to spend a lot of money on a lens that is dependent on auto-correction.
      I think olympus/panasonic should consider this if they want to make some true pro/enthusiast-equipment for their system.

      Take a look at the nikkor 10mm f/2.8. I don’t really like the nikon 1 system as it is now, but that lens is actually quite good. It may not be quite as wide or as fast as the oly 12mm, but it is also significantly cheaper and does not need auto-correction to produce decent distortion characteristics.

      • agent00soul

        The slrgear test is done with distortion correction and shows excellent sharpness. So what’s the problem?

    • Jim

      3 things make this lens smaller then the 4/3 one….

      1) the shorterr reg distance,
      2) digital distortion correction,
      3) non telecentric design

      who knows how small oly will get this down too?…. what if they do the extending lens design trick too….

      Could be only a bit larger than the kit zoom! – that would be amazing!

      But I still want f2.8-f4… no slower!

      • Martin

        Points 1) and 3) are strongly related. So in fact:
        1) shorter register -> non-telecentric design

      • Eric

        And no-telecentric means lower quality in the corners, especially for wide angles like 12 mm. And also lost of light in corner … and in the center (or they need to use microlenses on the sensor). Then marketing service tell you : this is a f/1.4 lens… gathering light like f/1.8 :-(

  • David

    Tamron is building Nex lenses because Sony is Tamron’s second largest shareholder.

  • I wonder why Olympus won’t create 4/3 versions of their m4/3 lenses. I’m really not sure if it would be harder to create 4/3 version of their m4/3 lenses. I really like the 45mm and I could only wish that there was a way to mount it on my e30. If only the 50mm macro had a focus limiter then focusing won’t be a problem for shooting on low light and portraits. The 45mm would have been a great alternative. I guess Oly has really abandon any development on their 4/3 lineup.

    • Agent00soul

      Just have a look at the back of the 45. The rearmost lens element is as far back as it will go in the m4/3 mount. Now, imagine shaving off the length of the 4/3 to m4/3 adapter from the back of the lens. Where would that put the rearmost lens element?

  • st3v4nt

    What we don’t get in 43 we do get in m43 fast prime lens with reasonable price, what we don’t get in m43 we do get in 43 great zoom lens, what I don’t get it is the price point Oly put in their m43 lenses, we do get reasonable price with great 45 lens, not so much in 17, too expensive in 12 and 9-18, too many version of 14-42, so so in 40-150 and 14-150, and I don’t care about 75-300, if these 12-60 would be near 12-60 43 quality then I’m afraid it will fall in 12 price range….that’s without any Pen Pro or PEN like wit built in EVF….will let me hold to purchase it indefinitely.

  • I’m really looking forward for this new lens :-) And I wonder which type of camera should be announced soon… Can’t wait…

  • David

    I’m looking forward to a new body

  • TheEye

    I paid $800 for a 12-60 a bit over two years ago. There’s no m4/3 cameras that suits me. I’m not going to buy an m4/3 body and an m4/3 12-60 or similar. Since the replacement cycle for gear has shrunk to just a few years, I’ll simply buy whatever meets my needs. No more brand loyalty from me!

  • Nelson

    Steadicam > OIS for video, and you don’t need expensive one either.

  • Barry

    the lens is rumored to be a 12-50 with apperture of f/3.5-5.3. that’s what I heard from a distributor in my country.

  • Oyzqycvl

    <a href=http://capitalplanners.net/controls/louisvuittonfactoryoutletcx.aspxlouis vuitton outlet online

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.