skip to Main Content

New Panasonic 12-35mm and 35-100mm pictures.


A reader sent me the image comparison on top to “prove” that the 12-35mm X lens could have a constant f/2.0 aperture. The theory says that if the Olympus Zuiko 14-35 with f/2.0 aperture has the same size of the Zuiko 7-14mm with f/4.0 aperture, than the Lumix 12-35mm could have the same f/2.0 aperture as it has the same size of the 7-14mm m43 lens. Easy or not? :)

Meanwhile Trustedreviews (Click here) spotted the two lens prototypes of the 12-35mm and 35-100mm pictures: “The lenses were still very much in prototype phase, with no word on aperture ranges, no lever for the powered zoom and even the focal ranges were stickers, but it was strongly suggested these would be the basic designs for future lenses in the range. The prototypes also didn’t appear to fold flat as on the 14-42mm X lens.

Black 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here) and Amazon Germany (Click here).
Silver 14-42mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here) and Amazon Germany (Click here).
Black 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here) and Amazon Germany (Click here).
Silver 45-175mm X lens is available for preorder at Amazon (Click here).
Black GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
Red GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).
White GF3 with 14-42mm X lens at Amazon (Click here).

  • Of course they don’t fold flat if they’re supposed to be fast… All that glass has to go somewhere.

    • ha

      Yep, more like the 45-175 with internal zoom & focus. On there’s a nice visualization.

      • Bob B.

        ha…I pre-ordered one of the new 45-175mm x lenses. I sold my Panasonic 45-200mm last year (just disappointed in the image quality…but I thought it was a good lens for the money)….hope that this lens is sharper and has better contrast..(it appears to in the samples!).
        I just can’t see spending a lot of money on these two new faster zooms with the quality of the MFT sensor at this point in time. If they are going to cost “THOUSANDS” of dollars, that kind of money is reserved for L lenses to put on my Canon 5D Mark II where the capture pays off for the money spent.
        …but …with all these new, exciting Pany lenses forthcoming….I am dying to know if the GF7 will come with a new sensor that gets the most out of these new “fast glass” zooms??????? Could it be coming?!?!?!?!?!?!?

  • Prasad

    Some how, seeing at the size of the front element of both the lenses, its hard to imagine that they might be f2.0. If you see the other constant aperture zooms, especially the Olympus f2.0 lenses, you would see that they have huge front elements, almost covering the entire lens diameter.

    And please Panasonic, no power zoom and power focusing on these ones. Instead provide weather sealing!! Who agrees with me on this?

    • ha

      >And please Panasonic, no power zoom and power focusing on these ones. Instead provide weather sealing!! Who agrees with me on this?

      Could be power zoom and weather sealing go hand in hand here. Internal zoom might only be possible with power zoom. Weather sealing is easier for electrics than for mechanics…

      • Prasad

        I don’t think so…Many current lenses like the Canon 70-200 have internal zoom.

    • Lily

      Totally with you on that.

    • JF

      Yes, no powered zoom please !

      • 7hau

        if u dun wan powerzoom just disable it in the menu… there might be others that need it.

        • JF

          @7hau: powerded zoom means not mecanical ie with a W/T button that controls a motor, sorry but I don’t want that…

          • carpandean

            True, it’s not mechanical, instead using zoom-by-wire. However, only the teeny-tiny 14-42mm has just the W/T button. The 45-175mm has both a W/T button and a manual zoom ring (check link in second comment.) Zooming with the manual ring will probably feel like manual focusing with all of these focus-by-wire lenses.

    • Christian

      Weather-Sealing is a must for me. I would never again make the mistake of buying lenses or bodies that are not weather-sealed (especially not for sky-high prices).

  • Bengt

    Aperture(f-stop)=focal length/Entrance Diameter. gives us that the entranse diameter of the lens must be 35/2= 17,5mm. Take measures of the lens prototype and se if this is a possible entrance diameter. Otherwise it will not be f2.0 at 35mm simple as that.

    • nobody

      That formula works for standard primes and tele lenses, but not for wide angle lenses which require larger front lens elements.

      Otherwise the 7-14mm f4 would need just a 3.5mm front lens diameter while in reality it is more than 10 times as much. Also the 12mm f2 Oly lens has a front lens diameter of more than 6mm.

      That formula does work for wide angle lenses, however, if you look at the minimum lens diameter inside the lens, but unfortunately we don’t have any such images.

      • Bengt

        It works as a “smallest possible diameter” measurement. The reason for wide angle lenses being so large i suspect is mostly about correcting distortion and abberations. But have a look at samyangs fisheye, seems to be a pretty small entry diameter.

    • JF

      powerded zoom means not mecanical ie with a W/T button that controls a motor, sorry but I don’t want that…

    • safaridon

      Assuming that the above formula of aperture equal to focal length/lens entrance diameter is correct in general terms then I would make the following rough projections: Scaling from the photographs on the 35-100 lens gives a front entrance lens diameter of about 43mm so 100/43=F2.3. So I would say that F2.5 is most reasonable and what has been rumored right from the beginning over a year ago for the smaller zoom at least. At the wide angle end the lens could be faster as 35/43=F 0.8 multiply that by 3x typical for Oly wa to reduce wa distorsions and you get back to F2.5.

      The pictures of the 12-35mm lens roughly scales of the entrance lens diameter to be about 40mm so 35/40 =F 0.9. So entirely reasonable even with different design that the F stop for the smaller zoom is F2 or faster.

      What do you think?

      Given the fact that these very polished prototypes were displayed by Panasonic, I find it very hard to understand the skepticism being expressed as if these were only rough mock ups or sketchy picture leaks. About the only thing missing is the F stop and Pany is fine tuning that but most likely the lenses will be the sizes as shown and displayed in my opinion.

    • Trevor

      Don’t confuse entrance pupil with front element. Entrance pupil refers to the *image size* of the smallest opening of the lens measured at the front. So, an entrance pupil can be measured to be larger than it physically is if the lens magnifies it. The front element is almost always larger than the entrance pupil (theoretically it could be the same, but it’s unlikely). The physical location of the entrance pupil is almost always where the aperture diaphragm is.

      • safaridon

        Trevor – Thanks for the correction. That does seem a lot more realistic. There were a couple posts like that by Nobody which specifically referred to the diameter of the front element hence my confusion as I see when looking back at the formula posted by Bengt that the entrance diameter was stated.

        At any rate based on other lens sizes I still think that F2.5 is realistic.

  • Jim

    with m43 arnt wide angles able to be made relatively smaller due to the short reg distance… in which case the 7-14 would be a fair bit smaller than an F2 – and since these are the same-ish size its likely the 12-35 is an F2.8????


  • Frederick Hew

    Chill… these are not even prototypes, just mock ups. They probably don’t even resemble the actual products, if those should ever materialize.

    • prob you are right, if there is no info about the speed of the lenses, these are just empty tubes filled with air only imo….

      • Neonart

        Or really small coffee mugs.

        • espresso mugs?

        • Mr. Reeee

          Ha ha! Adorama has Nikon and Canon Zoom lens coffee mugs in their check out line. Truly dorky! ;-)

          These omages being mock-up seems more plausible, although I suspect they’re based on commuter models, which means they may be just computer renderings.

  • DingieM

    Ahum, those pictures are from normal 43 lenses, the Zuiko.
    Olympus m43 lenses are called M.zuiko.

    • yes,they are shown as comparison to the mft 12-35 and the 35-100(not shown here but in the thrustedreview link)

  • Boooo!

    It doesn’t work that way.

    Short flange distance means easy wide angles, because there are no issues with creating complex retrofocus designs.

    The 12-35 will be a retrofocus design. The 7-14 is not.

    This is comparing apples and oranges; and fake oranges, at that, because the 12-35 doesn’t even exist yet and it’s highly doubtful if it’ll even have the same size as the mockup.

    Also keep in mind that every single m4/3 lens so far has been severely optically compromised because of software corrections.

    What I’m expecting from the 12-35 and 35-100 is:

    1) Huge vignetting
    2) Huge distortion
    3) f/2.8 minimum, probably not even constant aperture
    4) Awkward to use because of size and weight compared to tiny cameras
    5) No weather-proofing
    6) No manual zoom
    7) Focus-by-wire
    8 ) Poor autofocus performance on Olympus cameras
    9) Price high enough to rival 4/3 14-35 and 35-100

    • Martin

      #1) Huge vignetting
      With suitably designed offset microlenses, vignetting can be partially eliminated.

      #2) Huge distortion
      Certainly. It will be software-corrected, though. The final image is important.

      #3) f/2.8 minimum, probably not even constant aperture
      My guess is f/2.2-2.8 in case of the 12-35, f/2.5-3.2 for the 35-100. Everyone can guess, can’t we :)

      #4) Awkward to use because of size and weight compared to tiny cameras.
      Not necessarily. There will be bigger m43 cameras around in a year or two. What is important, that the new lenses will be significantly smaller than SHG Zuikos (which are overengineered, anyway) and hopefully smaller than the HG zooms (12-60, maybe even 14-54). It is exactly the smaller size where software correction pays dividends.

      #5) No weather-proofing

      #6) No manual zoom
      Nah. Of course a manual zoom ring will be included.

      #7) Focus-by-wire

      #8 ) Poor autofocus performance on Olympus cameras
      Maybe a little bit worse than for their own lenses, but certainly not poor.

      #9) Price high enough to rival 4/3 14-35 and 35-100
      I hope not. I hope the street price will be comparable to that of the HG Zuikos after some time.

    • Guest

      Why would the 12-35 be retrofocus? We don’t need to use retrofocus with m43 lenses, which is why the Lumix 7-14mm is so small.

  • uth

    in my opinion, Panasonic need to do these lenses at F2… why?? the reason is so simple…. if they won’t do that, Olympus will do it soon… and Panasonic will lose lots of their customers :)

    we have to accept that lots of people are still considered in DOF and 4/3 sensor lose in this game. I didn’t say DOF is everything but if we have something are called “Pro lenses”, they should do the best they can :)

    imagine this…

    if we have 12-35mm/f2, 35-100mm/f2 and the price of each one are around 1000$, that might be a big hit ;)

    ps.don’t forget that panasonic can provide us 7-14mm/f4 with the half price compare to olympus ZD 7-14mm/f4. why can’t they do it again? :)

    • Martin

      Constant f/2 zooms are (already) history IMO. If Olympus designers are sane, they will never repeat that mistake again (absurd size & price).

      • uth

        I have an old leica D 25mm/f1.4 and i’m really surprised when the new one, leica DG 25mm, come out…. the size is so small compare to the old one…

        the lens size does not depend on the difference between 4/3 system and mirrorless 4/3 system only….

        the technology now is different from the past….and don’t forget that X lenses, they use some software to correct the vignet and distortion …. so it means Panasonic don’t have to design the same optic just like the ZD 14-35mm and ZD 35-100mm ;P (the size can be smaller)

        From those reasons…that why i still hope these coming lenses may have F2

        (This is just my opinion)

      • uth

        forget one thing, i think Internal focusing is one of the keys to help us in the decreasing of the lenses’ size. you can compare a new 45-175mm with 45-200mm(when it is at 200mm)

    • DirkL

      Because m4/3 has a flange focal distance of 20 mm.
      Any focal length shorter than that has to be
      retrofocal, unless the lenses rear elements are
      closer to the sensor than the flange, which is

  • Marco

    Does the new 12-35mm lens has image stabilization?

    • uth

      All X lenses will have

      1.Power Zoom
      2.Nano coating
      3.Power O.I.S

      i hope 13-35 and 35-100 will have internal focusing ^^

  • compositor20

    olympus must do the variable aperture maybe 2.2 to 3.2 12-40 and a 40-105 2.2 to 3.2 but panasonic needs constant aperture for video so that they remain wide open when you zoom and the light transmission is the same

    panasonic probably will be f2.5 and that is enough for pro work

    there were rumors that the olympus 12-35 f2 zoom and 35-200 were 28-70 and 70-200 lenses with a wide converter so they can be made smaller but probably f2 with that front element size isnt possible

    we need comparable distortion with the kit zooms and vignetting too.. only central sharpness at f2.8 and corners at f5.6 mus be top notch! and that nano coating too and power OIS and internal zoom which would make it semi weather sealed

  • Martin

    What I’d like to see as a next ‘X design’ is a 50(70)-200 f/2.8-4 telezoom considerably smaller than the 50-200 Zuiko.

  • My guess: f2.0 – 2.8 (even when it´s more like a f2.2-2.9 in absolute terms).

    And +1 for some kind of weather sealing…for the GF7 too, please?

    and if not – Olympus, you have done it before! Pen Pro with weathersealing would be legendary awesome.

  • twoomy

    Well, I for one would just be glad to have ANY m43 zoom that starts at 12mm (24mm FF-35mm equivalent). It might not be a big deal to all, but 24mm FF is a wonderful wide-end compared to 28mm; most FF lenses have made the switch and Nikon and Sony now have DX lenses at start at 24mm FF (16mm for DX), so I’d be thrilled to see this for M4/3.

    I’m more concerned about edge-to-edge sharpness rather than the maximum aperture. f/2.0 variable, f/2.8 variable for fixed, I’m okay. Just make sure that it shines at 5.6. :)

  • bilgy_no1

    Basing the Aperture estimation on this is very poor reasoning…

    Strictly speaking, an f/2 35mm lens has to have a front element of at least 17.5mm. The lens is surely big enough to allow for this. But usually, the front element is larger than the minimum requirement for reasons of optical quality.

    The 12-35mm is only a 3x zoom lens, and Panasonic can use software distortion correction instead of optical correction. Crucially, it’s not a Leica branded lens which would not allow for software correction.

    • Godot

      Somebody please refresh my memory? Is powered zoom part of what defines the X series, or does it just happen to be a feature of the 14-42 and 45-175? In other words, how sure can we be that these fast zooms will have powered zoom, or even internal zoom?

      (Sorry, didn’t mean to post that as a reply to the post above… need more coffee.)

      • bilgy_no1

        No, Power zoom is not part of the design for all X-lenses. It just refers to a higher grade brand of lenses.

  • Andrew

    Admin: Would it be possible to find out if the 12-35 and 35-100mm lenses are anticipated to have an internal zoom?


    • uth

      45-175mm(kit) is internal zoom and focusing… so i think 12-35mm and 35-100mm ,which are more Pro, will be the same…

  • Daniel

    Interesting lenses for sure, especially if they have an excellent image quality and better luminosity than the kit zooms.

    A fixed F2.8 would be already very nice and a clear improvement over the kit zooms. For brigther lenses, we have excellent prime lenses.

    But I’m surprised with the ugly/flashy design of the X orange marking…

    Looks almost like cheap toys to my eyes. I would have wished a more “pro” design, with no flashing markings on it.

    No one had any thoughts about it?

    • uth

      i don’t really care about X marking on the lenses..

      i just want they’re all Internal Focusing(&Zoom)… i hate the lenses extend when they’re in zoom position = =

    • dumbo

      i think its to separate them from the leica designed panasonics, which have much less text and use much classier fonts/layout.

      you will be able to instantly see it’s an X, or a Leica, or a standard lens, so appealing to different demographics. i guess that the x lenses are aimed at the bling market and the leica at the discerning market :)

  • +1 on the cheap looks. More stealth please!

  • Anonymous

    The ZD 7-14 is actually a f2.8-4 lens. Olympus just capped it of at a straight f4 via software. The Lumix 7-14 is a f4 lens,  So I don’t see this as a good comparison.  I am willing to bet they will be 2.8. witch is still quite impressive when you consider the size of the canon 24-70 compared to the lumix  

  • The ZD 7-14 is actually a f2.8-4 lens. Olympus just capped it of at a straight f4 via software. The Lumix 7-14 is a f4 lens,  So I don’t see this as a good comparison.  I am willing to bet they will be 2.8. witch is still quite impressive when you consider the size of the canon 24-70 compared to the lumix  

  • spam

    F2.0 would have been nice on the 12-35, but seem unrealistic. It would be too big and too expensive compared to the m4/3 cameras.

  • Scott

    The benifit of m4/3 is the size of the lens. They better be 2.0 if they want to sell them. There is not reason they cant be

    • Martin

      Again, I’m afraid that constant f/2 zooms could be either of dreadful optical quality OR rather complex designs, not unlike SHG Zuikos, which would automatically mean 1) very expensive, 2) big size, which is exactly opposite to what you state:
      > The benefit of m4/3 is the size of the lens.

      Anyway, it will be certainly interesting to see what Panasonic’s designers are capable of, given the new approach to the correction of chosen aberrations (distortion, CA, vignetting). I’d like to be pleasantly surprised, that’s for sure.

  • SLO

    If they made these f2-2.5, with quick AF, and produced a better sensor, then m43 would attract a lot of people to the format.

    Also interesting is that Panny, of all companies, is producing exciting glass.

    • pdc

      Weird how so many of the contributors to this forum dismiss Panasonic as a force in photography. They have been big in commercial videography for a long time. Their Lumix compact camera range has been around for a long time, and their cameras have always been highly reliable (just compare the service history of these with Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Fuji etc). The Lumix L-1 and L-10 43 cameras were well reviewed. All their m43 cameras, with the exception of the G10, have been highly rated. They have some well recognized and possibly exceptional lenses in the 14-45, 7-14 zooms, and the 20, 25 and 45 primes. I have full confidence that some of these X series lenses will turn out to be excellent performers and fair value for their prices.

      • mahler

        Yes, that is a strange fact. The Olympus fanboys should better realize that Panasonic turned to be a very competent photographic manufacturer, which understands to make products for photographers much better than traditional photographic companies, especially Olympus.

        Panasonic’s bodies mostly have much better ergonomics than the Olympus PENs, just look at GH2 and G3. Panasonic already had a wide ranging lens line up (7-200mm), when Olympus had almost nothing to offer except a mediocre EP-1.

        I have no idea, why these PENs are acclaimed to be real photographic tools (as opposed to Panasonic offerings). This is simply not true. They don’t offer build-in view finders, have quite unergonomic bodies (flimsy controls), and no decent grip.

        • Interesting point, could you please give Leica a call – I think they failed delivering “real photographic tools” because there are no grips on the M9 or M6 ;)

          By the way, I think DSLRs (or a GH2) and Rangefinders (or a GF1) are just two categories of “real” photografic tools, just like mediumformat and so on…

          Anyway, offtopic, I had a Panasonic L1 and now own a GF1 and have to say, they are great photographic tools – anyone who denies that has probably never used one.

        • John

          I’m not an “Olympus fanboy” at least not yet, unless we want to talk about the OM-1, but i digress. What i am is a photographer with years of experience holding cameras shooting in all manner of conditions and i find your assertion that these small camera have better ergonomics naive at best. Simple direct controls of primary functions are what I’m looking for, ones that don’t require being looked at. Fuji gets that heck the Canon G12 gets it. Of the m43 stuff i’ve seen the EP-3 gets it better than most. Now i get the desire for a good evf, all the ones i’ve seen suck to varying degrees (i’d love to see the Sony a77’s 2.13mpix oled) Fuji’s hybrid on theX100 did not immediately turn me off. This leaves me preferring Canon’s hires screens and good live view and maybe if i’m lucky the EP-3’s, haven’t seen it yet in person. I’m with you on the flimsy issue though again the ep family seems to have been improved some. Panasonics current obsession with ultra minituraization is a distraction in my books as well (i so wanted to like the GF1 and had hopes for the 2, no luck and the 3… hmm). So we’ll what the pro models bring us. Ideally i think a good screen interface married to the basic functions on dedicated dials would be great (Fuji are you listening re the interface part?!)

  • MJr

    You guys are going to be disappointed ! This will not be F2 !

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.