skip to Main Content

The patents roundup: Olympus super fast f/1.0 primes, Panasonic 1.8 lens series and more…


The lats months I posted many Olympus and Panasonic patents. Some of them may show in what direction the companies are working. For example: we already know also from Manager interviews that fast primes are high on their priority list and there are plenty of patents of such lenses. So here is the roundup of the latest most interesting patents:

Built-in LED light flash for cameras (article here).
Global shutter (article here).
12-50mm f/2.8-4.0 lens (article here).
Lens Reversing Ring for MFT (article here).
12mm f/1.0 lens (article here).
250mm f/5.0 mirror lens patent (article here).

three RGB sensor Micro Four Thirds camera (article here).
Hybrid OVF/EVF (article here).
12mm f/1.2 MFT lens (article here).
f/1.8 prime lens series (article here).
100mm f/2.0 and 34mm f/1.8 lens (article here).

P.S.: Crossing my fingers for that 12mm f/1.0 lens :)

  • GaryGarth

    17.5mm F1.2 or F1.4 please!!! Just not a fan of the Oly 17mm F1.8……

    • nobody

      for me 20mm 1.2 or 1.4

    • Wha’s up with the 17mm f1.8?

      • i hear negative opinion sometimes about the 17mm like on the link of upcoming actors photographer Mr Nygen yesterday too.

          • Thank you for the link,I was asking you to write it ;)

            • ya he isnt specific about his complaints, but seeing some of his work , i assumed he knows what he is talking about :-)

          • Just read the part concerning the 17mm. He simply says he was disappointed. But does not write the reasons.
            I have used it lately on a model, and honestly I have enjoyed it.
            The first reviews were bad, perhaps the hype and expectations were too high, and the lens will carry that bad fame forever.
            It’s not sharp as the Voigty, of course, but I think it’s far from being a bad lens (actually it’s way better thanthe 17mm f2.8 pancake.

            • i only have used the 2.8 myself.. it hink that lens had even more bad advertisements because ot the resolution tests. I found it pretty good for people photography, ddi no modelshooting with it.

      • Yun

        Sharpness disappointment

        • They also have different fields of view, therefore I would not compare them. That’s also the reason why I use a RicohGR when in need of a 28mm (the pixel acuity of the RicohGR is impressive, and its lens is really sharp).

          Based on my experience, at f1.8 it’s not so sharp (I wouldn’t say soft), but the out of focus effect is nice. At f2 things start to be better.

          In he example below focus is on the eyelash and earring (sorry, I have only the Ilford simulated version on the iPad here..)

          • Yun

            Here is the link

            Although is better than 17mm F2.8 , like what you said but it lose ground to Pana 20mm F1.7 in sharpness .
            I would urge you to sell or replace it asap with much promising 15mm Summilux .

          • niiice shotm love the angle and BW!

            • Thank you Ulli! I started with the new 40-150mm but soon left it for the Nocticron and 75mm. Then I started to go wider with both 25mm 17mm, 17.5mm and also 12mm for some Jean Loup Stieff inspired pictures :) The model was nice and did a good job.

              • any more personal opinions about the 40-150 for model shootings? I can prob understand the move to the primes, but I like to hear your experiences.

  • Dmitry Anisimov

    The panasonic three-CMOS camera patent IS NOT four-thirds.

    • Agachart Sukchouy

      3MOS can’t go to m4/3 !!! ,i disagree but i think panny will reconstruct for larger sensor as

  • Yun

    I want that 12mm F1.2 & 100mm F2 .
    When ???
    The F1.8 prime lens series also welcome but make sure is above 45mm onwards otherwise not for me .
    btw , what is this three RGB sensor ? MCS ?

    • Agachart Sukchouy

      3MOS is basic mcs !!! maybe,

      real MCS was basic 3 color with CMYK option ;)

  • we alread have a 12mm, 100mm should be more welcome first to add an additional prime

    • Yun

      I agree with you .
      100mm F2 should come first before the 12mm , simply because portraits is always more important than anything else .

      • not more important lol, but i meant we dont have a prime in this FL yet.
        But yes, i would love it, not for close portraits but full body shots

        • jefrs

          You would have to be some good distance away to get a full body shot done. At normal portrait shooting distance you might get a close-up of an ear with a 100mm.

          • dont worry, i am aware of the shooting distances for full body portraits. While 45mm is nice, I prefer the 100mm for a bit of perspective compression; this one was shot with the zd 35-100 at 100mm f/2.0

      • jefrs

        A 100mm lens is not a portrait lens on M43 it is a long focus.
        You would want a 50mm as a portrait (20mm to 25mm is the “standard” M43 lens), we have those: 42.5; 45; 50; 60; 75 … at varying cost and make

  • kiki

    100/2 would be great !!

    • jefrs

      Which would require an iris diameter of 100/2=50mm which is bigger than the image circle diameter of the four thirds sensor at 22.5mmØ.

      i.e. 100/22.5 = f/4.4 but note that aperture is collimation: the light beam can and will converge to focus on the sensor after leaving the lens elements, thus the sensor can be smaller than the aperture; but it does limit minimum (& max) aperture number and it is more of a problem for larger sensors to get the image circle large enough without vignetting: they get very big (& expensive)

      For comparison “AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8. This weighs 4.8kg, has a maximum diameter of 160mm and is 352mm long. By comparison, the Zuiko Digital 300mm f/2.8 weighs 3.3kg, is 129mm wide and 281mm long.” and the Ollie four-thirds lens is the ‘longest’ one on FoV

  • Marc Ramirez

    Please make a 9mm or 10mm fast lens with moderate size and price. 2.8 or faster. Preferable more like 1.8.

    Promote it as a selfie lens if you must.

    • A rectilinear wide lens, at that aperture, would be big, and if delivering good IQ would be expensive too. The previous post was showing the Lensbaby fisheye lens (a rectilinear lens is more complicated to build), sold for 300 bucks. And with a plastic mount also..

      • Marc Ramirez

        So what are feasible specs for a 10mm prime in the sub 400 range? F4? I’m not saying it has to be a pancake. So is there not much size advantage from moving from a 9-18 zoom to a 10 mm prime? I don’t know much about lens design. Even an updated version of that collapsible zoom lens would be good.

        • If I were Olympus I would stick with the premium build construction and “offer” a high quality prime similar to the 12mm f2. And ask for a similar price.

          • Marc Ramirez

            You are referring to build quality, but not lens specs. I’d take the build of the 25mm or 45mm as those do not feel cheap.

            As far as lens quality (not build) and specs, are you saying a 10mm f4 could be as small as the 12mm f2? I’d like to have that option if so.

            • Yes: 10mm : f4 = 2.5 cm This would be the max aperture size. Add something for the barrel and here you have a lens similar in size to the 12mm

              • Marc Ramirez

                Thanks for the info. Where do you get the formula for this lens size calculation?
                I would take that compromise for a 10mm. Might also accept a larger lens to get to f2.8.

                • General knowledge :) jokes aside, I think that you can find some more detailed infos by looking for “how to calculate lens diameter aperture”.
                  As I wrote, basically you divide the focal lenght by the aperture, and the result is the diameter of the iris.
                  A focal lenght of 10mm at f2 will have an iris of 5cms diameter. Stopped down to f4 and the iris will be 2.5cms (internal blades will close and that is the iris).
                  Of course we’re talking about blades here, the glass will add something to the size. As well as the barrel. And the hood.
                  But you get the formula now.

                  • Turbofrog

                    That formula would result in a 100mm/f2 lens with an aperture half of a meter big! Those darned decimal places…

                  • Marc Ramirez

                    Also seems like sensor size should come into that equation .

                    • jefrs

                      Not really.
                      Think of the lens aperture as the hole on the end of a funnel.
                      Big hole is fast, small hole is slow.
                      Once you do that you quickly realise that the sensor area is of little importance for light gathering, it’s all down to the lens size.

                      The lens design is where the image area circle comes into it and that can certainly influence the dimensions of the lens: if it were possible to fit a M43 lens to a FF, it would vignette.

                      It is possible to put the small image circle CCTV C-Mount on M43 (and others) and they do vignette. CCTV lenses are often very fast and very cheap, and they are unremittingly ‘orrible.

                • jefrs

                  The iris diameter = focal length divided by the aperture number
                  and the aperture number is the focal length divided by the iris diameter.
                  That’s by definition but it’s determined by physics (optics).

              • Turbofrog

                Again, 10mm/f4 = 2.5mm, not 2.5cm. You are thinking of a 100mm/f4.

      • MJr

        You do remember the 10.5mm F0.95 Nokton?

        Yes it’s huge, but a 10/1.8 would be smaller. ;-)
        Theoretically only needs a 5.6mm diameter aperture/front element.

        Though maybe, with autofocus added .. probably ends up being close to the size of the Nokton anyway. ^.^

        • Theoretically yes. But a 56mm front element is considered big in m43 standards.. Add the hood (necessary with such a wide lens).

          I think it’s feasible, I’d like it, but I would not expect a price lower than 700 euros for it, considering the new r&d, prime build construction, latest nano coating.

          • MJr

            Sounds great. :D But yeah a bit overkill. F2.8 is of course plenty for superwide, and if not we have the Nokton!

          • Turbofrog

            He said 5.6mm, not 56mm. I.e. downright tiny. That’s only the theoretical minimum for light transmission though, not optical quality.

            It’s still unlikely that a 9 or 10mm f1.8 would be under $1000 USD, but it sounds like some people still want one despite the cost.

      • jefrs

        The plastic lens mount has the advantage of having better thermal stability whilst being incredibly strong and resilient. Do we actually know of any cases where a plastic mount has failed. They will take less wear than metal but they’re not a bearing in your car. Any blow that might break a plastic mount would also embugger a metal mount.

  • Einar

    I’m crossing my fingers for a 3,5-5,6/14 – 100 mm as good as a Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm 1:3,5-5,6G ED VR. And *not* more expansive!

    • jefrs

      The Nikkor 18-140 would be what, 27-210mm in M43 speak and it’s f/3.5-5.6
      Choices (scratches head, wondering what the problem is here)
      The Panny 45-150/f4.0-5.6 is not quite the same glass but it is incredible small and light to field, which can be important and would be my first choice for an all day lens on the second body.

      The X35-100/F2.8 is probably too good for you but it’s one of my favourite lenses.
      Then there’s the Panny 14-140; PZ45-175; 45-200 and the Ollie 45-140PRO

  • reqw

    Those f1.8 Panny primes along with the 100 f2 are the most interesting for me.

    I still want an UWA prime with AF.

  • Bob B.

    We are waiting for something REALLY innovating in the MFT world. Like a serious up-age in sensor performance.

    • Yun

      That is for sure .
      Meanwhile you also need decent lenses to bring out that desirable image quality .
      The 12mm F1.2 & 100mm F2 are the lenses for the sensor .

      • Desirable quality

        Believe me, if your images are not of “desirable quality”, they are not going to change with a 12mm F1.2 or 100mm F2.

    • MJr

      Waiting? Here’s an idea, just keep making those awesome photographs that i’m sure you make every day (right? right?), and don’t worry about it ..

      The MFT sensors today are way beyond good already man.

      • Bob B.

        here’s an idea…I don’t need you telling me what I need to be doing. The tech is there for us to have better capture. Let’s have at it.
        My 3-yr.-old FF still has more dynamic range and better low-light capture…Our MFT kit could produce more…we have great lenses and lots of them..the sensor needs a jump.
        I do create great images everyday..

        now let’s see yours jr. …!?!?!?!?! Right?…Right???

        • MJr

          Obviously, new tech is awesome. Why else do you think we’re here. Just saying that waiting it not going to do you any good. Imho it doesn’t NEED any jump, it happens when it happens. Don’t get your panties in a bunch.

          And no you can’t see my crappy photos.

        • Turbofrog

          Those are indeed nice photos. What do you find lacking in them caused by the sensor?

        • Sean Wagner

          Who needs sublime sensors when you have the sights of Manhattan? ;)

        • jefrs

          Great image but –

          For example, the GH4 has the same 13EV dynamic range as a good FF.

          And if we don’t falsify the result by normalising to 35mm neg size then its low light capability is as good or better: this is borne out by what these cameras can do. We do know that M43 will focus and shoot at light levels below that which any optical system can see in?

        • Zeikon

          Are these images great?

  • Thinkinginpictures

    Bigger lenses, faster glass, bigger lenses, faster glass. Meanwhile on the other side of the fence….Sony mirrorless….small cameras, slow glass, more small cameras, slow glass. Looks like we’ve reached an impasse.

  • TheTree

    We need HG lenses: 9-10mm, 17.5mm, 62.5mm and especially 100mm for Ulli :)

  • Jørgen

    Can you spell S-T-U-P-I-D? It is becoming Panasonics nickname for me. I have a Gh4 and I , like quite a few others, want ONE LENS!!!!! A good and fast focussing replacement of my good but slow 100-300. DO WE REALLY NEED ANOTHER BUNCH OF SUB 100 MM LENSES.

    Sorry for screaming, but I am getting truely fed up with Panasonic. The GH4 is great with great focussing but no long lens to use it on….

    • couldnt you have done some research on the lenses you need before you bought into the system? Now you are screaming indeed.

      • Jørgen

        Nonsense. DFD is very new, I have the 100-300 mm and indeed I could not know that it, in contrast to my 35-100 f2.8, would be dog slow. And also: I cannot understand why Panasonic gets us good AF-c but not good lenses for it and especially for a huge amount of people who could use a 100-300 mm that DOES focus fast. Nothing on the roadmap yet.

        • Jørgen

          And I started with the G1 in dec 2008, GH2 and now GH4…So I am already heavily invested in lenses. I feel let down by Panny. From a frontrunner they have gone down to one of the many choices. Of course you cannot expect them to be on top all the time. Not at all. But I cannot understand Various zooms below 100 mm, a couple of primes too and only ONE that is very slow to focus in AF-c beyond 200 mm. I don’t think it is strange.

          • jefrs

            I too have a collection and use the the GH4 with the 100-300. I find the pinpoint has to be held as steady as a rifle sight on the target and then the lens will focus smartly at full length.
            It does produce a better image result if it is nudged back from full extension to maybe 285mm but so do then all other long zoom lenses.
            But I do agree, we do not need yet another wide angle prime but are desperate for some decent extra-long ‘wildlife’ lenses.

        • maybe a slow f/ value could give you a hint?

          • jefrs

            The focus speed is not particularly slow nor is its f/4.0-5.6 which is very respectable for a zoom lens of this field of view. In fact I cannot think of a single DSLR lens of equivalent FoV that is as fast as this one on aperture.

            • i always thought that the speed of a lens affects its response in AF, or is that only relevant for PDAF?

              • jefrs

                Really only a problem with optical focus systems (PDAF) that cannot see the subject with a small aperture (less then f/8?), mirrorless (mainly CDAF+other) is like a night-vision jobbie and can focus by starlight or whatever the aperture, and still do it quickly.
                I’ve always thought it weird that certain tests mark down M43 for “Low Light / Sports” when they actually function better than a DSLR in low light, long after a DSLR has packed up and gone home for teatime. You can have the biggest and best sensor in the world but it’s no use to anyone if its camera can’t focus after the lights go out.

        • jefrs

          This is explained by the fact that the 100-300 has to focus through a range of 200mm whereas the X35-100 only has a range of 65mm.

          Its focus speed is respectably fast for any extra-long lens. It is a special purpose lens and deserves a little extra care when aiming it, and then it can and will produce tack sharp pictures.

  • Ricky Spanish

    Mature full frame systems (Nikon, Canon) already have lenses like this. Why waste money by putting it into a weak sensor system like m43? It would still only be a 24mm f2 in FF terms anyway.

    • Zeikon

      Mature and full frame? Apparently Canikon is the Steven Seagal of cameras.

      • Hugh Jasballs

        lol, keep struggling to shoot at ISO1600 dude with your noisy-at-all-ISOs sensor. love those magenta skin tones! LOL

        • Zeikon

          I guess I hit a nerve. An exclamation point and two LOL’s.

          Relax. Nobody is putting you under siege.

        • Sean Wagner

          ISO-3200. Olympus E-P5. And who said I can’t add an RX-1 to my gear?

          • Chris

            Is this supposed to be impressive or something?

            • jefrs

              Try clicking on the picture to see it properly.

              • while its a great shot…i dont think its convincing to show high iso performance on a 1024×768 scaled photo, unless its a 1:1 crop

                • Sean Wagner

                  Thank you Ulli for costructive and useful criticism. A pic from this weekend btw [ the artist was last featured in Times Square – a more fitting and impressive venue ]. I don’t encourage pixel peeping, but recognize it as an occasionally necessary burden. Such a pity the projected numbers don’t represent ISO values =P

          • anonymous

            That is terrible. Sony a7s at ISO400,000 puts this to shame.

        • jefrs

          That mauve tinge is down to Photoshop processing the raw. Oops.

          The noise level on M43 is getting as good as full frame now. It’s down to signal to noise ratio, the full frame sensor may have more signal but it also has a higher noise floor (it’s a size thing).
          The optical focus system on a DSLR means they simply cannot AF in what a mirrorless calls low light.

          Yes, we can produce acceptable and publishable photos at ISO25600.

          LOL indeed.

    • Harry

      Plenty of fauxtographers here will love it. A handful (worldwide) will buy it.

  • Camaman

    100mm f2,
    and 150mm f5.6 1:1 macro, please.

  • Peter

    I would be very excited (to the point of replacing my GH1 with an Olympus M10) if they release a 12-50mm that is smaller and lighter than the 12-40mm but has the same (or better!) optical quality of that lens.

    Would be a nice combo for lightweight travel (hiking, cycling)

    • Juurikas

      You think Olympus just happened to make 12-40mm larger than possible?

      • Peter

        The 12-40mm is a f/2.8 lens, would it be impossible that a f/2.8-4.0 lens be smaller? I’m not a lens designer, but as far as I can tell the max. aperture (in mm) of a lens is an important factor for its size and weight.

    • The Real Stig

      Physics is bítch.

      • anonymous

        Haha, what a cop out. They can obviously make it smaller with a redesign, better materials etc.

        • The Real Stig

          Better materials than the 12-40mm f2.8 already employs? You really don’t have a clue.

  • Peter Del

    I commented on the 250 f/5 mirror lens about a year ago, but have since changed my mind as it can’t be stopped down. I am delighted with my E-M5, 14-150 and 9-18 combination but would welcome a non-reflex, light weight lens.

    • lol

      wtf is this garbage?

      • Peter Del

        Polite sir or madam, what part of my comment to you consider garbage?

  • DouglasGottlieb

    Fast primes? Awesome! I’m interested in the low light capabilities of the fast wide angles. But why not make some super fast portrait focal lengths for shallow DoF?

    • i think the 45 and 42,5 versions around for MFT are very capable already. But maybe Olympus could come with a defocuser fine-adjust ring or specifically use imperfect glass with the right characteristics? maybe weird these days when optimal contrast and resolution are easier to achieve.

  • Alex

    I’d love an M.Zuiko 17.5mm f/1.0 with autofocus.

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.